Missy89:

'
Who wants to know?

I was talking to appleyard

I want to know.

Are you horn.y?

Shymm3x:


I want to know.

Are you horn.y?

Lol

NO

Missy89:


Lol

NO

Lol.

You lied.

You need to shout me - I wanna ask you something.

Err...check out these ships on parade by the Japanese Navy

Missy89:
Appleyard

You said -The fact that the investigation was even conducted by parties with self interest to the case, instead of being done openly by the United Nations. (i pity the truth)
Malaysia proposed this but Russia VETOED it

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/29/us-ukraine-crisis-mh17-un-idUSKCN0Q32GS20150729

Nice one but very weak excuse. How can you have a criminal tribunal without initial investigation? It is like asking a court of first instance to adjudicate on a matter when the investigation as to the causal factors of the crime is still ungoing or yet to begin, and therefore, inconclusive. Is there any sense in it? That was the reason Russia vetoed that silly resolution at the first place, but when she did raise the issue of and independent and open investigation into the said crime, was it taken into consideration? Answer that!

It is trite law that thorough and conclusive investigation precede any criminal prosecution, with all the relevant facts in issue adequately summed up and verified. You can take that to the Bank.

Appleyard:
Nice one but very weak excuse. How can you have a criminal tribunal without initial investigation? It is like asking a court of first instance to adjudicate on a matter when the investigation as to the causal factors of the crime is still ungoing or yet to begin, and therefore, inconclusive. Is there any sense in it? That was the reason Russia vetoed that silly resolution at the first place, but when she did raise the issue of and independent and open investigation into the said crime, was it taken into consideration? Answer that!

It is trite law that thorough and conclusive investigation precede any criminal prosecution, with all the relevant facts in issue adequately summed up and verified. You can take that to the Bank.

My question to you: If a tribunal was set up like Malaysia proposed, Will it reach a verdict without any investigation? What will prevent the UN from conducting its own independent investigation apart from the Dutch investigation? If the excuse is that the investigation is ongoing, Do you accept the dutch investigation as the " official one" and the verdict from that investigation valid and final? ( You already discredited it in your earlier post by calling it biased only to refer to the same investigation as a reason for the veto )

What could be more open and independent than a united nations tribunal with the secretary general appointing the judged and members? Please you have no argument here at all

You said the matter was should have been handled by the UN. It was referred to the UN but was Vetoed by the same nation you are defending. There is nothing to take to the bank!

Missy89:


Few screen shots from the first investigation that was released.

You said Russia's evidence was dismissed. That is false. I added another screenshot from the report where Almaz-Antey's simulation was added to the report and it was concluded that the 3 simulations that was ordered was consistent. ( one independent, one from Ukraine and one from Almaz-Antey the Russian manufacturer of the BUK). It was determined that the missile was fired within an area of 320 square kilometers without assigning blames or confirming the actual place it was fired since more evidence will be needed and it was beyond the scope of the investigation

Indeed Almaz Antey simulation of the crash was mentioned, but that doesn't entails or represent the official position of the the Russian government, not to mention that the Almaz Antey simulation contradicted that of the DSB. The list of evidential burden of proof pushed forward as " six cardinal questions " by Russia to the investigation panel, remain unanswered till date, and was never mentioned or refered to, therefore, was not admissible and did not form part of the so-called conclusive report/final findings of the panel that was not even independent to begin with.

Flight recorder info was released as well, debunking your earlier claim that it wasn't, that was how it was determined that the missile exploded on top of the plane (screenshot added)

flight recorder was never relied on, or can not be said to have been relied on, Missy, and you should know that. From the DSB reports, it was categorically stated (in its preliminary report, which also formed part of the final reports and findings,) that the Black Box information showed the MH17 flight proceeded normally until 1.20pm local time on July 17, 2014 after which all recordings “ended abruptly ". The determiniation that the missile exploded on top of the plane was simply from reconstruction of tthe plane from the wreckage using scientific hypothesis based on the position of the plane, the capability of the said missile, and the nature of the damage done. It was more of a case of probability, rather than info based on the flight recordings/Black Box.

