It's plausible, but I'd say there's good reason to prefer the theory that separatists shot the plane down unintentionally. In particular: 1) The now removed v

It's plausible, but I'd say there's good reason to prefer the theory that separatists shot the plane down unintentionally. In particular: 1) The now removed vk.com page of Col. Igor Strelkov, leader of the pro-Russian separatists, bragging earlier today about shooting down an AN-26 and posting video that we now know to be of the MH17 crash site. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fvk.com%2Fwall-57424472_7256 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&q=cache%3... 2) An apparent (and alleged) recording of a phone call between separatists and a Russian intelligence official in which they admit to accidentally shooting down a civilian airliner. http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/separatists-admit-downing-a-civilian-plane-in-tapped-conversation-full-transcript-356545.html http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/separatists-admit-do... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10974050/Malaysia-Airlines-plane-crashes-on-Ukraine-Russia-border-live.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/109... (The video had been posted to youtube, but has now been removed.) 3) If you read the headline of the RT today article you linked to, you'll see that Russian officials have contradicted the Interfax report about the Presidential plane flying over Ukraine. It 'hasn't overflown Ukraine for long time.' (Though, in fairness to you, the story was not originally posted with that additional information. Perhaps it was updated since you wrote your comment.) None of this is conclusive, and some of it is particularly suspect since it comes from the Ukrainian government, which clearly has an interest here. But the picture as it is developing so far is pretty ugly for the separatists.