Would you agree with the point I made here the day after the crash?


"They say that the Buk weapons system is very difficult to work . If the rebels did have them they would have needed expert support - the missiles are guided by a radar station . The rebels couldn't have used BUKs without Russian back-up . If the Russians were involved they would have known that it wasn't a military aircraft."

In short no I would not. But dealing with what you say point by point:

1: "the Buk weapons system is very difficult to work"

Not if you have been previously trained on Russian/Soviet weapons systems as all conscripts attached to Air Defence Regiments kitted out with the BUK weapons system would have been.{Remember this piece of kit has been in service with Warsaw Pact/Soviet/Russian Forces since 1979}

2: "If the rebels did have them they would have needed expert support"

Not without the bounds of possibility that the Russians sent "specialists" across the border to operate those systems under "local" control.

3: "the missiles are guided by a radar station"

As normally deployed yes, but all tactical missile weapons systems are fully capable of being operated under "local" control in the event that if anything happens to their main command and control systems the weapons system can provide a reduced operating capability. Had the Russians provided a full system then that would have been easily detected by third parties.

"what of the mistakenly-shot-down-by-rebels explanation offered by Keith and others?"

Oh I am convinced entirely that the airliner WAS shot down by mistake, the Rebels thought that the aircraft they heard but could not see was a Ukrainian military transport aircraft similar to the one they had shot down previously.