dissident wrote:The 26 km comes from the US claim that the rebel Buk was in Snezhnoye (Snizhne).
The Dutch government did not have any information about concrete threats to high-flying passenger aircraft above eastern Ukraine, ministers said in written answers to parliament on Tuesday.
The cabinet was responding to reports that diplomats were warned about the risks at a meeting, just days before Malaysian Airways flight MH17 was shot down on July 17, killing 298 people.
In their briefing, ministers said diplomats were told that an Antonov plane flying at a height of 6.2 kilometers had been shot down. However, flight MH17 was flying at over 10 kilometres, above the restricted zone, ministers said.
The cabinet has refused to publish a report on the diplomatic meeting, which was sent to the foreign affairs and defence ministries and in summary form to four others. It was not sent to the infrastructure ministry, which is responsible for aviation, Nos says.
A copy was also sent to the Dutch safety council OVV which is investigating the cause of the crash.
The meeting had not led to any airlines changing their routes, the cabinet briefing said. Those which did avoid eastern Ukraine, had done that since the unrest in Crimea in April, ministers claim.
MPs from across the political spectrum say they are concerned about shortcomings in the system set up to warn airlines about the risk of flying over conflict zones, website nu.nl says on Wednesday.
They plan to raise the issue during Thursday’s debate on the investigation into the downing of Malaysian Airways flight MH17 on July 17.
Currently, individual countries themselves are responsible for sending out safety updates, known as Notams. These state at which height it is safe to fly. Using this information and security service reports, it is up to airlines themselves to decide what to do, nu.nl says.
VVD MP Han ten Broeke told nu.nl the current system would appear to be inadequate given that a plane carrying 298 people was shot out of the air.
British Airways and Korean Air already avoided eastern Ukraine because of the risks.
Briefing
Ministers said on Tuesday they did not have any information about concrete threats to high-flying passenger aircraft above eastern Ukraine. The cabinet was responding to reports that diplomats were warned about the risks at a meeting, just days before Malaysian Airways flight MH17 was shot down.
In their briefing, ministers said diplomats were told that an Antonov plane flying at a height of 6.2 kilometers had been shot down. However, flight MH17 was flying at over 10 kilometres, above the restricted zone, ministers said.
The cabinet has refused to publish a report on the diplomatic meeting, which was sent to the foreign affairs and defence ministries and in summary form to four others. It was not sent to the infrastructure ministry, which is responsible for aviation, Nos said. A copy was also sent to the Dutch safety council OVV which is investigating the cause of the crash.
The meeting had not led to any airlines changing their routes, the cabinet briefing said. Those which did avoid eastern Ukraine, had done so since the unrest in Crimea in April, ministers claim.
The Dutch foreign affairs and defence ministries were aware that Russian ground to air missiles were in eastern Ukraine three days before flight MH17 was shot down, according to television current affairs programme Argos.
A report on a diplomatic briefing in Kiev on July 14, written by a Dutch diplomat, states that Ukraine warned officials of the danger in Ukrainian airspace. The meeting was called on the same day as a Ukrainian military plane was shot down.
Prime minister Mark Rutte has so far refused to make the report public, saying it could damage diplomatic relations between the two countries. However, a copy is in the hands of Argos researchers
The report, written by the interim head of the Dutch embassy in Kiev, states that the Ukrainian plane, an Antonov 26, could only have been shot down using Russian equipment or by the Russian military ‘given the separatists do not have this sort of equipment’.
The shooting down of the Antonov was the ‘most recent concrete example’ of the ‘critical and dangerous’ situation in the east of the country.
Until now, Dutch ministers had said that the briefing concerned the ‘possible deployment’ of ground to air missiles.
Three days after the briefing, MH17 was shot down, killing 298 people, most of them Dutch. There is mounting evidence the plane was brought down by a BUK rocket of Russian origin.
dissident wrote:Once again, where are the flight voice and data recorder outputs? It has been over EIGHT months. Both the voice and data recorders were recovered intact.
dissident wrote:OK, sunshine, show me another case where the data was not released for over 8 months. I dare you.
dissident wrote:BTW the Dutch, Ukrainians,etc. all signed an NDA with veto rights. That means the Kiev regime can control the release of the information. You think this is normal, do you.
dissident wrote:I am quite sure if the rebels decided to keep the black boxes you NATO drones would be foaming at the mouth screeching about "suppression of information" 24/7.
The thinking is that it was a false flag operation that would be blamed on Russia. If so, it worked very well for the Kiev regime and its "Western" backers.tita wrote:if you really think about it, you just see no reason for Ukraine to shoot planes in their sky, because of the lack of enemy planes, while the rebels had all the reasons to do it, because they were attacked with planes.
tita wrote:But if you really think about it, you just see no reason for Ukraine to shoot planes in their sky, because of the lack of enemy planes
tita wrote:Whatever you think, there is no solid proof supporting any of these stories. Someone is hiding the responsibility of course. But if you really think about it, you just see no reason for Ukraine to shoot planes in their sky, because of the lack of enemy planes, while the rebels had all the reasons to do it, because they were attacked with planes.
AgentR11 wrote: pump money in, not out.
radon1 wrote:AgentR11 wrote: pump money in, not out.
Pu would then say: "See, money are flowing into the country under my presidency, foreign direct investment increased multi-fold. I told you all that I was going to be a good president."
Return to Geopolitics & Global Economics
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests