Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Russian Government Edits Wikipedia On Flight MH17

samzenpus posted about 4 months ago | from the writing-history dept.

Wikipedia 667

An anonymous reader writes A political battle has broken out on Wikipedia over an entry relating to the crash of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17, with the Russian government reportedly removing sections which accuse it of providing 'terrorists' with missiles that were used to down the civilian airliner. A Twitter bot which monitors edits made to the online encyclopedia from Russian government IP addresses spotted that changes are being made to a page relating to the crash. All-Russia State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company (VGTRK) changed a Russian language version of a page listing civil aviation accidents to say that "The plane was shot down by Ukrainian soldiers." That edit replaced text – written just an hour earlier – which said MH17 had been shot down "by terrorists of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic with Buk system missiles, which the terrorists received from the Russian Federation."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

It gets worse... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496681)

They tried to edit slashdot to make this the first post

Re:It gets worse... (2)

TWX (665546) | about 4 months ago | (#47496871)

Then I'm glad that you were here to take one for the team!

Let us keep our thoughts with our Kremlin friends (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497053)

Poor shills are on their 3rd straight day without sleep, and over-time pay is reduced to only 6 extra potatoes due to sanctions. Remember to take a rest, comrades. Next week when the satellite and black box data come out you will be needed even more.

I don't see the problem. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496689)

One biased side is fighting edits from an even more biased side.

The first casualty of war is the truth. In this case both sides are trying to pummel truth's dead body into a hamburger.

Re:I don't see the problem. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496749)

The issue is what constitutes a "terrorist" depends on which side you're on.

When pic of a dead baby is used as propaganda tool (-1, Flamebait)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 4 months ago | (#47496909)

The issue is what constitutes a "terrorist" depends on which side you're on

A little baby suffered a horrible death and its (dunno if it's a girl or a boy) remains lie on the ground

Someone took a picture of that little baby and that pic was used as a propaganda tool against another side ...

I was utterly disgusted with the way Ukraine is using this tragedy to further their political agenda - They have utterly no regard for anything, even the dead body of a little baby in their hand becomes a political tool !!

Re:When pic of a dead baby is used as propaganda t (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496933)

That's great, but it doesn't have dukey-squat to do with GP's point.

Re:I don't see the problem. (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497015)

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Re:I don't see the problem. (2)

Scott Ragen (3378093) | about 4 months ago | (#47497269)

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

This is all my opinion but I don't think an argument like that can be summed up in one short sentence. Looking at it objective from a third party, the objectives of a freedom fighter and terrorist may be the same, but their methods certainly are not.

A terrorist's goal is to frighten people into submission by causing fear of harm or death into civilians and attacking civilian's (like 9/11).

A freedom fighter makes statements to the people by attacking appropriate military or government sites

Re:I don't see the problem. (0, Troll)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 4 months ago | (#47496781)

Except one of these sides actually knows the truth, or the closest thing to it, and is a primary source, the other side are just internet idiots trying to push an anti "Red" agenda left over from the Soviet Union and American anti communist propaganda. The Russian government is likely the most knowledge institution in the world when it comes to this incident. Sharing that knowledge with Wikipedia is just transparency, unless we know that they are knowingly disseminating false information. Not that this is unlikely, just that it is a possibility that they are telling the truth (I have absolutely no knowledge of modern Russian politics or this incident, but last I heard we know next to nothing).

Re:I don't see the problem. (4, Insightful)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 4 months ago | (#47496821)

I like how you wrote all these things with a straight face. Perfect deadpan!

Re:I don't see the problem. (4, Funny)

Cryacin (657549) | about 4 months ago | (#47496843)

There's the truth (shakes head) and the truth! (Nods head)

Re:I don't see the problem. (1)

poity (465672) | about 4 months ago | (#47497131)

A skeptic doubts all. A conspiracy theorist doubts selectively.
wisnoskij is clearly not a skeptic.

Re:I don't see the problem. (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 4 months ago | (#47496879)

Actually, I suspect that neither side knows the truth. Or at least neither government does. This strikes me as an act of somebody or some organization that was acting entirely independently of government authority or sanction (and most likely used illegally purchased munitions to achieve it).

Re:I don't see the problem. (4, Informative)

Michael Woodhams (112247) | about 4 months ago | (#47497149)

The plane was 10km up. It wasn't shot down by something bought for $50,000 from Bob's Quality Used Implements of Death and Destruction and delivered to you by a courier van. The suspected weapon system [wikipedia.org] requires at minimum one tank sized tracked launcher vehicle, and for full capability it requires three such vehicles. This is way out of Bob the arms dealer's league. Although I'm pretty much guessing here, the missile alone I expect would cost over a million dollars to manufacture.

Having said that, the possibility exists that rebels with military experience seized such a weapon system from an overrun Ukrainian military base.

Re:I don't see the problem. (0)

Lumpy (12016) | about 4 months ago | (#47497181)

And they are brain dead easy to run. Army soldiers are not the brightest bulbs in the box.

Re:I don't see the problem. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497297)

Actually I suspect that the launch of the missile was monitored by one or more of the many satellite/radar systems eyeing the region, its trajectory was known, the position of the plane and all other air traffic was known, the type of missile and launcher used and their origins are known, conversations between the "rebels" and their handlers in Moscow were intercepted, and I further suspect that follow-up conversations regarding the cleanup/coverup of the site were recorded. This all tracks with what was already known: the "rebels" are supported by Russia and include covert agents and/or troops. They are not an organic/grassroots response to Ukrainian actions, they are the direct result of Russian influence, because Putin has less control over Ukraine than he did in the past.

