Joined: Nov 6 2006, 05:39 PM

Aug 21 2014, 01:18 AM #120

20 aug. 2014
Vragen en antwoorden over het onderzoek naar het neerstorten van vlucht MH17

1. Waarom is onderzoek nodig?

Wanneer een vliegtuigongeluk plaatsvindt, is het van groot belang om door het doen van onderzoek een helder beeld te krijgen van de oorzaak. Hierdoor kunnen nabestaanden, andere betrokkenen en de (internationale) samenleving op basis van feiten te weten komen wat er gebeurd is. Daarnaast kan onderzoek bijdragen aan de veiligheid in de (burger)luchtvaart: waar nodig en relevant worden aanbevelingen gedaan om herhaling in de toekomst te voorkomen.

De Onderzoeksraad vindt het van groot belang dat het neerstorten van vlucht MH17 breed en diepgaand wordt onderzocht. Daarom wordt naast het (internationaal) onderzoek naar de oorzaak van de crash ook de besluitvorming rondom vliegroutes en de beschikbaarheid van passagierslijsten onderzocht.

2. Waarom heeft de Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid de leiding over het onderzoek?
Oekraïne heeft de leiding over het onderzoek naar de oorzaak van de crash overgedragen aan de Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid. Dit is gebeurd op verzoek van Oekraïne.

De redenen van het verzoek zijn dat de vlucht uit Nederland is vertrokken en het grote aantal Nederlandse slachtoffers. De overdracht is op woensdag 23 juli formeel vastgelegd in een overeenkomst.

3. Welke landen zijn betrokken bij het onderzoek en waarom?

Vanuit ICAO (de internationale VN organisatie voor burgerluchtvaart) is bepaald dat het land waar een vliegtuigongeval plaatsvindt , de taak heeft om de oorzaak van het ongeval te onderzoeken. Direct na de crash van vlucht MH17 zijn luchtvaartonderzoekers van Oekraïne gestart met het onderzoek naar de oorzaak. Nederland heeft als betrokken land kort na de crash een officiële melding gekregen van de onderzoekers over het neerstorten van vlucht MH17, met daarbij de uitnodiging om aan het onderzoek deel te nemen.

Op basis van het ICAO-verdrag moeten bepaalde landen betrokken worden bij het onderzoek.  Het land waar het voorval zich heeft voorgedaan heeft in beginsel de leiding over het onderzoek. De mogelijkheid bestaat om de leiding over het onderzoek over te dragen aan een ander land. De landen waar de operator vandaan komt, waar het vliegtuig ontworpen is en waar het vliegtuig gemaakt is hebben ook het recht om deel te nemen aan het onderzoek. Landen die specifieke informatie of experts kunnen leveren, kunnen deelnemen op uitnodiging van de partij die de leiding heeft over het onderzoek. Landen die slachtoffers te betreuren hebben, hebben tevens recht op een  rol in het onderzoek maar hebben beperkte rechten.

In het geval van het onderzoek naar het neerstorten van vlucht MH 17 hebben veel landen spontaan hun hulp aangeboden. In sommige gevallen is die hulp aangenomen omdat de onderzoekers specifieke kennis, informatie of expertise konden bieden.

In het internationaal onderzoeksteam naar het neerstorten van vlucht MH17 hebben de volgende landen (in meer of mindere mate) een bijdrage geleverd aan het onderzoek: Oekraïne, Maleisië, Australië, Rusland, Verenigd Koninkrijk, Verenigde Staten, Duitsland, Frankrijk, Italië, Indonesië. Daarnaast hebben de organisaties ICAO en het Europese Agentschap voor de veiligheid van de luchtvaart (EASA) bijgedragen aan het onderzoek. De leiding van het onderzoek ligt bij de (Nederlandse) Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid, die zowel het preliminary report (voorlopig rapport) als het eindrapport zal publiceren. De landen die vanuit het ICAO-verdrag formeel een rol hebben als deelnemer aan het onderzoek, krijgen inzage in de conceptrapportages en mogen daarop reageren.  Het staat de partij die de leiding heeft over het onderzoek vrij om ook andere landen inzage te verlenen op het conceptrapport.

