“Support MH17 Truth”: OSCE monitors identify “shrapnel and machine gun-like holes” indicating shelling. No evidence of a missile attack. Shot down by a military aircraft

Global Research, October 18, 2015
Global Research 31 July 2014

su25

Su-25 aircraft

The evidence presented in this article first published by GR on July 31, 2014 (updated in September 2014) contradicts the recently released report of the Dutch Safety Board.

The evidence confirms that MH17 was not brought down by a surface to air missile.

The West accuses Russia and the Donbass separatists of having brought down the plane with a surface to air missile. IT’S A LIE. 

The evidence available in September 2014 –including a BBC report which the BBC decided to suppress– refutes the official story.

As we recall, the alleged role of Russia in bringing down the plane was used as a justification to implement the economic sanctions regime against Moscow. 

Michel Chossudovsky, July 29, 2015, minor update October 18,  2015

*     *     *

According to the report of German pilot and airlines expert Peter Haisenko, the MH17 Boeing 777 was not brought down by a missile.

What he observed from the available photos were perforations of the cockpit: 

 The facts speak clear and loud and are beyond the realm of speculation: The cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile. (Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” Global Research, July 30, 2014)

[click image right to enlarge]

Based on detailed analysis Peter Haisenko reached  the conclusion that the MH17 was not downed by a missile attack:

This aircraft was not hit by a missile in the central portion. The destruction is limited to the cockpit area. Now you have to factor in that this part is constructed of specially reinforced material

The OSCE Mission

It is worth noting that the initial statements by OSCE observers (July 31) broadly confirm the findings of Peter Haisenko:

Monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe reported that shrapnel-like holes were found in two separate pieces of the fuselage of the ill-fated Malaysia Airlines aircraft that was believed to have been downed by a missile in eastern Ukraine.

Michael Bociurkiw of the OSCE group of monitors at his daily briefing described part of the plane’s fuselage dotted with “shrapnel-like, almost machine gun-like holes.” He said the damage was inspected by Malaysian aviation-security officials .(Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2014)

The monitoring OSCE team has not found evidence of a missile fired from the ground as conveyed by official White House statements. As we recall, the US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power stated –pointing a finger at Russia– that the Malaysian MH17 plane was “likely downed by a surface-to-air missile operated from a separatist-held location”:

The team of international investigators with the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) are uncertain if the missile used was fired from the ground as US military experts have previously suggested, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported. (Malay Mail online, emphasis added)

The initial OSCE findings tend to dispel the claim that a BUK missile system brought down the plane.

Evidently, inasmuch as the perforations are attributable to shelling, a shelling operation conducted from the ground could not have brought down an aircraft traveling above 30,000 feet.

Ukraine Su-25 military aircraft within proximity of MH17

Peter Haisenko’s study is corroborated by the Russian Ministry of Defense which pointed to a Ukrainian Su-25 jet in the flight corridor of the MH17, within proximity of the plane.

Ironically, the presence of a military aircraft is also confirmed by a BBC  report conducted at the crash site on July 23.

All the eyewitnesses  interviewed by the BBC confirmed the presence of a Ukrainian military aircraft flying within proximity of Malaysian Airlines MH17 at the time that it was shot down: 

Eyewitness #1: There were two explosions in the air. And this is how it broke apart. And [the fragments] blew apart like this, to the sides. And when …

Eyewitness #2: … And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it. Everybody saw it.

Eyewitness #1: Yes, yes. It was flying under it, because it could be seen. It was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.

Eyewitness #3: There were sounds of an explosion. But they were in the sky. They came from the sky. Then this plane made a sharp turn-around like this. It changed its trajectory and headed in that direction [indicating the direction with her hands].

BBC Report below

<iframe width=”640″ height=”360″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/zUvK5m2vxro&#8221; frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen><!–iframe>

The original BBC Video Report published by BBC Russian Service on July 23, 2014 has since been removed from the BBC archive.

In a bitter irony, The BBC is censoring its own news productions.

This is the BBC Report, still available on Youtube

Media Spin

The media has reported that a surface to air missile was indeed fired and exploded before reaching its target.  It was not the missile that brought down the plane, it was the shrapnel resulting from the missile explosion (prior to reaching the plane) which punctured the plane and then led to a loss of pressure.

According to Ukraine’s National security spokesman Andriy Lysenko in a contradictory statement, the MH17 aircraft “suffered massive explosive decompression after being hit by a shrapnel missile.”  (See IBT, Australia)

In an utterly absurd report, the BBC quoting the official Ukraine statement  says that:

The downed Malaysia Airlines jet in eastern Ukraine suffered an explosive loss of pressure after it was punctured by shrapnel from a missile.

They say the information came from the plane’s flight data recorders, which are being analysed by British experts.

However, it remains unclear who fired a missile, with pro-Russia rebels and Ukraine blaming each other.

Many of the 298 people killed on board flight MH17 were from the Netherlands.

Dutch investigators leading the inquiry into the crash have refused to comment on the Ukrainian claims.

“Machine Gun Like Holes”

The shrapnel marks should be distinguished from the small entry and exit holes “most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile” fired from a military aircraft. These holes could not have been caused by a missile explosion as hinted by the MSM.