There's little confusion about what happened. What's confusing is what to do next. The EU may finally be spurred to approve more sanctions on Russia, but Russia can sell gas to China and other partners instead. The "BRICS" movement is a strategy to reduce American and European influence on world affairs, reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar and the World Bank, IMF, and other Western dominated institutions, and it has picked up steam in recent years as China and Russia grow more weary of being told what to do. Influencing Putin on Ukraine requires giving him a way to save grace and not appear weak to his sheeple back home, which may be impossible. Best case scenario, Putin will back off slowly and broker a peace deal between his cronies and Ukraine, while the Russian government-dominated media continue to lie about MH17, claim that Ukraine shot at Putin's plane, etc.

Re:I don't see the problem. (4, Funny)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 4 months ago | (#47496907)

I feel like I just read a Soviet era Pravda article.

Re:I don't see the problem. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496943)

Now you know how the rest of the world feels when we look at US coverage of this.

Re:I don't see the problem. (1, Informative)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 4 months ago | (#47497087)

And where exactly are you from? Some of the most accusatory reporting is coming from Europe.

Re:I don't see the problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497101)

People like to say how Pravda has been a propaganda tool for the Soviet Union/Russia Communist party. Yet they fail to mention how the mainstream media in the US functions very similarly also as a propaganda tool.

Re:I don't see the problem. (4, Informative)

poity (465672) | about 4 months ago | (#47497165)

Russian news sites were just yesterday trying to insinuate that Putin's presidential plane took the same flight path as MH17, and that this was a botched assassination by Kiev. Of course, a quick glance at a map will reveal that a plane flying from Brazil to Poland to Russia never even comes close to Eastern Ukraine.

Re:I don't see the problem. (5, Informative)

richlv (778496) | about 4 months ago | (#47496941)

of course, russian govt is the most knowledgeable - they shot down the damn plane.
on the other hand, the rest of the world knows quite a lot - photos and videos on the ground, showing buk system moving around, intercepted terrorist conversations that include receiving of the buk, moving it around, then scrambling to react when they find out just what they just shot down.
that also includes public bragging about downed ukrainian plane, only to hastily remove all those comments once they figured out that it's a civilian plane.
after that they publicly try other idiotic statements like claiming that all passengers were dead in amsterdam already (yeah, happens in that city every now and then, right ?), or trying to find "weapons" in the remains of the plane.
then more intercepted conversations where they are given the orders from the "higher ups, from moscow, you know what i mean" not to let anybody who's not "theirs" near the crash site and above all - find all "black" boxes and ship them to moscow.

there is no "anti red agenda". there's a fascistic, aggressive country that invaded and annexed part of a european country. and there are lots of paid commenters who try to whitewash the crazy actions of russian state. (although some might be genuinely crazy and/or uninformed and do it for free)

Re:I don't see the problem. (5, Insightful)

bossk538 (1682744) | about 4 months ago | (#47496979)

It's pretty easy to determine if the Russian government is sharing knowledge as a primary source or knowingly disseminating false information. The edits implicate the government and military of Kiev, replacing statements that implicate the rebels as well as Moscow. So if the Russian side was in fact the truth, you would expect rebels and Moscow bending over backwards to assist with the investigation, and if the Russian side was a Big Lie, you would expect rebels and Moscow doing every to impede the investigation. It seems pretty clear the extent of assistance the investigation is getting.

Re:I don't see the problem. (4, Interesting)

Oligonicella (659917) | about 4 months ago | (#47496993)

Current reports are that Russia is helping to destroy on ground evidence.

Re:I don't see the problem. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496793)

Wikipedia doesn't care about the truth. They just don't want original research [wikipedia.org] .

Re:I don't see the problem. (1, Flamebait)

aphelion_rock (575206) | about 4 months ago | (#47496893)

It is too early to be writing about who shot down the plane. There needs to be an investigation first.

Re:I don't see the problem. (5, Insightful)

sinij (911942) | about 4 months ago | (#47496903)

False equivalence.
 
Sides are not equally wrong, and truth is not somewhere in the middle. There is a very clear wrong side - Russian equipment operated by Russian-sponsored terrorists and/or Russian military misidentifying civilian aircraft and shooting it down. Anything else is intentional misinformation.

Re:I don't see the problem. (5, Insightful)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | about 4 months ago | (#47497215)

False equivalence.

Sides are not equally wrong, and truth is not somewhere in the middle. There is a very clear wrong side - Russian equipment operated by Russian-sponsored terrorists and/or Russian military misidentifying civilian aircraft and shooting it down. Anything else is intentional misinformation.

"Terrorist" is the wrong word, it's obvious from the intercepts this was a tactical error on someone's part.

Terrorism isn't defined by actions so much as the reason. For the love of Jebus, it has a well understood meaning folks, look it up.

Re:I don't see the problem. (5, Insightful)

Scott Ragen (3378093) | about 4 months ago | (#47497217)

Terrorists? I've seen them called both separatists and I think Militia. I haven't heard them called terrorists until now, and whilst I'm not fully educated on their movement, treatment of civilians in the area and other matters, I don't know if they should morally be classified as terrorists by the international community, that is unless they shot the airliner down on purpose or performed other heinous acts of terror.
The looting of MH17 on the other hand is a terrible and those doing it should be held accountable

The way Israel has been behaving lately looks more like a terrorist organisation than the Ukrainian separatists.