4. Kan er goed onderzoek gedaan worden als er geen onderzoekers op de rampplek zelf aanwezig zijn geweest?

Het heeft de voorkeur om ook onderzoek te doen op de crashsite zelf, maar het is niet onmogelijk om op basis van andere bronnen een goed onderzoek te doen en tot een definitief rapport te komen. Overigens, de dagen na het voorval (toen het onderzoek nog onder leiding van Oekraïne stond) zijn enkele luchtvaartonderzoekers van Oekraïne  een aantal keer kort op de rampplek geweest voor onderzoek.

Als een veilige en stabiele situatie op de crashsite is bereikt, zal de Onderzoeksraad de crashsite alsnog bezoeken. Dit  om onderzoeksresultaten op basis van andere bronnen te verifiëren en heel gericht te zoeken naar bepaalde brokstukken of ander materiaal.

5. Waarom is de Onderzoeksraad nog niet op de crashsite geweest?

De Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid is nog niet op de rampplek geweest omdat de veiligheid van de onderzoekers niet geborgd kon worden. De Nederlandse overheid heeft ingeschat dat onderzoekers naar de oorzaak van de crash grotere veiligheidsrisico’s lopen dan forensisch onderzoekers, nabestaanden of journalisten. Hierbij is ook rekening gehouden met de veiligheid van eventuele andere aanwezigen op de rampplek: de  aanwezigheid van onderzoekers van de Onderzoeksraad mag anderen niet in gevaar brengen.

Daarnaast had het bergen van slachtoffers en het zoeken naar persoonlijke eigendommen de absolute prioriteit. Er waren slechts beperkte mogelijkheden om ter plaatse te gaan en de forensisch onderzoekers (en ondersteunende marechaussees) kregen hierbij voorrang.

6. Wat is een  preliminary report (voorlopig rapport)?

Het zogenaamde preliminary report (voorlopig rapport) is een tussentijds rapport waarin de eerste feiten van een onderzoek naar een vliegramp gepubliceerd worden. Het ICAO-verdrag waarin de procedures voor onderzoeken naar (burger)luchtvaart zijn vastgelegd, bepaalt dat tijdens een onderzoek een preliminary report gepubliceerd moet worden. Hierin kunnen eventueel ook veiligheidswaarschuwingen worden opgenomen. Er zijn geen voorschriften voor de vorm en omvang van een preliminary report. De inhoud is mede afhankelijk van de voortgang van het onderzoek en de noodzaak tot het vermelden van bepaalde uitkomsten.

Het preliminary report dat de Onderzoeksraad over het neerstorten van vlucht MH17 maakt, bevat een aantal  feiten afkomstig  vanuit verschillende bronnen, waardoor een eerste, voorlopig beeld van het voorval geschetst kan worden . Het onderzoeksteam  verzamelt informatie uit verschillende bronnen, zoals de Cockpit Voice Recorder, de Flight Data Recorder, (satelliet)foto’s en radarinformatie. Deze informatie wordt vervolgens met elkaar vergeleken om te achterhalen of de verschillende data elkaar ondersteunen, of een afwijkend beeld laten zien. Dat vergt zorgvuldigheid en is daarmee een tijdrovend proces dat nog niet is afgerond.

De conceptversies van het preliminary report worden besproken binnen het internationale onderzoeksteam en met de raad, voordat het preliminary report wordt vastgesteld. Vanuit ICAO wordt gesteld dat het normaliter twee tot vier weken duurt om een preliminary report op te stellen, maar daar kan gemotiveerd van afgeweken worden. Gelet op de bijzondere en complexe omstandigheden van deze ramp,  is nog niet duidelijk wanneer precies het preliminary report wordt gepubliceerd.

7. Geeft de Onderzoeksraad de inhoud van de Cockpit Voice Recorder en de Flight Data Recorder volledig vrij?

Onderzoeksmateriaal en bronnen van informatie die de Onderzoeksraad gebruikt bij het onderzoek, zijn wettelijk beschermd. Uitsluitend informatie die nodig en relevant is om de oorzaak van het neerstorten van vlucht MH17 te verklaren, wordt opgenomen in het eindrapport. Het beschikbare onderzoeksmateriaal wordt niet integraal vrijgegeven, behoudens de informatie die in het eindrapport gepubliceerd wordt. Dit is ook zo bepaald in de Rijkswet Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid en het ICAO-verdrag.

8. Wanneer komt het eindrapport?

Een onderzoek naar een luchtvaartcrash vergt veel tijd. Niet alleen is het onderzoek een complex, zorgvuldig en daardoor tijdrovend proces met veel verschillende partijen, de Onderzoeksraad is ook gehouden aan internationale regels die zijn vastgelegd in het ICAO-verdrag. Eén van de bepalingen is dat het concept eindrapport voor commentaar moet worden voorgelegd aan alle betrokken partijen. Die hebben vervolgens zestig dagen de tijd om op het concept te reageren, waarna de Onderzoeksraad de reacties moet verwerken. Naar verwachting wordt het definitieve rapport binnen een jaar gepubliceerd.

9. Wat is het verschil tussen preliminary report en het eindrapport?

Het preliminary report  geeft in een relatief korte tijd na het ongeval een overzicht van de eerste, voorlopige feiten. Er heeft dan nog geen analyse van alle onderzoeksdata plaatsgevonden en er zijn nog geen definitieve conclusies getrokken. Meer onderzoeksinformatie, een analyse en daarop gebaseerde conclusies worden wel opgenomen in het eindrapport, dat daarmee veel uitgebreider en diepgaander is.

10. Waarom doet de Onderzoeksraad geen uitspraak over schuld of aansprakelijkheid?

Het doel van het werk uitgevoerd door de Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid is - naast  een helder beeld te geven van de oorzaak – het verbeteren van de veiligheid. Dat gebeurt door onderzoek te doen naar de oorzaak van een ongeval en  – indien mogelijk - aanbevelingen te doen om de veiligheid te verbeteren. Dit is ook zo vastgelegd in het ICAO-verdrag, dat specifiek ingaat op luchtvaartonderzoeken.

11. Wat is  ICAO en wat is Annex 13?

De in 1947 opgerichte Internationale Burgerluchtvaartorganisatie (Engels: International Civil Aviation Organization) is een gespecialiseerde organisatie van de Verenigde Naties die als doel heeft de principes en standaarden voor de internationale burgerluchtvaart op te stellen ter verbetering van het luchtverkeer. In het ICAO-verdrag is onder meer bepaald hoe luchtvaartongevallen onderzocht moeten worden en dat het doel van dit onderzoek het verbeteren van de veiligheid is en niet het aanwijzen van schuldigen of aansprakelijkheid. In Annex 13 (bepaald deel van het verdrag) wordt beschreven hoe het onderzoek naar luchtvaartongevallen gedaan moet worden, aan welke eisen het rapport moet voldoen en welke landen betrokken moeten worden.

Bekijk hier de vragen in PDF.

Source

Code: Select all

http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/nl/onderzoek/2048/onderzoek-crash-mh17-17-juli-2014/onderzoek/1558/vragen-en-antwoorden-over-het-onderzoek-naar-het-neerstorten-van-vlucht-mh17#fasen
Google Translate
Aug 20. 2014
Questions and answers about the investigation into the crash of flight MH17

1 Why is research necessary?
When an aircraft accident occurs, it is of great importance by doing research to get the cause of a clear picture. This allows relatives, other stakeholders and the (international) society based on facts to find out what happened. In addition, research to contribute to the security of the (civil) aviation: where necessary and relevant recommendations are made to prevent recurrence in the future.

The Safety Board considers it of great importance that the crash of flight MH17 width and depth is investigated. Therefore we also investigate decisions about routes and availability of passenger lists in addition to the (international) research into the cause of the crash.

2 Why did the Safety Board in charge of the investigation?
Ukraine is in charge of the investigation into the cause of the crash transferred to the Safety Board. This was done at the request of Ukraine.