While the MSN is saying that the “shrapnel like holes” can be caused by a missile (see BBC report above), the OSCE has confirmed the existence of what it describes as “machine gun like holes”, without however acknowledging that these cannot be caused by a missile.

In this regard, the GSh-302 firing gun operated by an Su-25 is able to fire 3000 rpm which explains the numerous entry and exit holes.

According to the findings of Peter Haisenko:

If we now consider the armament of a typical SU 25 we learn this: It is equipped with a double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302 / AO-17A, equipped with: a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum), arranged in alternating order. The cockpit of the MH 017 has evidently been fired at from both sides: the entry and exit holes are found on the same fragment of it’s cockpit segment (op cit)

The accusations directed against Russia including the sanctions regime imposed by Washington are based on a lie.

The evidence does not support the official US narrative to the effect that the MH17 was shot down by a BUK missile system operated by the DPR militia.

What next? More media disinformation, more lies?

See:

Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” By Peter Haisenko, July 30, 2014

Advertisements

Revelations of German pilot: Shocking analysis of the “shooting down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft was not hit by a missile”

Global Research, October 18, 2015
Malaysia MH17

This article  first published on July 30, 2014 contradicts the substance of the recently released Dutch Safety Board Report. 

 Zur deutschen Version bitte hier anklicken

The tragedy of Malaysian MH 017 continues to elude any light of clarity being cast over it.

The flight recorders are in England and are evaluated. What can come of it? Maybe more than you would assume.

Especially the voice recorder will be interesting when you look at the picture of a cockpit fragment. As an expert in aviation I closely looked at the images of the wreckage that are circulating on the Internet.

Peter Haisenko in Cockpit of Condor DC 10

First, I was amazed at how few photos can be found from the wreckage with Google. All are in low resolution, except one: The fragment of the cockpit below the window on the pilots side. This image, however, is shocking. In Washington, you can now hear views expressed of a “potentially tragic error / accident” regarding MH 017. Given this particular cockpit image it does not surprise me at all.

Entry and exit impact holes of projectiles in the cockpit area

Source for all photos: Internet

I recommend to click on the little picture to the left. You can download this photo as a PDF in good resolution. This is necessary, because that will allow you understand what I am describing here. The facts speak clear and loud and are beyond the realm of speculation: The cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile. The edge of the other, the larger and slightly frayed exit holes showing shreds of metal pointing produced by the same caliber projectiles. Moreover, it is evident that at these exit holes of the outer layer of the double aluminum reinforced structure are shredded or bent – outwardly! Furthermore, minor cuts can be seen, all bent outward, which indicate that shrapnel had forcefully exited through the outer skin from the inside of the cockpit. The open rivets are are also bent outward.

In sifting through the available images one thing stands out: All wreckage of the sections behind the cockpit are largely intact, except for the fact that only fragments of the aircraft remained . Only the cockpit part shows these peculiar marks of destruction. This leaves the examiner with an important clue. This aircraft was not hit by a missile in the central portion. The destruction is limited to the cockpit area. Now you have to factor in that this part is constructed of specially reinforced material. This is on account of the nose of any aircraft having to withstand the impact of a large bird at high speeds. You can see in the photo, that in this area significantly stronger aluminum alloys were being installed than in the remainder of the outer skin of the fuselage. One remembers the crash of Pan Am over Lockerbie. It was a large segment of the cockpit that due to the special architecture survived the crash in one piece. In the case of flight MH 017 it becomes abundantly clear that there also an explosion took place inside the aircraft.

Tank destroying mix of ammunition

Bullet holes in the outer skin

So what could have happened? Russia recently published radar recordings, that confirm at least one Ukrainian SU 25 in close proximity to MH 017. This corresponds with the statement of the now missing Spanish controller ‘Carlos’ that has seen two Ukrainian fighter aircraft in the immediate vicinity of MH 017. If we now consider the armament of a typical SU 25 we learn this: It is equipped with a double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302 / AO-17A, equipped with: a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum), arranged in alternating order. The cockpit of the MH 017 has evidently been fired at from both sides: the entry and exit holes are found on the same fragment of it’s cockpit segment!

Now just consider what happens when a series of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells hit the cockpit. These are after all designed to destroy a modern tank. The anti-tank incendiary shells partially traversed the cockpit and exited on the other side in a slightly deformed shape. (Aviation forensic experts could possibly find them on the ground presumably controlled by the Kiev Ukrainian military; the translator). After all, their impact is designed to penetrate the solid armor of a tank. Also, the splinter-explosive shells will, due to their numerous impacts too cause massive explosions inside the cockpit, since they are designed to do this. Given the rapid firing sequence of the GSh-302 cannon, it will cause a rapid succession of explosions within the cockpit area in a very short time. Remeber each of these is sufficient to destroy a tank.

What “mistake” was actually being committed – and by whom?

Graze on the wing

Because the interior of a commercial aircraft is a hermetically sealed pressurized chamber, the explosions will, in split second, increase the pressure inside the cabin to extreme levels or breaking point. An aircraft is not equipped for this, it will burst like a balloon. This explains a coherent scenario. The largely intact fragments of the rear sections broke in mid air at the weaker points of construction most likely under extreme internal air pressure. The images of the widely scattered field of debris and the brutally damaged segment of cockpit fit like hand in glove. Furthermore, a wing segment shows traces of a grazing shot, which in direct extension leads to the cockpit. Interestingly, I found that both the high-resolution photo of the fragment of bullet riddled cockpit as well as the segment of grazed wing have in the meantime disappeared from Google Images. One can find virtually no more pictures of the wreckage, except the well known smoking ruins.