Propaganda (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496697)

Each party blames it on the others. Surprise surprise.

To be honest it's quite impossible to be certain of the facts now and neither side is helping.

I don't trust any of the parties involved. They're all war mongering liars.

Re:Propaganda (2)

linearz69 (3473163) | about 4 months ago | (#47496861)

I don't trust any of the parties involved. They're all war mongering liars.

Certainly the Russian and their armed separatists are war mongers. It's not clear if the Ukrainian government really wants a war or just wants sovereignty.

Russia is clearly the aggressor here, and no matter who fired the missile, Russian has a huge responsibility in the matter. Provda shouldn't be editing the Wiki.

Re:Propaganda (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496887)

The problem is Obama is supposed to be the Commander-In-Chief, yet he continues doing photo ops (and we're told he disdains photo ops) and other activities showing his disconnect and tone-deaf politics i.e.:

He's golfing today while Israel burns Gaza to the ground

Hours after news of the MH17 crash he takes the opportunity for another photo op at a Delaware burger joint. "Great to be in Delaware!" he said.

Minutes after issuing a statement on Russia's invasion of Crimea, he went to a meeting of the Democratic National Committee, where he told a cheering crowd: “Well, it’s Friday, it’s after 5:00. So this is officially happy hour with the Democratic Party.”

The day after the Benghazi terrorist attacks he attended a political fund raiser.

Immediately after delivering a eulogy to the victims of the Fort Hood shooting he went to another political fund raiser.

He's just tone fucking deaf. It's a shameful state of affairs this country is in having this guy as CinC.

Re:Propaganda (4, Informative)

richlv (778496) | about 4 months ago | (#47496965)

a strategy of kremlin propagandists.
distribute lies about events ("oh, ukrainians shot down mh 17 ! they even shot down their own planes a few days before that. we claimed credit for that just for fun !"), then go "ooooh, but you know, i don't trust either side, they all are lying"

so far russia has been caught lying many times. all evidence points at russian special forces (and regular army, too) being responsible both for invasion in eastern ukraine, and for downing mh17 specifically.

please, stop whitewashing this terrible government, it can lead to even more tragic losses.

I hope that we start seeing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496709)

some murdering of political leaders soon. Both in the east and in the west. Some good old mass assassinations would be quite good right now.

Yet another NSA shill pointing fingers at someone (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496739)

Yet another NSA shill pointing fingers at someone else

To distract you from US gov disinfo and cover up projects like congressedits [twitter.com] .

Assassination of John F. Kennedy Wikipedia article edited anonymously by US House of Representatives [t.co]
  Donald Rumsfeld Wikipedia article edited anonymously by US House of Representatives [t.co]
  Nevada Test and Training Range Wikipedia article edited anonymously by US House of Representatives [t.co]
  Trilateral Commission Wikipedia article edited anonymously by US House of Representatives [t.co]
  City of London Corporation Wikipedia article edited anonymously by US House of Representatives [t.co]
  Crimea Wikipedia article edited anonymously by US House of Representatives [t.co]

Simply put, Americans, don't worry about what others are doing, whatever bad is happening outside the US, your government is doing it 10 times worse and you're taking the blame for them.

Re:Yet another NSA shill pointing fingers at someo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496771)

And the Wikipedia page on Anonymous Cowards was edited from your IP.

So what does that mean?

Re:Yet another NSA shill pointing fingers at someo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496785)

Perhaps you can post a citation? The first AC was able to post links where you could look at it the house edits.
As for what it means, I guess that was left as an excessive for the reader.

Re: Yet another NSA shill pointing fingers at some (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496995)

Why was your IP also used to edit Wikipedia?

What does that mean?

Re:Yet another NSA shill pointing fingers at someo (1)

linearz69 (3473163) | about 4 months ago | (#47496973)

Clearly the NSA wants us to know that Rumsfeld is an alien reptile. Maybe the NSA listens to us is because they are out of gum?
 

Re:Yet another NSA shill pointing fingers at someo (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497117)

LOL newbies (or agent pretending to be newbies).

The reptile bullshit is part of the disinfo project to mix into conspiracy theories to make them look stupid, like the tin foil hat, and that is also EXACTLY why the congress is adding it to the Wikipedia article.

Just shut up, eat your burgers and go back to your football, silly Americans.

Re:Yet another NSA shill pointing fingers at someo (1)

linearz69 (3473163) | about 4 months ago | (#47497291)

Oh yea, I get it... They want us to think that those sunglasses allow us to see the alien reptilian faces so that when we put them on and see human faces we think the alien reptiles are real people. I have found that tinfoil makes the sunglasses work. You should try it.

Re:Yet another NSA shill pointing fingers at someo (4, Informative)

Guy Harris (3803) | about 4 months ago | (#47497051)

God forbid somebody who happens to work for or be a Congressperson spread disinfomation by alphabetizing categories...

...or adding serial commas!

You might want to limit yourself to examples where somebody's changing the tone of an article to favor (or mock) some particular view, like the rest of the links.

And, of course, a particular Congressperson or staffer for that Congressperson isn't necessarily acting on behalf of the US Government, just as somebody working at or for the VGTRK isn't necessarily acting on behalf of the Russian government. (Perhaps it'd be more likely in the latter case, but if it were somebody posting from the Duma in that case, or somebody from the Voice of America in the former case, it'd be a closer match.)

Re:Yet another NSA shill pointing fingers at someo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497193)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W... [wikipedia.org]
You have to try harder than this Vassiliy

lol (-1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 4 months ago | (#47496751)

I don't think Russian state media should be editing Wikipedia entries especially not on matters of current affairs.

But still, interpreted literally the new statement is far more factually correct and unbiased than what it replaced. Whoever shot down the plane, they were "soldiers" or fighters of some variety and almost certainly can be described as Ukrainian, given that everyone seems to agree that the fighters are actually eastern Ukrainians and at most Russia is supplying weapons to them.

The original text, on the other hand, more or less exactly sums up western/west Ukrainian line despite the obvious abuse of the word terrorist to mean "rebel fighter" and the [citation needed] assertion about who did it and the source of the weapons.

Re:lol (4, Insightful)

bloodhawk (813939) | about 4 months ago | (#47496761)

I don't think Russian state media should be editing Wikipedia entries especially not on matters of current affairs.

But still, interpreted literally the new statement is far more factually correct and unbiased than what it replaced. Whoever shot down the plane, they were "soldiers" or fighters of some variety and almost certainly can be described as Ukrainian, given that everyone seems to agree that the fighters are actually eastern Ukrainians and at most Russia is supplying weapons to them.

The original text, on the other hand, more or less exactly sums up western/west Ukrainian line despite the obvious abuse of the word terrorist to mean "rebel fighter" and the [citation needed] assertion about who did it and the source of the weapons.

I don't think Wikipedia should be used as a political tool fullstop. posting accusations that Russia was involved is for news sites not for supposedly unbiased material. If it proves to be a fact then it can be put there. The original text is more like a fox news story than an encyclopaedia reference.

Re:lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496925)

> I don't think Wikipedia should be used as a political tool fullstop. posting accusations that Russia was involved is for news sites not for supposedly unbiased material.

You watch a lot FOX news, don't you?

News sites are supposed to investigate available sources, to publish and provide, "unbiased material".

Re:lol (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | about 4 months ago | (#47496969)

Actually I don't watch fox news at all, but so many idiots post information published from it that it is hard to avoid it. News sites stopped doing proper investigative journalism years ago, the majority of articles even on the relatively good places are poorly researched and/or republished crap. Even on the current MH17 it amazes me some of the fake/phony stuff that has been put on news here in Australia as fact, they don't even bother to do basic research anymore.

Re:lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497059)

It will never prove to be a fact. All people that was on "BUG" (rocket missile system) and launched that missile are already dead.. If you think that Moscow would allow for something like that to point on them then you are just naive. This night alone another 4 tanks crossed Russia -> Ukraine border. We all know who did it and why did it. But like in court room... it doesn't matter what you know, it's matter what you can prove... If it was indeed Russian tv station then it's on direct order from russian government because in russia TV station = government. There is no free speech TV station there.. Only propaganda served by Putin.
There was 45 funerals of soldiers lately in Russia... All of them from special forces... Official version says that ALL of them died on vacations..... I don't think comment is needed here... You have your own brain.

Re:lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496789)

Indeed, given that they've been shelling and rocketing and bombing their own people, it would be fair to describe the Ukrainian government forces as terrorists.

Re:lol (5, Insightful)

Nidi62 (1525137) | about 4 months ago | (#47496983)

But still, interpreted literally the new statement is far more factually correct and unbiased than what it replaced. Whoever shot down the plane, they were "soldiers" or fighters of some variety and almost certainly can be described as Ukrainian, given that everyone seems to agree that the fighters are actually eastern Ukrainians and at most Russia is supplying weapons to them.

Not exactly. There is a distinct difference between a soldier and a combatant. A soldier is trained and is a member of a standing military. The separatists can at best be described as "irregulars", or insurgents or rebels if you want to go with slightly more charged terminology. And who exactly is this "everyone" who are agreeing that they are all Eastern Ukranians? I have yet to see any reputable source make that claim. And Russia is not just supplying small arms to these groups. They are giving them tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery, and anti-air systems (both MANPADS and tracked systems). You don't just pick these systesms up and start using them. They are recieving training, either in Russia or locally from trainers that Russia has moved into Ukraine. And given the fact that the missiles were launched from inside territory controlled by the rebelsis a very important detail. Why would the Ukrainians have anti-air equipment deployed in an area they do not control, against an enemy with no air power? All evidence points to the missiles being fired by the separatists, which means Russia had a hand in at the very least training them on how to use the equipment if not providing that equipment as well as continuing to use their influence to keep the conflict going.

Re:lol (-1, Troll)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 4 months ago | (#47497187)

Not exactly. There is a distinct difference between a soldier and a combatant. A soldier is trained and is a member of a standing military. The separatists can at best be described as "irregulars", or insurgents or rebels if you want to go with slightly more charged terminology.

Yes, really? With that definition it'd be impossible for a new military to ever be created, because anyone who joins and fights with one is not joining a standing army therefore cannot be soldiers. That is obviously nonsense, it must be possible for someone to be a soldier in a newly formed army, which is what it looks like is happening here.

Additionally, you claim that the fighters in Donetsk cannot be soldiers because soldiers are trained, and then immediately claim they're receiving training from Russia. So which is it?

