4 ms·

So, perceived number and diversity of the people involved in the hypothetical misinformation operation seems to be key. 1) The part about fake evidence seems t

So, perceived number and diversity of the people involved in the hypothetical misinformation operation seems to be key. 1) The part about fake evidence seems to be firmly within reach of Ukrainian secret service: after all, the original article is about them successfully staging a high-profile crime. I'd hypothesize such organizations have on average less than one Snowden per generation. 2) Then, there is a rather opaque entity: JIT. On the other hand, it is large and international. How do we assess the probability of leak here? 3) Does misinformation need to involve people without strong NDAs? Not sure. Also, here's the most strange part of this story. Both suggested launch sites are in rather populated areas, so there were a lot of witnesses, both civilian and military (both sides). So, you'd expect some tweets and pictures, like "look wtf these bastards launched" from the other side of conflict? I tried searching. Found none.

reitanqild 8y ago
Again, you argue well but I don't buy it. > The part about fake evidence seems to be firmly within reach of Ukrainian secret service: after all, the original article is about them successfully staging a high-profile crime. No doubt about that. And the moon landings could be special effects. > I'd hypothesize such organizations have on average less than one Snowden per generation. Remember: firing the rocket must have been done by the army, not by some NSA like agency. That increases the risk of leaks. > Then, there is a rather opaque entity: JIT. On the other hand, it is large and international. How do we assess the probability of leak here? You write like there is a cover up here, but what do those guys have to win by blaming one part instead of the other? Western Europeans does not generally go around hating Russians trying to find something to blame them for. > Also, here's the most strange part of this story. Both suggested launch sites are in rather populated areas, so there were a lot of witnesses, both civilian and military (both sides). So, you'd expect some tweets and pictures, like "look wtf these bastards launched" from the other side of conflict? I tried searching. Found none. This, if true, is also interesting. Also: here is some reading material that goes into the investigation: https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-crash/ https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-crash/ https://www.om.nl/mh17-ezine-juni2016/4-forensic-research-en.html https://www.om.nl/mh17-ezine-juni2016/4-forensic-research-en... https://www.om.nl/mh17-ezine-juni2016/7-weapon-system-en.html https://www.om.nl/mh17-ezine-juni2016/7-weapon-system-en.htm...
- mh17skeptic 8y ago
  > Remember: firing the rocket must have been done by the army, not by some NSA like agency. That increases the risk of leaks. Sure. But by how much? Ukrainians were actively moving their BUK launchers around at the time, so the movement itself wasn't going to raise suspicions. The firing itself is going to involve a dozen of officers. Other soldiers will see the rocket and this will leak? Don't know. The opposing soldiers have also definitely seen the rocket, and you would suppose this is not their secret, so you'd expect them to just tell the journalists? Nothing. > You write like there is a cover up here, but what do those guys have to win by blaming one part instead of the other? Or to lose. US government has consistently expressed a strong opinion on this case. How do we know what influence do they have on Dutch investigators? > Western Europeans does not generally go around hating Russians trying to find something to blame them for. Sure, false flag operations are not generally guided by emotions.

reitanqild 8y ago

Again, you argue well but I don't buy it. > The part about fake evidence seems to be firmly within reach of Ukrainian secret service: after all, the original article is about them successfully staging a high-profile crime. No doubt about that. And the moon landings could be special effects. > I'd hypothesize such organizations have on average less than one Snowden per generation. Remember: firing the rocket must have been done by the army, not by some NSA like agency. That increases the risk of leaks. > Then, there is a rather opaque entity: JIT. On the other hand, it is large and international. How do we assess the probability of leak here? You write like there is a cover up here, but what do those guys have to win by blaming one part instead of the other? Western Europeans does not generally go around hating Russians trying to find something to blame them for. > Also, here's the most strange part of this story. Both suggested launch sites are in rather populated areas, so there were a lot of witnesses, both civilian and military (both sides). So, you'd expect some tweets and pictures, like "look wtf these bastards launched" from the other side of conflict? I tried searching. Found none. This, if true, is also interesting. Also: here is some reading material that goes into the investigation: https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-crash/ https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-crash/ https://www.om.nl/mh17-ezine-juni2016/4-forensic-research-en.html https://www.om.nl/mh17-ezine-juni2016/4-forensic-research-en... https://www.om.nl/mh17-ezine-juni2016/7-weapon-system-en.html https://www.om.nl/mh17-ezine-juni2016/7-weapon-system-en.htm...

mh17skeptic 8y ago
> Remember: firing the rocket must have been done by the army, not by some NSA like agency. That increases the risk of leaks. Sure. But by how much? Ukrainians were actively moving their BUK launchers around at the time, so the movement itself wasn't going to raise suspicions. The firing itself is going to involve a dozen of officers. Other soldiers will see the rocket and this will leak? Don't know. The opposing soldiers have also definitely seen the rocket, and you would suppose this is not their secret, so you'd expect them to just tell the journalists? Nothing. > You write like there is a cover up here, but what do those guys have to win by blaming one part instead of the other? Or to lose. US government has consistently expressed a strong opinion on this case. How do we know what influence do they have on Dutch investigators? > Western Europeans does not generally go around hating Russians trying to find something to blame them for. Sure, false flag operations are not generally guided by emotions.