If you listen to the voices from Washington now who speak of a “potentially tragic error / accident”, all that remains is the question of what might have been the nature of this “mistake” perpetrated here. I am not given to hover long in the realm of speculation, but would like to invite others to consider the following : The MH 017 looked similar in it’s tricolor design to that that of the Russian President’s plane. The plane with President Putin on board was at the same time ”near” Malaysia MH 017. In aviation circles “close” would be considered to be anywhere between 150 to 200 miles. Also, in this context we might consider the deposition of Ms. Tymoshenko, who wanted to shoot President Putin with a Kalashnikov.

But that this remains pure speculation. The shelling of the cockpit of air Malaysia MH 017, however, is definitely not speculation. 

The Malaysian MH17 crash investigation; Dutch, Australian, UK govts are withholding evidence

Global Research, September 16, 2015
Dances with Bears 13 September 2015
MH17-wreakage

The Dutch Government has decided to launch a missile attack on Moscow in October. By suppressing all evidence obtained from the bodies of victims of the crash of Malaysian Airlines MH17, officials of the Dutch Safety Board and associated Dutch military officers, police and prosecutors are preparing to release a report on the crash with a gaping hole in its veracity.

At the same time, and apparently unknown in The Netherlands, an Australian coroners’ report on the identification and forensic testing of the bodies carried out in The Netherlands reveals post-mortem evidence to show that in their public statements the Dutch government officials have been lying about metal evidence they claim to have found. This evidence has not only been buried with the passengers’ remains. It has been buried by the Dutch Government and by coroners in the UK and Australia, who are now legally required to investigate independently what caused the deaths of citizens in their jurisdiction. All are withholding the CT scans, X-rays, autopsy and other post-mortem results, including metallurgical assays, the documentation of which accompanied the coffins of the aircraft’s victims from The Netherlands to their homelands.

Continue reading

“Support MH17 Truth”; OSCE monitors identify “shrapnel and machine-like bullet holes” indicating shelling; no evidence of missile attack

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, July 29, 2015
Global Research 31 July 2014

This article was first published by GR on September 9, 2014. In the context of the July 29, 2015 United Nations Security Council Resolution vetoed by Russia, it should be emphasized that the evidence confirms that MH17 was not brought down by a surface to air missile.

The West accuses Russia and the Donbass separatists of having brought down the plane with a Buk missile. IT’S A LIE. 

The evidence available in September 2014 –including a BBC report which the BBC decided to suppress– refutes the official story. The alleged role of Russia in bringing down the plane was used as a justification to implement the economic sanctions regime against Moscow. 

Michel Chossudovsky, July 29, 2015 

*     *     *

According to the report of German pilot and airlines expert Peter Haisenko, the MH17 Boeing 777 was not brought down by a missile.

What he observed from the available photos were perforations of the cockpit: 

 The facts speak clear and loud and are beyond the realm of speculation: The cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile. (Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” Global Research, July 30, 2014)

[click image right to enlarge]

Based on detailed analysis Peter Haisenko reached  the conclusion that the MH17 was not downed by a missile attack:

This aircraft was not hit by a missile in the central portion. The destruction is limited to the cockpit area. Now you have to factor in that this part is constructed of specially reinforced material

The OSCE Mission

It is worth noting that the initial statements by OSCE observers (July 31) broadly confirm the findings of Peter Haisenko:

Monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe reported that shrapnel-like holes were found in two separate pieces of the fuselage of the ill-fated Malaysia Airlines aircraft that was believed to have been downed by a missile in eastern Ukraine.

Michael Bociurkiw of the OSCE group of monitors at his daily briefing described part of the plane’s fuselage dotted with “shrapnel-like, almost machine gun-like holes.” He said the damage was inspected by Malaysian aviation-security officials .(Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2014)

The monitoring OSCE team has not found evidence of a missile fired from the ground as conveyed by official White House statements. As we recall, the US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power stated –pointing a finger at Russia– that the Malaysian MH17 plane was “likely downed by a surface-to-air missile operated from a separatist-held location”:

The team of international investigators with the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) are uncertain if the missile used was fired from the ground as US military experts have previously suggested, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported. (Malay Mail online, emphasis added)

The initial OSCE findings tend to dispel the claim that a BUK missile system brought down the plane.

Evidently, inasmuch as the perforations are attributable to shelling, a shelling operation conducted from the ground could not have brought down an aircraft traveling above 30,000 feet.

Ukraine Su-25 military aircraft within proximity of MH17

Peter Haisenko’s study is corroborated by the Russian Ministry of Defense which pointed to a Ukrainian Su-25 jet in the flight corridor of the MH17, within proximity of the plane.

Ironically, the presence of a military aircraft is also confirmed by a BBC  report conducted at the crash site on July 23.

All the eyewitnesses  interviewed by the BBC confirmed the presence of a Ukrainian military aircraft flying within proximity of Malaysian Airlines MH17 at the time that it was shot down: 

Eyewitness #1: There were two explosions in the air. And this is how it broke apart. And [the fragments] blew apart like this, to the sides. And when …

Eyewitness #2: … And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it. Everybody saw it.