And given the fact that the missiles were launched from inside territory controlled by the rebelsis a very important detail. Why would the Ukrainians have anti-air equipment deployed in an area they do not control, against an enemy with no air power?

You're quite right - it probably was the separatists. This does not change the accuracy of the Wikipedia edit that's being discussed, because unless/until the separatists win, they are still Ukrainians.

Although I'd note that given the amount of bullshit emanating from all sides in this conflict it's hard to really know anything about what's going on. The area of Ukraine that's in revolt is next to the Russian border, which is exactly where you'd expect the Ukrainian military to have had lots of soldiers and equipment stationed. Missiles might have been trucked over the Russian border, or they might simply have been there already. The separatists might be being trained by Russians (this would be unsurprising and not exactly unprecedented - see how the USA supported rebels in Syria), or alternatively they might be operating the equipment without really knowing what they're doing - indeed, having no clue what you're targeting would be rather indicative of not being properly trained, no? Or perhaps they're being trained by people who are ethnically Russian but lived in Ukraine at the time of the rebellion, or one of many other more complex cases that won't neatly fit into the "Putin fired the missiles himself" story the west is busy pushing.

All we can say for sure is that whatever you read about this incident is going to be full-blown propaganda, and should be treated as such.

Re:lol (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497203)

But still, interpreted literally the new statement is far more factually correct and unbiased than what it replaced. Whoever shot down the plane, they were "soldiers" or fighters of some variety and almost certainly can be described as Ukrainian, given that everyone seems to agree that the fighters are actually eastern Ukrainians and at most Russia is supplying weapons to them.

Not exactly. There is a distinct difference between a soldier and a combatant. A soldier is trained and is a member of a standing military. The separatists can at best be described as "irregulars", or insurgents or rebels if you want to go with slightly more charged terminology. And who exactly is this "everyone" who are agreeing that they are all Eastern Ukranians? I have yet to see any reputable source make that claim. And Russia is not just supplying small arms to these groups. They are giving them tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery, and anti-air systems (both MANPADS and tracked systems). You don't just pick these systesms up and start using them. They are recieving training, either in Russia or locally from trainers that Russia has moved into Ukraine. And given the fact that the missiles were launched from inside territory controlled by the rebelsis a very important detail. Why would the Ukrainians have anti-air equipment deployed in an area they do not control, against an enemy with no air power? All evidence points to the missiles being fired by the separatists, which means Russia had a hand in at the very least training them on how to use the equipment if not providing that equipment as well as continuing to use their influence to keep the conflict going.

Even common sense kind of makes it obvious it was the separatists. This whole mess reeks of something that only an undisciplined mob of rebels would do. Why would the Ukraininans blindly shoot down an airliner with a tactical SAM when they have a multi layered air defense system and modern jet fighters at their disposal? Surely their military radars are capable of reading civilian transponder signals and they could have sent up a pair of MiG-29s to fly rings around MH17 if they'd had reason to suspect it of being something other than it's ID data, transponders and flight plan said it was. As for the conspiracy theory that the Ukrainians drove that Buk launcher into separatist territory to 'frame' the separatists, they'd have had to drive a tacked vehicle with four bigass missles sitting on top of it deep into separatist controlled territory unnoticed. The stories coming out of Russia trying to blame this on the Ukrainians are just plain ridiculous.

Re:lol (4, Informative)

richlv (778496) | about 4 months ago | (#47497035)

Whoever shot down the plane, they were "soldiers" or fighters of some variety and almost certainly can be described as Ukrainian, given that everyone seems to agree that the fighters are actually eastern Ukrainians and at most Russia is supplying weapons to them.

is that "everybody" 'russia today' ?
try googletranslating http://lb.ua/news/2014/07/20/2... [lb.ua] - ukrainian army detains 23 terrorists. somehow all 23 turn out to be citizens of the russian federation.
there's also an interview with a former warrior from moscow how tells how 80% of them were from russia, with locals not exceeding 20%.

let's bisect the other thing you said - "at most Russia is supplying weapons to them".
"at most". as if they were given bows and arrows. they get armoured vehicles. they get... tanks. they get bloody sam systems that can reach targets up to 25km.

Re:lol (0)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 4 months ago | (#47497231)

try googletranslating http://lb.ua/news/2014/07/20/2 [lb.ua] ... [lb.ua] - ukrainian army detains 23 terrorists. somehow all 23 turn out to be citizens of the russian federation.

That page is merely reporting a press release from the Ukrainian government in Kiev. Are you suggesting we should treat everything they say as factually true?

let's bisect the other thing you said - "at most Russia is supplying weapons to them".
"at most". as if they were given bows and arrows. they get armoured vehicles. they get... tanks. they get bloody sam systems that can reach targets up to 25km.

Yes. That's what I said. Perhaps this is a language issue.

Whatever is happening in Ukraine it is not a full-blown invasion by Russia in the "classical" style that Iraq or Afghanistan were. That would be far more obvious. It seems to be much more similar to what's been happening in Syria where the west has been supplying weapons, training and expertise to anti-Assad groups there. If you were to say the west has "at most been supplying weapons and training to the Syrian rebels" you would be correct, given that (fortunately) Syria was not invaded by a foreign army.

Re:lol (1)

sribe (304414) | about 4 months ago | (#47497037)

... given that everyone seems to agree that the fighters are actually eastern Ukrainians and at most Russia is supplying weapons to them.