The reasons for the request that the flight left the Netherlands and the large number of Dutch victims. The transfer is on Wednesday, July 23 formalized in an agreement.


3 Which countries are involved in the research and why?
From ICAO (the UN International Civil Aviation Organisation) is that the country where an aircraft accident occurs, the task to investigate. The cause of the accident Immediately after the crash of flight MH17 Aviation investigators of Ukraine initiated the investigation into the cause. Netherlands has received official notification of the investigators on the crash of flight MH17, together with the invitation to participate. Part in the study shortly after the crash as a country

Based on the ICAO Convention certain countries should be involved in the research. The country where the incident occurred has in principle in charge of the investigation. It is possible to transfer to another country. Leading the investigation The countries where the operator comes from, where the aircraft is designed and where the plane is made also have the right to participate in the study. Countries that can provide specific information or experts to participate at the invitation of the party in charge of the investigation. Countries that victims have to regret, are also entitled to a role in the investigation, but have limited rights.

In the case of the investigation into the crash of flight 17 MH many countries have spontaneously offered their help. In some cases, this aid adopted because researchers could offer. Specific knowledge, information or expertise

The international research team to the crash of flight MH17 the following countries (to a greater or lesser extent) have contributed to the study: Ukraine, Malaysia, Australia, Russia, United Kingdom, United States, Germany, France, Italy, Indonesia. Additionally, the organizations ICAO and European Agency for Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) have contributed to the research. The leadership of the research lies in the (Dutch) Safety Board, which will publish. Both the preliminary report (preliminary report) of the final report The countries who have formally involved from the ICAO Convention as a participant in the research, have access to the draft reports and may respond. It is the party that is in charge of the study is free to provide to the draft report. Other countries access

4.Can be well researched there are no investigators at the scene have been? Present themselves
It is preferable to do so at the crash site itself, research but it is not impossible to do a good research on the basis of other sources and to come. Until a final report Incidentally, the day after the incident (when the investigation was still under the leadership of Ukraine) are some aviation researchers from Ukraine several times briefly at the scene was for research.

As a safe and stable situation on the crash site is reached, the Research Council will visit the crash site yet. This to verify research results based on other sources, and very specifically to look for some debris or other material.

5. Why is the Research Council has not yet been to the crash site?
The Safety Board has not been at the scene because the safety of the researchers could. Insecure The Dutch government has estimated that researchers into the cause of the crash increased safety risks run than forensic investigators, relatives or journalists. This also takes into account the safety of any other persons present at the scene: the presence of researchers from the Research Council should not put others at risk.

In addition it had mountains of victims and the search for personal belongings absolute priority. There were only limited opportunities to spot to go and the forensic investigators (and supporting military police) were given this priority.

6 What is a preliminary report (preliminary report)?
The so-called preliminary report (preliminary report) is an interim report in which the initial facts of an investigation into a plane crash are published. The ICAO Convention defining the procedures for investigations (civil) aviation are set, determines to be. Published a preliminary report during an investigation It may possibly also safety warnings are included. There are no requirements regarding the form and scope of a preliminary report. The content is also dependent on the progress of the investigation and the need for identifying particular outcomes.

The preliminary report that the Research Council, about the crash of flight MH17 contains some facts derived from different sources, giving a first, preliminary picture of the event can be. Outlined The research team gathers information from various sources, such as the Cockpit Voice Recorder, the Flight Data Recorder (satellite) images and radar information. This information is then compared to determine whether the various data support each other, or show. Abnormal image It requires care and is a time consuming process that is not yet completed.

The draft versions of the preliminary report are discussed within the international research team and the board, before the preliminary report is adopted. From ICAO states that it normally takes two to four weeks to prepare a preliminary report on but can be justified deviated from there. Given the special and complex circumstances of this disaster is not yet clear exactly when the preliminary report is published.

7 Shows the Research Council of the contents of the Cockpit Voice Recorder and the Flight Data Recorder completely free?
Research material and sources of information that the Research Council used in the investigation, are protected by law. Only information that is necessary and relevant to explain the cause of the crash of flight MH17 is included in the final report. The available evidence is not fully available, subject to the information published in the final report. This is also defined in the Act Safety Board and the ICAO Convention.