Eyewitness #1: Yes, yes. It was flying under it, because it could be seen. It was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.

Eyewitness #3: There were sounds of an explosion. But they were in the sky. They came from the sky. Then this plane made a sharp turn-around like this. It changed its trajectory and headed in that direction [indicating the direction with her hands].

BBC Report below

The original BBC Video Report published by BBC Russian Service on July 23, 2014 has since been removed from the BBC archive.

In a bitter irony, The BBC is censoring its own news productions.

This is the BBC Report, still available on Youtube

Media Spin

The media has reported that a surface to air missile was indeed fired and exploded before reaching its target.  It was not the missile that brought down the plane, it was the shrapnel resulting from the missile explosion (prior to reaching the plane) which punctured the plane and then led to a loss of pressure.

According to Ukraine’s National security spokesman Andriy Lysenko in a contradictory statement, the MH17 aircraft “suffered massive explosive decompression after being hit by a shrapnel missile.”  (See IBT, Australia)

In an utterly absurd report, the BBC quoting the official Ukraine statement  says that:

The downed Malaysia Airlines jet in eastern Ukraine suffered an explosive loss of pressure after it was punctured by shrapnel from a missile.

They say the information came from the plane’s flight data recorders, which are being analysed by British experts.

However, it remains unclear who fired a missile, with pro-Russia rebels and Ukraine blaming each other.

Many of the 298 people killed on board flight MH17 were from the Netherlands.

Dutch investigators leading the inquiry into the crash have refused to comment on the Ukrainian claims.

“Machine Gun Like Holes”

The shrapnel marks should be distinguished from the small entry and exit holes “most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile” fired from a military aircraft. These holes could not have been caused by a missile explosion as hinted by the MSM.

While the MSN is saying that the “shrapnel like holes” can be caused by a missile (see BBC report above), the OSCE has confirmed the existence of what it describes as “machine gun like holes”, without however acknowledging that these cannot be caused by a missile.

In this regard, the GSh-302 firing gun operated by an Su-25 is able to fire 3000 rpm which explains the numerous entry and exit holes.

According to the findings of Peter Haisenko:

If we now consider the armament of a typical SU 25 we learn this: It is equipped with a double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302 / AO-17A, equipped with: a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum), arranged in alternating order. The cockpit of the MH 017 has evidently been fired at from both sides: the entry and exit holes are found on the same fragment of it’s cockpit segment (op cit)

The accusations directed against Russia including the sanctions regime imposed by Washington are based on a lie.

The evidence does not support the official US narrative to the effect that the MH17 was shot down by a BUK missile system operated by the DPR militia.

What next? More media disinformation, more lies?

See:

Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” By Peter Haisenko, July 30, 2014

http://www.globalresearch.ca/support-mh17-truth-osce-monitors-identify-shrapnel-like-holes-indicating-shelling-no-firm-evidence-of-a-missile-attack/5394324

Malaysian Airlines MH17: CNN shows 30 mm cannon bullet discovered in wreckage

By Sam Nejad
Global Research, May 02, 2015

We’ve seen several photographs of the Malaysian Airlines MH17 cockpit remains on the ground in Eastern Ukraine. They show numerous 30mm entry & exit cannon holes. These have been fobbed off by the propaganda media as ‘shrapnel’ damage from a BUK ground to air missile.

The consistent circularity and size corresponding to 30mm bullet holes, or the fact that they are concentrated on the cockpit doesn’t bother apologists who have an agenda to promote.

In a CNN report (see below) there is footage of Donbass militia looking at the newly fallen wreckage of MH17, some of it still on fire. The video was broadcast by CNN. As the images run past us a barely noticeable item is briefly in view of the camera:

A combatant spots something amongst the debris. He bends down to pick it up. What he has retrieved is a 30mm bullet that was in the fallen material.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDtqf0cqOCE

The bullet is in view only for 3 seconds; from 1′ 36″ to 1′ 39″. And the way it was casually passed by the camera lens for so short a time indicates that the man who found it took it for granted that the plane was shot at by the trailing fighter jet(s).

This was within minutes of the shooting down, and before the mass media propaganda machine started its deception a few hours later about a rebel or Russian launched BUK missile. So the Donetsk combatant would not have known the significance of the 30mm cannon bullet he was holding.

Previously, Global Research has published articles showing the bullet holes and witness evidence about the downing of MH17 [1], but so far as I am aware no video clips have been noticed showing the damning evidence of this 30mm bullet.

A quick search of Global Research [1] and any web search engine [2] will give numerous links to evidence and photographs of the bullet holes, as well as witnesses who saw the fighter jet(s). This, together with the flight route diverted directly over the battle area indicates a premeditated plan to bring the plane down.

As to whether air to air missiles were fired from the fighter jet(s) or a bomb had been planted in the plane, those could well have been additional factors. But we now know for certain that the plane was machine gunned by fighter jets. The bullet holes in the cockpit, and now this 30mm bullet in plain view proves it.

One is left to wonder, what kind of irrational psychopaths would order such a murderous act, what brain-dead automatons would carry it out, and what supine and servile corporate mainstream media would try to deflect attention from the perpetrators and blame other parties.