As per not assigning blame, Lets wait for the criminal inquiry, That is another report entirely. This report however blames Ukraine for not protecting her airspace and families of people that died on the plane are suing Ukraine already for the negligence.

Now, this was where i couldn't help but shake my head in pity and awe towards the evils people could go. Never in my life have i seen or heard of an investigation into a criminal matter concluding its findings without giving a hint as to the possible culprits responsible for the said crime. So, the criminal inquiry will now take a seat, spread the DSB report before it, and then holla; " hey, Russia, come forward here, you are responsible! Oh, Ukraine Junta, or you damn seperatists, you did it! Now, interpol, start the arrest! " blabla bla. Ask yourself: based on this findings, what will the criminal inquiry or prosecution rely on for the necessary indictment? And on what grounds (since there is virtually any in this DSB summations) would they base and formulate their evidence/indictment?

I dey laf ooo, MiSsy.

Missy89:


My question to you: If a tribunal was set up like Malaysia proposed, Will it reach a verdict without any investigation? What will prevent the UN from conducting its own independent investigation apart from the Dutch investigation? If the excuse is that the investigation is ongoing, Do you accept the dutch investigation as the " official one" and the verdict from that investigation valid and final? ( You already discredited it in your earlier post by calling it biased only to refer to the same investigation as a reason for the veto )

What could be more open and independent than a united nations tribunal with the secretary general appointing the judged and members? Please you have no argument here at all

You said the matter was should have been handled by the UN. It was referred to the UN but was Vetoed by the same nation you are defending. There is nothing to take to the bank!

You seem to have forgotten the actual reasons why Russia vetoed that resolution. How can you have a criminal tribunal that can prescribe punishment without initial investigation? This was Russia's contention , and This is where you don't get it. Secondary, the whole thing was becoming politicise, and even some international commentators alluded to this fact.

https://www.rt.com/news/311109-russia-veto-un-tribunal-mh17/

And it will interest you to know that Russia have warned before then that it would veto such resolution if their wish is not taken into consideration. So why this hullabaloo about Russia vetoeing it from the begining?

Russia's call for independent investigation entails a constituent body devoid of personal interests and one sided line of argument. It was never against finding the truth from the very begining.

Appleyard:

You seem to have forgotten the actual reasons why Russia vetoed that resolution. How can you have a criminal tribunal that can prescribe punishment without initial investigation? This was Russia's contention , and This is where you don't get it. Secondary, the whole thing was becoming politicise, and even some international commentators alluded to this fact.

https://www.rt.com/news/311109-russia-veto-un-tribunal-mh17/

And it will interest you to know that Russia have warned before then that it would veto such resolution if their wish is not taken into consideration. So why this hullabaloo about Russia vetoeing it from the begining?

Russia's call for independent investigation entails a constituent body devoid of personal interests and one sided line of argument. It was never against finding the truth from the very begining.

Oh come on now! You are avoiding the question. If a tribunal was set up, will they reach a verdict without investigating? You initially said there was no UN panel, now your argument is that the panel was rushed or will be bias no matter what. Chai!

What investigation body will be acceptable to Russia devoid of personal interest? Russian Court? I will repeat this part again, Malaysia wanted the Sec gen to pick the members of the tribunal, Russia can protest a member they do not like if that is what they were worried about

Russia warning that it will veto the bill has nothing to do with anything. 99% of un passed resolutions are known before hand and the reason why there is a vote anyway is to show the whole world who is against it.

The only reason i even brought this up is because you said they should have gone to UN. Now going to the UN was too early for you. Na wah!

Appleyard:
Indeed Almaz Antey simulation of the crash was mentioned, but that doesn't entails or represent the official position of the the Russian government, not to mention that the Almaz Antey simulation contradicted that of the DSB. The list of evidential burden of proof pushed forward as " six cardinal questions " by Russia to the investigation panel, remain unanswered till date, and was never mentioned or refered to, therefore, was not admissible and did not form part of the so-called conclusive report/final findings of the panel that was not even independent to begin with.