8 When will the final report?
An investigation into an air crash takes time. Not only is it a complex investigation, careful and therefore time-consuming process with many different parties, the Safety Board is also subject to international rules laid down in the ICAO Convention. One of the provisions is that the draft final report for comments to be submitted to all parties involved. Which then have sixty days to respond, after which the Research Council's comments should handle. On the concept The final report is published within a year. Expected to

9 What is the difference between the preliminary report and the final report?
The preliminary report shows in a relatively short time after the accident, an overview of the first provisional facts. There is still no analysis of the research data occurred and there are no definitive conclusions. More research information, analysis and conclusions based thereon are still included in the final report, which will be much more extensive and profound.

10 Why does the Research Council no judgment about guilt or liability?
The purpose of the work carried out by the Safety Board - in addition to give a clear picture of the cause - improving safety. This is done by investigating the cause of an accident investigation, and - to do to improve the safety advice - if possible. This is also defined in the ICAO Convention, specifically addressing aviation investigations.

11 What is and what is ICAO Annex 13?
The International Civil Aviation Organization, established in 1947 (English: International Civil Aviation Organization) is a specialized agency of the United Nations that aims to propose measures to improve air traffic on the principles and standards of international civil aviation. In the ICAO Convention, inter alia, how aviation accidents should be investigated and that the purpose of this research to improve the safety and not the blame or liability. In Annex 13 (certain part of the Convention) describes how the investigation should be, what requirements the report must meet and which countries should be involved. Done to aircraft accidents

View the questions in PDF.
"No one understood better than Stalin that the true object of propaganda is neither to convince nor even to persuade, but to produce a uniform pattern of public utterance in which the first trace of unorthodox thought immediately reveals itself as a jarring dissonance." Leonard Schapiro
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Jun 22 2006, 05:18 PM

Aug 21 2014, 03:43 PM #121

^ An English version is available on the web site.

http://onderzoeksraad.nl/en/onderzoek/2 ... mh17#fasen
Kort bericht 21 aug. 2014
Questions and answers concerning the investigation into flight MH17

1. Why is an investigation necessary?
In the event of an aircraft accident, it is very important to conduct an investigation in order to clearly ascertain the cause. This will allow the surviving relatives, other parties involved and also the world to understand what happened based on a factual account. An investigation can also contribute to the safety of civilian (and other) aviation:  recommendations are made whenever necessary to avoid similar incidents in the future.

The Dutch Safety Board believes that the MH17 crash should be the subject of an extensive and in-depth investigation. In addition to the (international) investigation into the cause of the crash, the decision-making process surrounding flightroutes and the availability of passenger lists will also be examined.
     
2. Why is the Dutch Safety Board leading the investigation?
Ukraine has transferred responsibility for investigating the cause of the crash to the Dutch Safety Board. The request came from Ukraine.

This request was made because the flight departed from the Netherlands, and due to the large number of Dutch nationals who died in the crash. The transfer was formally recorded in an agreement on 23 July.
     
3. Which countries are involved in the investigation and why?
The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) states that it is the responsibility of the country where an aircraft accident took place to investigate the cause. Immediately following the crash of flight MH17, aviation investigators  from Ukraine began investigating the cause of the accident. The Netherlands (as one of the countries affected) received official word of the crash of MH17 from the investigators shortly after it took place, including an invitation to take part in the investigation.
     
The ICAO agreement dictates that certain countries are obliged to be involved in the investigation.  In principle, the country where the accident took place (state of occurance) should lead the investigation. However, the option is available to transfer the obligation of the investigation to another country. The countries where the operator is based, where the aircraft was designed and where it was built are also entitled to take part. Countries that can supply specific information or expertise may participate at the invitation of the party leading the investigation. Countries that suffered fatalities are also entitled to play a part in the investigation, but have limited rights.

In the case of the MH17 crash, many countries volunteered their assistance of their own accord. In some cases this assistance was accepted because the investigators had specific knowledge, information or expertise to offer.
     