Notes:

[1]  http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-was-behind-the-downing-of-mh17-osce-monitor-mentions-machine-gun-bullet-holes-in-mh17-no-evidence-of-missile/5394693

http://www.globalresearch.ca/dutch-safety-board-report-dsb-malaysian-mh17-was-brought-down-by-a-large-number-of-high-energy-objects-contradicts-us-claims-that-it-was-shot-down-by-a-russian-missile/5400526

http://www.globalresearch.ca/evidence-is-now-conclusive-two-ukrainian-government-fighter-jets-shot-down-malaysian-airlines-mh17-it-was-not-a-buk-surface-to-air-missile/5394814

http://www.globalresearch.ca/another-mh17-cover-up-hiding-a-key-autopsy/5421386

http://www.globalresearch.ca/how-the-malaysian-airlines-mh17-boeing-was-shot-down-examination-of-the-wreckage/5435094

[2]  https://www.google.com.au/search?q=MH17+30mm+bullet

http://www.globalresearch.ca/malaysian-airlines-m17-canon-bullet-discovered-in-mh17-wreckage/5446724

MH-17 documentary interviews international experts

Reflections on MH17
From Russia Today

http://rt.com/shows/documentary/223071-mh17-plane-crash-investigation/

27:54

Startling information about what was done and what wasn’t done in the investigation. This is an overview documentary on some of the issues. More has been posted at Global Research and here.

From RT’s website:

“The tragedy of MH17 in which 298 people lost their lives made the conflict in Ukraine real for many other countries. While the international community awaits the outcome of the crash investigation, speculation in the media continues to fuel the blame game. RTD travels far and wide to interview international experts on what has hindered the investigation, what procedures were needed to collect vital evidence and what might have brought down the ill-fated Boeing 777.”

On-duty Ukraine air traffic controller refuted Kiev-U.S. claims about MH17 (parte en español )

From Strategic Culture Foundation Journal, August 28, 2014:
Looking Who Is Talking! MH17 and the US Role in Downing Passenger Airplanes
By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

[CHRONOLOGY OF TWITTER COMMENTS BY AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER CARLOS ON JULY 17, 2014 ARE BELOW — ORIGINAL SPANISH COMMENTS AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION]

Approximately four months after Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (MH370) disappeared in March 2014, while en route from the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur to the Chinese capital of Beijing, another incident took place with a Malaysian passenger plane. This time Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17), en route from the Dutch capital of Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was shot down on July 17, 2014 over the contested airspace of the breakaway Donetsk People’s Republic. The incident took place over Torez near the Russian-Ukrainian border while the authorities in Kiev were busy militarily assaulting the separatist armed forces of Novorossiya, that is the soldiers of the breakaway Donetsk People’s Republic and Donetsk’s sister-breakaway republic in East Ukraine, the self-proclaimed Lugansk People’s Republic.

Blaming Russia and the Donetsk People’s Republic for the MH17 Crash

The downing of MH17 in East Ukraine was quickly blamed on the Donetsk People’s Republic. One way or another, the Russian Federation was also blamed by the puppet authorities in Kiev and its supporters in the US and the European Union. Salivating with another opportunity to demonize Russia and justify its existence, NATO also pointed the finger in the same direction towards Moscow. As part of the continuous anti-Russian hysteria, NATO governments and media networks lined up to blame Russia for the downing of the Malaysian passenger plane over Donetsk.

Starting in late-February 2014 with the EuroMaidan coup, for the last six months or half a year, all types of accusations have been made and directed towards Russia and its federal government in Moscow. Blaming the Kremlin for the attack on MH17 was just a continuation of the Russophobic trend that Washington and its European Union allies had unleashed with the simmering crisis in Ukraine.

Valentyn Oleksandrovych Nalyvaichenko, the post-EuroMaidan head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU/SBU) and an Orangist that left Viktor Yushchenko to join Vitali Klitschko in 2012, claimed that the attack MH17 was a Russian-linked false flag that went wrong. Interfax Information Service Group’s branch in Ukraine reported on August 9, 2014 that the SSU/SBU chief claimed that the Donetsk People’s Republic was planning on bombing a Russian airliner from Aeroflot that was suppose to fly south to the Mediterranean Sea from Moscow to the Greek Cypriot city of Larnaca. The SSU/SBU released an official statement on August 7, 2014 claiming that the plan was to give the Russian Federation a pretext for invading and occupying Ukraine.

The US government and its high-ranking officials joined their puppets in Kiev in trying to ultimately lay the blame on Russia for the downing of MH17. US officials made numerous public statements that were designed to pin the blame on the Russian Federation for the MH17’s crash. The US government launched an international information campaign in this regard that utilized its diplomatic missions, the internet, social media, and the mainstream media networks.

When Washington was challenged for proof about Russian involvement and the source of the attack on MH17, in the tradition of US Secretary of State Colin Powel’s weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq presentation at the United Nations the US government presented doctored evidence which was debunked immediately. The US government released doctored satellite images that from an examination of location of physical objects and atmospheric conditions were clearly taken days after MH17 was shot down. After embarrassingly being exposed for presenting false evidence to support its claims, Washington refused to provide anymore of its so-called evidence under the justification of not revealing data sources. In reality, there Washington was lying again and had no evidence to support the ridiculous claims that Moscow had masterminded the downing of MH17. Not long after this, US officials admitted that they had no tangible evidence against Russia. Then they and their NATO allies began to look like they were losing interest in even investigation the MH17 crash in Donetsk.