Almaz analysis was consistent with the other two simulations. They must have realized that there submission does not correspond with the Russian propaganda narrative hence the reason they organize a shady press conference hours before the report was release. What six cardinal questions? You mean RT's cardinal nonsense . So where is the final report from Russian investigative panel and lets compare notes.

Appleyard:


flight recorder was never relied on, or can not be said to have been relied on, Missy, and you should know that. From the DSB reports, it was categorically stated (in its preliminary report, which also formed part of the final reports and findings,) that the Black Box information showed the MH17 flight proceeded normally until 1.20pm local time on July 17, 2014 after which all recordings “ended abruptly ". The determiniation that the missile exploded on top of the plane was simply from reconstruction of tthe plane from the wreckage using scientific hypothesis based on the position of the plane, the capability of the said missile, and the nature of the damage done. It was more of a case of probability, rather than info based on the flight recordings/Black Box.

You said the black box was "classified" ,Turns out it wasnt, Now the information released from it is inadequate? Ehen!

Appleyard:

Now, this was where i couldn't help but shake my head in pity and awe towards the evils people could go. Never in my life have i seen or heard of an investigation into a criminal matter concluding its findings without giving a hint as to the possible culprits responsible for the said crime. So, the criminal inquiry will now take a seat, spread the DSB report before it, and then holla; " hey, Russia, come forward here, you are responsible! Oh, Ukraine Junta, or you damn seperatists, you did it! Now, interpol, start the arrest! " blabla bla. Ask yourself: based on this findings, what will the criminal inquiry or prosecution rely on for the necessary indictment? And on what grounds (since there is virtually any in this DSB summations) would they base and formulate their evidence/indictment?
I dey laf ooo, MiSsy.

There are 2 reports. One is to determine what happened so that ICAO or whatever will review and raise the standards of air flights to prevent future occurrence. That was the report that was released. The other one is criminal that will determine who was responsible and it will be out next year. The evidence is overwhelming already.

Missy89 so proAmerica you can't even realise the fact that her america has not released the satellite images they said they have

The Russians love to troll. You'll never find another collective bunch of population ready to bandy the most inane form of propaganda than those Ruskies.

Missy89:

Almaz analysis was consistent with the other two simulations. They must have realized that there submission does not correspond with the Russian propaganda narrative hence the reason they organize a shady press conference hours before the report was release. What six cardinal questions? You mean RT's cardinal nonsense . So where is the final report from Russian investigative panel and lets compare notes.

Ehen! Almaz held that press conference to make public their position knowing that its findings and submissions to the DSB regarding the capability of the said missile and the scenario where it was use, may not be included in black and white in the DSB final report, and it turns out to be so, regardless the DSB mentioned its simulation. I remember that sometime ago, following sanctions in the wake of the clash, Almaz-Antey, in order to aid the investigation, did carried out two meetings with the DBS in which it declassified the specifications of its rockets – the 9M38 and 9M38M1 surface-to-air missile systems. The declassified information included technical specifications, flight and ballistics characteristics, launch parameters, algorithms governing the detonator and characteristics of the warhead, but we didn't see any of this in the DSB final reports. The arms maker also provided the results of a simulated test of a BUK missile hitting a Boeing and described the damage. But in the final Dutch report, all these calculations were ignored. The report also had discrepancies with regards to the metallurgical properties of the missile and size of the warhead.

You said the black box was "classified" ,Turns out it wasnt, Now the information released from it is inadequate? Ehen!

I still maintain alot of things have been left out.

There are 2 reports. One is to determine what happened so that ICAO or whatever will review and raise the standards of air flights to prevent future occurrence. That was the report that was released. The other one is criminal that will determine who was responsible and it will be out next year. The evidence is overwhelming already.

Which evidence? That the seperatist did it or Russia did it? Bet me missy, nothing would come out of this at the end. Its just a waste of time on a false flag that gone completely off the mark, though it succeeded a little. We can only wait.