The following countries have contributed (to a greater or lesser extent) to the international investigation team into the crash of flight MH17: Ukraine, Malaysia, Australia, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, France, Italy and Indonesia. The ICAO and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) also contributed to the investigation as organisations. The leadership of the investigation rests with the Dutch Safety Board, which will publish both the preliminary and final report. The countries that have a formal role as participants in the investigation under the ICAO agreement will be given access to the draft reports, and may provide feedback.  The country leading the investigation may offer other countries access to the draft reports at its discretion.

4. Is it possible to conduct an effective investigation if nobody has visited the crash site itself?
Although additional investigation at the crash site itself is preferable, it is not impossible to conduct an effective investigation based on other sources and to produce a definitive final report. Incidentally, on the days following the incident (when Ukraine was still leading the investigation), several Ukrainian aviation investigators visited the crash site briefly several times for investigative purposes.

Once a secure and stable situation has been established, the Dutch Safety Board will visit the location. This in order to verify the results of the investigation from other sources and to conduct a specific search for wreckage and other vital pieces.

5. Why has the Dutch Safety Board not yet visited the crash site?
The Dutch Safety Board was not abled to visit the crash site because the safety of the investigators could not be guaranteed. The Dutch government believes that people investigating the causes of the crash will be at greater risk than forensic investigators, next of kin or journalists. In this respect, the safety of others at the crash site is also being taken into account: the presence of Dutch Safety Board investigators must not put others in danger.

Moreover, recovering the victims' bodies and searching for personal belongings had top priority. The opportunities for visiting the crash site were limited, and priority was given to forensic investigators (and the supporting marechaussees).

6. What is a preliminary report?
The preliminary report is an interim report used to publish the initial results of an investigation following an major aircraft accident. The ICAO agreement that sets out the investigative procedures for civil and other aviation states that a preliminary report must be released during an investigation. This report may also include safety warnings. The preliminary report is not subject to any criteria in terms of structure or scope. The content is partly dependent on the progress of the investigation and the need to report certain findings.

The preliminary report on the crash of MH17 being prepared by the Dutch Safety Board contains a number of facts based on various sources; allowing an initial, provisional sequence of events to be made. The investigation team collected information from various sources, such as the Cockpit Voice Recorder, the Flight Data Recorder, satellite and other images, and radar information. All the data is then compared to determine whether the various sources corroborate each other, or show a different view. This is a delicate and time-consuming process that has not yet been completed.

The draft versions of the preliminary report will be discussed by the international investigation team and with the Board prior to being published. The ICAO states that the normal period required for drawing up a preliminary report is 2-4 weeks, however justified exceptions are permitted. Given the particular and complex circumstances surrounding this occurence, it is not yet exactly clear when the preliminary report will be published.

7. Will the Dutch Safety Board be publicly releasing the content from the Cockpit Voice Recorder and the Flight Data Recorder?
Investigative materials and sources of information used by the Dutch Safety Board in its investigations are protected by law. Only information relevant to determining the cause of the MH17 crash will be included in the final report. The available investigative information  will not be released publicly in their entirety, except for what is published in the final report. This is in accordance with the Dutch Safety Board Act (Rijkswet Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid) and the ICAO agreement.

8. When will the final report be released?
An aviation accident investigation requires a lot of time. Not only is the investigation a complex, delicate and therefore time-consuming process involving various different parties, the Dutch Safety Board is also bound to international regulations that are set out in the ICAO agreement. One of these regulations prescribes that a draft of the final report must be presented for feedback to all parties which are formally involved. These parties then have sixty days to respond to the draft, after which the Dutch  Safety Board must incorporate their feedback. The definitive report is expected to be published within one year.
     
9. What is the difference between the preliminary report and the final report?
The preliminary report provides an overview of the initial, provisional facts a relatively short time after the occurence. When the report is released, not all investigation data will have been analysed and no definitive conclusions drawn. Additional investigation data, an analysis and the conclusions based thereon will be included in the final report, making it far more extensive and in-depth.