The Facts Come into View: What were Kiev’s Fighter Jets Doing?

The narrative of the US and the puppet authorities in Kiev was feeble and horribly put together from the start. Not only was there an absence of evidence that the Donetsk People’s Republic or Russia were behind the attack on Mh17, which killed all two hundred and eighty-three passengers and fifteen crew members on board (a total of two hundred and ninety-eight people), but the evidence indicated the US-supported puppet Ukrainian authorities in Kiev as the culprits responsible for the downing of the Malaysian passenger jet.

Within moments before the MH17 crash, a Spaniard employee working as an air traffic controller at Ukraine’s largest airport, Borispol (Boryspil) International Airport (not to be confused with Kiev International Airport in Zhulyany, southwest Kiev), using his Twitter account (Carlos @spainbuca), refuted the claims of the Ukrainian puppet authorities in Kiev and their backers in Washington. Carlos would write at 11:48 am on July 17, 2014 that MH17 was «escorted by 2 fighters of Ukraine until minutes before disappearing from the radar» screen at the air traffic control tower. What Carlos meant by fighters was Ukrainian fighter jets. Carlos also wrote, at 1:29 pm, that the Interior Ministry of Ukraine, which is heavily politicized and under the control of the ultra-nationalist forces behind the EuroMaidan coup, knew what the Ukrainian fighter jets were doing next to MH17 whereas the Ukrainian military knew very little and, at 1:36 pm, that the Ukrainian military confirmed that Kiev had downed the Malaysian passenger jet (please see the annex for what was exactly written). It would only be at 3:17 pm that the air traffic control tower would be told officially that a missile had shot MH17 down over Donetsk. Carlos wrote at 4:06 pm that Ukrainian military air control officials had said that it the missile was one of their own. Because of his revelations, eventually the Spaniard’s Tweeter account would be blocked and deleted.

Contradicting the rhetorical claims of Washington and its puppets in Kiev, the federal government of Russia provided valid data that could be analyzed with a high level of confidence. Among the data that Moscow produced, was information that a Ukrainian Sukhoi SU-25 fighter jet had intercepted MH17. The puppet authorities in Ukraine declined to explain why a Ukrainian military jet had been sent to intercept MH17. While calling for an international investigation to be conducted by an impartial team from the United Nations, Moscow also called for the puppet authorities in Kiev to publicly release the communication records that took place between MH17 and Ukrainian air traffic control.

Even the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which has been negatively biased towards Russia during the entire crisis in Ukraine, contradicts the allegations of the US government. Michael Bociurkiw, a Canadian citizen of Ukrainian descent, investigating the crash as an OSCE monitor contradicted the claims made by the US-supported puppet authorities in Kiev. The OSCE monitor reported that no missile was used against MH17 from the OSCE’s initial studies. Not only was no missile used, Bociurkiw mentions that it looks like MH17 looked like it was downed by bullets. In Michael Bociurkiw’s own words, he told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) the following on July 29, 2014: «There have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really pockmarked with what almost looks like machine-gun fire, very very strong machine-gun fire».

As soon as photographs of the crash became available, it was noticed by many people that it looked like the Malaysian jet has been fired on (in addition to any possible missile penetration). Specifically, the MH17’s cockpit looks like it was fired at from both sides with both entry and exit bullet holes. This means that the MH17 was either shot at from two different angels or that the ammunition that was fired on it ricocheted outwards. Taken that the ammunition of the Ukrainian Sukhoi SU-25 is cannon ammunition is armor-piercing and made to destroy heavy armored military vehicles, this makes a lot of sense.

OSCE monitor Michael Bociurkiw has been criticized for using non-technical language, specifically referring to thirty millimeter caliber cannon ammunition as «machine-gun fire» while talking about the MH17 attack. The point, however, should not be lost. It looks like a Ukrainian Sukhoi SU-25 fighter jet had fired on the MH17 (in addition to any possible missile penetration of the Malaysian passenger plane). All the evidence about the downing of MH17 points in the direction of the authorities in Kiev.

Hiding the Facts via Information Censorship

The voice of Carlos, contradicting the US and its allies, would be just one of many. The Information Telegraph Agency of Russia (ITAR-TASS) also confirmed his story on July 18, 2014. ITAR-TASS reported as follows: «This information is confirmed by eyewitnesses in the Donetsk region who saw Ukrainian warplanes near the passenger jet. They say they heard sounds of powerful blasts and saw a Ukraine warplane shortly before the crash.» Even the Russian-language service of the state-owned British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) News would corroborate the account put forward by Carlos and eyewitnesses in East Ukraine. The BBC’s Olga Ivshina (Ivshyna) interviewed four residence of the area near the crash, which all said that they saw warplanes next to MH17. One eyewitness told Ivshina that the military jet «was flying under it, we could see it. It was going underneath the civilian one».

The BBC would censor Olga Ivshina’s report, because it contradicted the separatist missile attack narrative and it fit perfectly with what the Spanish air traffic controller and the Russian government claimed. After being caught red handed, the BBC responded to deleting its own report and put back a modified version of it on July 25, 2014. Yan Leder, the managing editor for BBC News’s Russian service explained that there was no «self-censorship» and that the report was removed as it contained «mistakes» and was not in «compliance of the editorial values of BBC».