No, not even that is agreed upon. That are many claims that the "commanders" of the fighters are Russian, not Ukrainian.

Re:lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497245)

While they may be described as Ukrainians because they live in the Ukraine, they are quite likely to be descendents of Russians and other ethnicities moved in to the country after it was annexed by the Soviet Union.

strained logic (1)

Comboman (895500) | about 4 months ago | (#47497273)

But still, interpreted literally the new statement is far more factually correct and unbiased than what it replaced. Whoever shot down the plane, they were "soldiers" or fighters of some variety and almost certainly can be described as Ukrainian, given that everyone seems to agree that the fighters are actually eastern Ukrainians and at most Russia is supplying weapons to them.

By that logic, "Saudi Arabian soldiers" were responsible for flying airliners into the World Trade Center.

Re:lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497295)

>>the fighters are actually eastern Ukrainians and at most Russia is supplying weapons to them.
this is quite inaccurate - lots of what you call "fighters" actually have russian citizenship, not ukrainian, they come across a part of the border that is not under ukrainian control. Well, even president of self-proclaimed republic is a russian citizen.

Probably some random guy. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496755)

You would think a government approved change, from any government, would at least use a proxy.

cause and/or those responsible (0)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 4 months ago | (#47496783)

Are those 'objectively' known? If not, then what am I doing here?
Btw. does anyone here remember the USS Vincennes?

Re:cause and/or those responsible (4, Insightful)

linearz69 (3473163) | about 4 months ago | (#47496851)

Are those 'objectively' known? If not, then what am I doing here?

Btw. does anyone here remember the USS Vincennes?

I don't remember the US government editing the Wiki page on Iran Air Flight 655. Rather, the US government admitted to the mistake rather quickly, without attempting to blame Iran.

This MH17 thing is different. Russia has a huge role in this, no matter who shot down the plane. At the very least, the Russians armed an ethnic population in a foreign nation to create a war. And it is this war that got that plane shot down. I think, objectively, everyone can agree on this... It does cast suspicion on any Russian attempt to shape the Wiki truth.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496873)

The US government never admitted it's mistake, or apologised. It reached an ex gratia settlement with no admission of liability or fault years later.

And it, and 13 other supporters in the security council, entirely blamed Iran at the time, saying that if Iran had only respected the security council resolution to stop fighting, then it wouldn't have put that flight in risk.

Check your history. It might surprise you.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (5, Insightful)

linearz69 (3473163) | about 4 months ago | (#47496955)

The US government never admitted it's mistake, or apologised.

Certainly it admitted a mistake. The US government admitted shooting the plane down rather immediately, called it a mistake, and has since used it as a training case in the military for what not to do. You either weren't alive back then, or you have a twisted view of history...

Apologized is a different story. The idea of an apology became a bit of a political football during an election year, with Dukakis stating that the US should apologize and then Bush beating the crap out of Dukakis by saying we should never apologize for American troops. Bush won, and the apology never came. But Bush could be a bit of a douche. He did run the CIA.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496915)

Actually the US "STILL" hasn't admitted fault in that incident. They blamed it on the hostilities in Iran and then proceeded to cover up the whole incident as best they could, like the location of the ship, breach of orders, no court marshal despite blatant crew failings etc.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (5, Insightful)

linearz69 (3473163) | about 4 months ago | (#47497145)

Actually the US "STILL" hasn't admitted fault in that incident. They blamed it on the hostilities in Iran and then proceeded to cover up the whole incident as best they could, like the location of the ship, breach of orders, no court marshal despite blatant crew failings etc.

There is a big difference between admitting fault and admitting a fact. The US never denied shooting down the plane.

Claiming that an incident where nobody is even raising their hand as to who shot it down is the same as the Iran Air incident makes you sound like the kind of person that wants the vilify the US wherever they can.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496949)

A ha ha ha ha ha !!!

And the United State / England have never armed foreign groups to mount wars by proxy? Then you know nothing of South America, the Middle East or Africa.

Get. Off. Your. High. Horse.

I shouldn't be so harsh on you ... you probably derive all your "news" from Western media (Fox / BBC / Reuters / ...)

Re:cause and/or those responsible (1)

linearz69 (3473163) | about 4 months ago | (#47497189)

A ha ha ha ha ha !!!

And the United State / England have never armed foreign groups to mount wars by proxy? Then you know nothing of South America, the Middle East or Africa.

Get. Off. Your. High. Horse.

I shouldn't be so harsh on you ... you probably derive all your "news" from Western media (Fox / BBC / Reuters / ...)

So has your non-Western media ever told you of the western democracies arming a bunch of yahoos with SAMs that could shoot down commercial airliners?

At least when we arm are proxy forces, we're not dumb enough to give them weapons that make us look stupid. You Russians are idiots for that one.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497255)

By this logic, no one has the right to criticise the US, as all people alive today owe their lives to their ancestors having been successful conquerors.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497007)

First, as others have posted the US has not admitted to the mistake. In fact, they created "scenario fulfillment" to explain away what happened (google it, the first result is Vincennes). No matter how many "friendly fire" incidents the US has been in they have never admitted fault.

Next, does this also work?

" At the very least, the Americans armed an ethnic population in a foreign nation to create a war. "
Both the Russians and Americans have a rich history of funding various nations war efforts, sometimes it even comes back to bite later ;)

Lastly, one would assume MH17 is "different" because this time Russia has a huge role in this, vs Vincennes which the US did NOT have a huge role?