10. Why does the Dutch Safety Board not issue any statements concerning guilt or liability?
In addition to providing a clear understanding of the cause, the aim of the  Dutch Safety Board's work is to increase safety. This is achieved by investigating the causes of an incident and – if possible – making recommendations to improve safety. This is set out as such in the ICAO agreement, which deals specifically with aviation investigations.

11. What is the ICAO and what is Annex 13?
Founded in 1947, the International Civil Aviation Organisation is a specialist UN organisation whose goal is to establish the principles and standards for international civil aviation for the improvement of aviation. Among other things, the ICAO agreement prescribes how aviation accidents must be investigated, and that the purpose of such investigations must be to improve safety and not to apportion blame or establish liability. Annex 13 (one section of the agreement) describes how investigations into aviation incidents should be conducted, the criteria that the report must satisfy, and which countries need to be involved.
     
Read the Q&A in PDF.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Nov 26 2005, 01:46 AM

Nov 14 2014, 07:26 PM #122

Timed for the G20 and coincidentally a day after RT ran with the Samantha Lewthwaite 'Russian sniper' story as the lead all day, Russian channel 1 show a US satellite image of a Ukrainian MIG-29 shooting down MH17 - both were claims made by Russian that there was a military plane alongside and that the US had a satellite directly overhead at the time of the downing of MH17:



http://vladimirsuchan.blogspot.co.uk/20 ... ge-in.html

http://www.1tv.ru/news/leontiev/271824
�To those who are afraid of the truth, I wish to offer a few scary truths; and to those who are not afraid of the truth, I wish to offer proof that the terrorism of truth is the only one that can be of benefit to the proletariat.� -- On Terrorism and the State, Gianfranco Sanguinetti
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Nov 26 2005, 01:46 AM

Feb 25 2015, 01:38 PM #123

Excellent documentary on MH17

​Reflections on MH17 — RT Documentary
�To those who are afraid of the truth, I wish to offer a few scary truths; and to those who are not afraid of the truth, I wish to offer proof that the terrorism of truth is the only one that can be of benefit to the proletariat.� -- On Terrorism and the State, Gianfranco Sanguinetti
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Nov 6 2006, 05:39 PM

Apr 12 2015, 01:26 PM #124

The Cobweb
Can the Internet be archived?
By Jill Lepore

Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 took off from Amsterdam at 10:31 A.M. G.M.T. on July 17, 2014, for a twelve-hour flight to Kuala Lumpur. Not much more than three hours later, the plane, a Boeing 777, crashed in a field outside Donetsk, Ukraine. All two hundred and ninety-eight people on board were killed. The plane’s last radio contact was at 1:20 P.M. G.M.T. At 2:50 P.M. G.M.T., Igor Girkin, a Ukrainian separatist leader also known as Strelkov, or someone acting on his behalf, posted a message on VKontakte, a Russian social-media site: “We just downed a plane, an AN-26.” (An Antonov 26 is a Soviet-built military cargo plane.) The post includes links to video of the wreckage of a plane; it appears to be a Boeing 777.

Two weeks before the crash, Anatol Shmelev, the curator of the Russia and Eurasia collection at the Hoover Institution, at Stanford, had submitted to the Internet Archive, a nonprofit library in California, a list of Ukrainian and Russian Web sites and blogs that ought to be recorded as part of the archive’s Ukraine Conflict collection. Shmelev is one of about a thousand librarians and archivists around the world who identify possible acquisitions for the Internet Archive’s subject collections, which are stored in its Wayback Machine, in San Francisco. Strelkov’s VKontakte page was on Shmelev’s list. “Strelkov is the field commander in Slaviansk and one of the most important figures in the conflict,” Shmelev had written in an e-mail to the Internet Archive on July 1st, and his page “deserves to be recorded twice a day.”

On July 17th, at 3:22 P.M. G.M.T., the Wayback Machine saved a screenshot of Strelkov’s VKontakte post about downing a plane. Two hours and twenty-two minutes later, Arthur Bright, the Europe editor of the Christian Science Monitor, tweeted a picture of the screenshot, along with the message “Grab of Donetsk militant Strelkov’s claim of downing what appears to have been MH17.” By then, Strelkov’s VKontakte page had already been edited: the claim about shooting down a plane was deleted. The only real evidence of the original claim lies in the Wayback Machine.