The BBC’s censorship was only the tip of the iceberg. Facebook and Twitter began to block posts linked to articles about MH17 and the claims made by Carlos. Posts involving what happened to MH17 over East Ukraine were becoming unavailable or failing to open on social media. Enough people noticed and complained about this that warnings and explanations were offered about why the posts about MH17 were being blocking.

Tacitly, Matthew Peckham provides the dubious rationale of social media for restricting posts in a Time article titled «Facebook and Twitter Users: Don’t Fall for MH17 ‘Actual Footage’ Scams» on July 22, 2014. Peckham reports the following: «If you run across Facebook pages touting pictures of Malaysia Airlines MH17 crash victims, or tweets linking to reports on the disaster, warning: they may be fakes, harbor malware or redirect you to pornographic websites.» Then his article tacitly explains that such links have been removed from Facebook. In other words, the rationale being presented is that posts covering the MH17 crash can be censored or blocked to protect readers from scammers, malware, and software viruses.

Despite the reasoning behind any possible blocking of articles and posts about MH17, the rationale given does not explain why Carlos was censored or why Tweeter deleted his account (Carlos @spainbuca). The Spaniard would also do an interview with RT en Español (RT Spanish) or RT Actualidad from Madrid on May 8, 2014. Hiding his identity because of death threats he had received in Ukraine, the Spanish air traffic controller would explain that he and his family were deported from Ukraine to Spain by the puppet authorities in Kiev.

The US is the One that Downs Passenger Planes, Not Russia

The US government is the one that attacks and downs civilian passenger planes, either directly with its own military forces or through state-sponsored terrorism. When US Secretary of State John Kerry was pointing the finger at Russia, no one asked him about Cuban (Cubana de Aviación) Flight 455 (CU455) and Iran Air Flight 655 (IR655). While flying from Barbados to Jamaica, CU455 was brought down on October 6, 1976 by a CIA-linked double C-4 bomb attack. IR655, on the other hand, was shot down by a US warship over Iranian territory, while flying on its regular route from Tehran to Dubai in the UAE, on July 3, 1988.

The bombing of the CU455 was carried out by the US-supported and CIA-trained Coordination of United Revolutionary Organizations (CORU). CORU also worked out of US territory and all its actions were coordinated with the US government. Orlando Bosch, Luis Posada Carriles, and Michael Vernon Townley, the key figures involved are known to have been financed by the CIA and to have worked with it and other US agencies in a terrorist campaign against Cuba aimed at securing regime change in Havana. Townley as a professional assassin for the US helped kill Latin American figures opposing US influence in their countries.

Although the US claims that it was not involved, it has been behind a terrorist campaign that has been attacking Cuban infrastructure after the Cuban Revolution in 1959. The Cubans reacted by reporting the US to the United Nations in 1960 and by providing the United Nations Security Council with detailed records of multiple US-sponsored terrorist attacks, which included the names of registered pilots, plane identification numbers, data on the flight routes coming from the US, and physical evidence. Washington, however, continued to deny that it was involved in the terrorist attacks on the Cubans. Not only did the US continue to lie, but it launched the invasion of the Bay of Pigs in 1961.

The terrorist bombing of CU455 would be a national tragedy for all Cuban society. After winning gold medals for their Cuba at the 1976 Central American and Caribbean Championships, all twenty-four members of the entire Cuban national junior fencing team would be killed in CU455. Most of the Cuban fencers were teenagers. The other passengers were Cuban fishing and sports officials and Guyanese medical students going to Cuba to study medicine.

IR655 was shot down directly by the USS Vincennes in a clear act of aggression against a passenger airliner. The attack on IR655 took place in Iranian territory as the airplane was flying through Iranian airspace towards Dubai. All two hundred and ninety passengers and sixteen crew members were killed.

In both cases the US government lied or provided excuses about what happened. Washington’s actions, however, spell its position and intentions out clearly. Despite the US government’s shameless claims not to have supported the bombing of CU455, the US gave asylum and sanctuary to the figures behind the murder of all seventy-eight passengers onboard the Cuban passenger plane. In regards to IR655, the crew of the USS Vincennes was awarded for their ship’s actions and received combat-action ribbons for the tour of the Vincennes in the Persian Gulf. Captain (N) William C. Rogers III was awarded the Legion of Merit for his service as the commanding naval officer of the Vincennes from 1987 to 1989 whereas Lieutenant -Commander Scott Lustig, the warships’ air-warfare coordinator, received the Navy Commendation Medal for «quickly and precisely complete the firing procedure.»

Lie after lie, the modus operandi of the US government is the same. How much credence can people give to John Kerry and the US government when they claimed that the Syrian government was behind the chemical attack on Ghouta in late-2013, but the facts proved that it was the US-supported insurgents that were behind the chemical attack?