Re:cause and/or those responsible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496855)

But that was -totally- different. That naval captain made a totally understandable mistake in the fog of war, and while regrettable, the United States never apologises and has never accepted liability. And in any case, it was Iran's fault for still being at war with Iraq, and thus forcing the USS Vincennes to be on such high alert.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497083)

Let me see if I fully understand your position.
Because Iran and Iraq were at war the US was FORCED to be on high-alert and shoot down a commercial airliner loaded with civilians?
I think you lost most at your "in any case" statement as you just know an excuse is coming from the bottom of the excuse bucket.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497285)

Maybe he's mirroring RT's recent excuses and the laying of blame on Ukraine, and basically blaming Ukraine for forcing the rebels into doing this by not letting Russia and the separatists do as they wish.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (1)

linearz69 (3473163) | about 4 months ago | (#47497201)

You are watching too much "Western Media", my AC Ruskie friend.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (5, Insightful)

SvnLyrBrto (62138) | about 4 months ago | (#47496917)

> Btw. does anyone here remember the USS Vincennes?

Actually yes, I do. There were various discussions about at what point the crew knew they'd just shot down an airliner, or at what point they should have known that they were targeting one. There've even been various conspiracy theories that they knew it was an airliner all along and shot it down intentionally to kill someone or another who was onboard. But the US has always admitted that it was the one who shot down that airliner.

At no point has the US government tried to re-write history and disavow the blame by claiming that it not the US who pulled the trigger; but some bunch of locals who somehow managed to capture (and figure out how to operate) the Vincennes.

Re:cause and/or those responsible (1)

bossk538 (1682744) | about 4 months ago | (#47497109)

Yes, I am sure most everyone here does know about Iran Air 655. The Wikipedia page on MH 17 links to a list of commercial passenger planes shot down, that include the USS Vincennes incident. However, we are discussing Wikipedia edits made for the Malaysian Air flight made by a national government. Has the US Government been involved in making edits to that page to shift blame from itself and disseminate false information, or are you just engaging in whataboutism [wikipedia.org] ?

soviets have a long practice... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496799)

... of distorting the history.

Protip: (5, Insightful)

DMJC (682799) | about 4 months ago | (#47496829)

The crash scene is a crime scene and all the bodies and bits should be left in place. Russia lost all credibility the second they started moving bits around.

Re:Protip: (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496891)

Russia has no credibility at all when it comes to matters related to the other former Soviet states, especially Ukraine. Anything they say or do related to those states might as well be assumed propaganda at this point. The only "Russians" we should be paying attention to here are the "we would rather be Russian" Ukranians.

Re:Protip: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496919)

Yeah -- at this point, the only shocking outcome would be if Russia had allowed unfettered access to the crash site with no room for manipulation. We're already past that point, however.

Re:Protip: (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496927)

1. It's the scene of an "accident", not a crime.
It's a war zone, and the Western media conveniently omits that 2 military planes were downed in the previous 3 days in the exact same area via the exact same means.

2. Would the US or Britain permit an external power (e.g. Ukraine) to investigate any of their territories?

3. 300 people killed when MH-17 was accidentally downed
350 Palestinians deliberately killed in the past 4 days

4. To paraphrase yourself:
The United States and England lost all credibility the second they (predictably) mounted their co-ordinated propaganda campaigns.

Re:Protip: (2)

Fjandr (66656) | about 4 months ago | (#47496967)

The Ukrainian government isn't prohibiting access to the site. Ukrainian militants are.

Re:Protip: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497199)

NSA agents must be working overtime, the parent post got modded down almost immediately while sensational shits like these get modded up instantly:

Water is wet (1)
oldhack (1037484) | 45 minutes ago | (#47496857)
Putin is a murderous goon. He and his cronies will get what's coming to them.

The Germans in the Nazi era must be like the Americans today, so proud and arrogant at the time, but cursed by all future generations.

Re:Protip: (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497283)

Well it doesn't seem like you want an actual reasonable debate, but just for the sake of the matter.

You seem pretty particular about calling it an accident, how can you be sure it wasn't on purpose? Or for that matter, even certain kind of accidental events will some times be prosecuted as crimes under the law. Considering some of the information circling around, it seems quite warranted to want to secure the location as a potential crime site really.

I believe number 2 would be answered with a yes, in that they would allow foreign inspection in certain cases like this. Why wouldn't you let foreigein aircraft specialists look at a crash site? You're only going to look bad for saying no after all, pretty straight forward PR thing.

Number 3 is totally true and it's a shame they don't get more attention. But life is unfair and thisis pretty tangential to the current matter, as in, it's not really relevant aside of showing how people are quite good at ignoring one disaster in favour of another that concerns them more.

Number 4 is an odd statement, pretty much anything could be considered a PR campaign after all, including telling the straight up truth. Certainly in other fields one can observe such things as well. So I don't think it's a justified statement. Not to mention Russia and the separatist rebels are quite clearly running PR campaigns as well, seemingly of much higher intensity. So does this mean they have much less credibility then the US and UK? It seems the logical conclusion, so by your logic the US and UK should be more credible then, no?

Water is wet (3, Insightful)

oldhack (1037484) | about 4 months ago | (#47496857)

Putin is a murderous goon. He and his cronies will get what's coming to them.

Nice try (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497043)

How is your day at your NSA brainwashing office?

Putin didn't do it and this article [rt.com] nails it.

Quote:

And then there's the curiouser and curiouser story of Carlos, the Spanish air traffic controller working at Kiev's tower, who was following MH17 in real time.

"The B777 was escorted by 2 Ukrainian fighter jets minutes before disappearing from radar (5.48pm)"

"If the Kiev authorities want to admit the truth 2 fighter jets were flying very close a few minutes before the incident but did not shoot down the airliner (5.54)"

"As soon as the Malaysia Airlines B777 disappeared the Kiev military authority informed us of the shooting down. How did they know? (6.00)"

"Everything has been recorded on radar. For those that don't believe it, it was taken down by Kiev; we know that here (in traffic control) and the military air traffic control know it too (7.14)"

"The Ministry of the Interior did know that there were fighter aircraft in the area, but the Ministry of Defense didn't. (7.15)"

"The military confirm that it was Ukraine, but it is not known where the order came from. (7.31)"

And quote:

So who profits?

The key question remains, of course, cui bono? Only the terminally brain dead believe shooting a passenger jet benefits the federalists in eastern Ukraine, not to mention the Kremlin.

As for Kiev, they'd have the means, the motive and the window of opportunity to pull it off Ã" especially after Kiev's militias have been effectively routed, and were in retreat, in the Donbass. And this after Kiev remained dead set on attacking and bombing the population of eastern Ukraine even from above. No wonder the federalists had to defend themselves.

And quote:

For evidence supporting the possibility of a false flag, check here [wordpress.com] .

Re:Nice try (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497267)

whatever nutta.. rt are going to be real impartial..

War of words ... (0)

CaptainDork (3678879) | about 4 months ago | (#47496875)

Meanwhile, those with an IQ higher than asphalt fault no one yet because it's just too early.

What's good for the goose ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47496889)

... is good for the gander

Israeli propaganda war hits social media [smh.com.au]

East is East, West is West... (1)

tomhath (637240) | about 4 months ago | (#47496975)

Those of us in the West can't understand why Russia doesn't just admit that it was a mistake.

Meanwhile those in the East understand that Russia will never admit it screwed up.

Texan edits George Bush wikipedia page (1)

sugarmotor (621907) | about 4 months ago | (#47497005)

Wasn't there once a guy from Texas who removed the section on crimes against humanity from George Bush's wikipedia page?

Re:Texan edits George Bush wikipedia page (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497141)

People are constantly adding and deleting crap on Wikipedia. Just because it was there doesn't mean it was true.

It was Putin's missle? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497027)

The answer is no and this article [rt.com] nails it.

Quote:

And then there's the curiouser and curiouser story of Carlos, the Spanish air traffic controller working at Kiev's tower, who was following MH17 in real time.

"The B777 was escorted by 2 Ukrainian fighter jets minutes before disappearing from radar (5.48pm)"

"If the Kiev authorities want to admit the truth 2 fighter jets were flying very close a few minutes before the incident but did not shoot down the airliner (5.54)"

"As soon as the Malaysia Airlines B777 disappeared the Kiev military authority informed us of the shooting down. How did they know? (6.00)"

"Everything has been recorded on radar. For those that don't believe it, it was taken down by Kiev; we know that here (in traffic control) and the military air traffic control know it too (7.14)"

"The Ministry of the Interior did know that there were fighter aircraft in the area, but the Ministry of Defense didn't. (7.15)"

"The military confirm that it was Ukraine, but it is not known where the order came from. (7.31)"

And quote:

So who profits?

The key question remains, of course, cui bono? Only the terminally brain dead believe shooting a passenger jet benefits the federalists in eastern Ukraine, not to mention the Kremlin.

As for Kiev, they'd have the means, the motive and the window of opportunity to pull it off Ã" especially after Kiev's militias have been effectively routed, and were in retreat, in the Donbass. And this after Kiev remained dead set on attacking and bombing the population of eastern Ukraine even from above. No wonder the federalists had to defend themselves.

And quote:

For evidence supporting the possibility of a false flag, check here [wordpress.com] .

We're all harmed by growth of Internet propaganda (5, Interesting)

Jason Coombs, CEO (3755591) | about 4 months ago | (#47497031)

Twitter bots that monitor and call attention to things, or future AI tools we develop that provide similar functionality for monitoring what appears to be the cyber behavior of certain groups or certain people, have a downside, too. Everyone knows it isn't very hard for somebody with substantial financial resources (or a sysadmin who works at a particular ISP and has substantial political beliefs or alliances) to spoof the IP addresses that are thought to be associated with certain groups/nations. This evolving condition of intrinsic uncertainty around digital media and Internet communications needs new technical and social solutions. See: http://slashdot.org/submission... [slashdot.org]

Re:We're all harmed by growth of Internet propagan (1)

AHuxley (892839) | about 4 months ago | (#47497251)

Yes a lot of funding has gone into "Containment control".
Air Force research: How to use social media to control people like drones (July 17 2014)
http://arstechnica.com/informa... [arstechnica.com]
"...researchers could be used to sway the opinion of social networks toward a desired set of behaviors—perhaps in concert with some of the social media “effects” cyber-weaponry developed by the NSA and its British counterpart, GCHQ"
A push by sock puppets in posting AC stories eg the "IP addresses".
Someone has new war PR to sell.

What can you expect? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47497177)

Russia is currently ruled by an ex-KGB thug that has no use for democracy or the truth, if they don't suit his intentions.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?