Some supposed screenshots of some twitter messages as the proof can be sold to the readers of the Daily Mail but not used on HN. "I've read it on the Internet, therefore it must be true." Oh look, Elvis is also on Twitter.
> After all, civilian air traffic has overflown Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003 and 2001 respectively, even with long-running insurgencies in both nations. Where's the outrage about that?
Outrage? You suggest somebody should be outraged for no civilian planes being shot in 2003 and 2001? Actually Ukrainians shot the civilian Russian plane in 2001, 78 victims.
"shot down by the Ukrainian military over the Black Sea on 4 October 2001" "Ukraine eventually admitted that the disaster was probably caused by an errant missile fired by its armed forces.[1] Ukraine ended up paying $15 million to surviving family members of 78 victims ($200,000 per victim)."
Now if only we can get Russia to the same low standards Ukraine demonstrated in eventually acknowledging its level of responsibility (in this case, via the Russian-organized resistance movement).
Because if your working theory is "UKRAINE DID IT (again)", you should probably know that the missile came from separatist-held territory. You know, while you're busy lecturing the rest of us on standards of evidence.
> After all, civilian air traffic has overflown Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003 and 2001 respectively, even with long-running insurgencies in both nations. Where's the outrage about that?
Outrage? You suggest somebody should be outraged for no civilian planes being shot in 2003 and 2001? Actually Ukrainians shot the civilian Russian plane in 2001, 78 victims.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812
"shot down by the Ukrainian military over the Black Sea on 4 October 2001" "Ukraine eventually admitted that the disaster was probably caused by an errant missile fired by its armed forces.[1] Ukraine ended up paying $15 million to surviving family members of 78 victims ($200,000 per victim)."