The average life of a Web page is about a hundred days. Strelkov’s “We just downed a plane” post lasted barely two hours. It might seem, and it often feels, as though stuff on the Web lasts forever, for better and frequently for worse: the embarrassing photograph, the regretted blog (more usually regrettable not in the way the slaughter of civilians is regrettable but in the way that bad hair is regrettable). No one believes any longer, if anyone ever did, that “if it’s on the Web it must be true,” but a lot of people do believe that if it’s on the Web it will stay on the Web. Chances are, though, that it actually won’t. In 2006, David Cameron gave a speech in which he said that Google was democratizing the world, because “making more information available to more people” was providing “the power for anyone to hold to account those who in the past might have had a monopoly of power.” Seven years later, Britain’s Conservative Party scrubbed from its Web site ten years’ worth of Tory speeches, including that one. Last year, BuzzFeed deleted more than four thousand of its staff writers’ early posts, apparently because, as time passed, they looked stupider and stupider. Social media, public records, junk: in the end, everything goes.

Web pages don’t have to be deliberately deleted to disappear. Sites hosted by corporations tend to die with their hosts. When MySpace, GeoCities, and Friendster were reconfigured or sold, millions of accounts vanished. (Some of those companies may have notified users, but Jason Scott, who started an outfit called Archive Team—its motto is “We are going to rescue your shit”—says that such notification is usually purely notional: “They were sending e-mail to dead e-mail addresses, saying, ‘Hello, Arthur Dent, your house is going to be crushed.’ ”) Facebook has been around for only a decade; it won’t be around forever. Twitter is a rare case: it has arranged to archive all of its tweets at the Library of Congress. In 2010, after the announcement, Andy Borowitz tweeted, “Library of Congress to acquire entire Twitter archive—will rename itself Museum of Crap.” Not long after that, Borowitz abandoned that Twitter account. You might, one day, be able to find his old tweets at the Library of Congress, but not anytime soon: the Twitter Archive is not yet open for research. Meanwhile, on the Web, if you click on a link to Borowitz’s tweet about the Museum of Crap, you get this message: “Sorry, that page doesn’t exist!”

Code: Select all

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/01/26/cobweb
"No one understood better than Stalin that the true object of propaganda is neither to convince nor even to persuade, but to produce a uniform pattern of public utterance in which the first trace of unorthodox thought immediately reveals itself as a jarring dissonance." Leonard Schapiro
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Jun 22 2006, 05:18 PM

Apr 27 2016, 06:29 PM #125

Conspiracy Files - Who Shot Down MH17?
BBC TWO
3rd May 2016 21:00
4th May 2016 23:15

Producer Mike Rudin
Director Mike Rudin
Executive Producer Samantha Anstiss

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0791ns4
Who Shot Down MH17?

When Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 was shot down over Ukraine, killing all 298 passengers and crew, a storm of conspiracy theories was unleashed across social media. While the official inquiries have pointed the finger of blame at separatist fighters and their Russian backers, a host of different theories claim the Ukrainian government, and even the CIA, were to blame.

With revealing eyewitness testimonies, satellite photographs, wire taps, clandestine videos and expert evidence, Conspiracy Files tries to sort the fact from the fiction. In a world where the information war fought online can be just as significant as battles on the ground, this film also analyses the role of the Kremlin in the search for the truth about who shot down MH17.
An article on the programme by Mike Rudin here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35706048
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Nov 26 2005, 01:46 AM

Apr 28 2016, 05:30 PM #126

^ I think we know what to expect - the Western 'official' version is correct!
�To those who are afraid of the truth, I wish to offer a few scary truths; and to those who are not afraid of the truth, I wish to offer proof that the terrorism of truth is the only one that can be of benefit to the proletariat.� -- On Terrorism and the State, Gianfranco Sanguinetti
Quote
Like
Share