Minutes before reporting about the Ukrainian military’s involvement, at 11:13 am on July 17, 2014, Carlos wrote on Twitter that he was wondering why foreign personnel entered his air traffic control tower with Kiev authorities to gather information. The Spaniard later reported at 12:00 pm, interestingly minutes after the military authorities in Kiev had notified his air traffic control tower that MH17 was downed over Donetsk, that the air traffic control tower was filled with foreign personnel. Who were these foreign personal? Most probably they were from NATO countries and, more specifically, from the US. There is no question that the US had a role in the downing of MH17; at the very minimum Washington has knowingly and criminally worked to distort the picture of what happened to MH17. It is also important to note that Carlos described divisions among the Ukrainian soldiers in Kiev through what appeared to be upset and disgusted faces by those soldiers who reported that Kiev was responsible for the downing of MH17 whereas the Ukrainian military personnel and authorities accompanied by foreigners were busy lying and trying to spin the attack on MH17. The downing of MH17 is not the crime of Ukraine, but an act committed by US and EU proxies, embezzlers, and fanatics.

One way or another, the US government and the European Union do not have clean hands. The US accuses others of committing the actions that it itself commits. It is not Russia that bombs civilian passenger airplanes, but the United States. History is a witness to this.

ANNEX CHRONOLOGY OF TWITTER COMMENTS BY CARLOS ON JULY 17, 2014

Source: @spainbuca

• The Tweets (Twitter comments) are in original Spanish followed by translations.

• The time is presumed to be Eastern European Time (EET)

• The time is given in both 24-hour and 12-hour clock formats

10:21/10:21 AM

Autoridades de kiev, intentan hacer que pueda parecer un ataque de los pro-rusos

Kiev Authorities, trying to make seem like an attack by pro-Russians

10:24/10:24 AM

Ojo! Que puede ser un derribo B777 Malaysia Airlines en ukraine, 280 pasajeros

Pay attention! It can be a downing of Malaysia Airlines B777 in Ukraine, 280 passengers

10:25/10:25 AM

Cuidado! Kiev tiene lo que buscaba

Careful! Kiev has what it sought

10:25/10:25 AM

Vuelven a tomar la torre de control en Kiev

They have returned to take the control tower in Kiev

10:27/10:27 AM

El avión B777 de Malaysia Airlines desapareció del radar, no hubo comunicación de ninguna anomalia, confirmado

The Malaysia Airlines B777 airplane disappeared from the radar, there was no communication of any anomaly, confirmed

10:30/10:30 AM

Avión derribado, derribados, derribado no accidente

«Airplane shot down, shot down, shot down, no accident»

10:31/10:31 AM

Kiev, tiene lo que buscaba, lo dije en los primeros tw, kiev es responsable @ActualidadRT

Kiev has what it wanted, I said in the first tw [Tweet], Kiev is responsible @ ActualidadRT

10:35/10:35 AM

Un accidente muy normal no es, no están amenazando en la misma torre del aeropuerto de kiev,

An accident that is not quite normal, they are threatening us in the same tower of Kiev airport»

10:35/10:35 AM

Nos van a quitar, nuestros tlf y demás de un momento a otro

We will take from our tel. [telephones] and others stuff at any moment

10:38/10:35 AM

Antes de que me quiten el tlf o me rompan la cabeza, derribado por Kiev

Before they remove my phone or they break my head, shot down by Kiev

11:12/11:12 AM

Nosotros tenemos la confirmación. Avión derribado, la autoridad de kiev, ya tiene la información, derribado, estamos tranquilos ahora

We have confirmation. Airplane downed, Kiev authorities already got the information, downed, we are calm now

11:13/11:13 AM

Que hace personal extranjero con autoridades de kiev en la torre? Recopilando toda la información

What are doing foreigner personnel doing with Kiev authorities in the tower? Gathering all the information

11:15/11:15 AM

Cuando sea posible sigo escribiendo

When possible I keep writing

11:48/11:48 AM

El avión B 777 voló escoltado por 2 cazas de ukraine hasta minutos antes, de desaparecer de los radares,

The B777 airplane flew escorted by 2 fighter [jets] of Ukraine until minutes before disappearing from the radar, [sic.]

11:54/11:54 AM

Sí las autoridades de kiev, quieren decir la verdad, esta recogido 2 cazas volaron muy cerca minutos antes , no lo derribo un caza

If Kiev authorities, want to tell the truth, it is recorded that 2 jet fighters flew very close minutes before, was not downed by a fighter

12:00/12:00 PM

Nada más desaparecer el avión B 777 de Malaysia Airlines la autoridad military de kiev nos informo del derribo, como lo sabían?

Just as the Malaysia Airlines B777 airplane disappeared the Kiev military authority informed us of the downing, how did they know?

12:00/12:00 PM

A los 7:00 minutos se notificó el derribo, más tarde se tomó la torre nuestra con personal extranjero q siguen aquí

7:00 minutes after crash was reported, our tower was overtaken with foreigner staff, they are still here

12:01/12:01 PM

En los radares esta todo recogido, para los incrédulos, derribado por kiev, aquí lo sabemos y control aéreo militar también

All this is gathered in radars, for unbelievers, shot down by kiev [sic.], here we know it and military air traffic control also [knows]

13:15/1:15 PM

Aquí los mandos militares manejan y admiten que militares a otras órdenes, pudieron ser, pero no, los pro-rusos

Here the military commanders administer and suppose it could be the military following other orders, but could be the pro-Russians

13:29/1:29 PM

El ministro del interior si conocía que, hacían los cazas en la zona, el ministro de defensa no,

Interior minister knew what the fighters were doing in the area, the defence minister did not.

13:31/1:31 PM

Militares confirman que fue ukraine, pero se sigue sin saber de donde vino la orden

Military confirms that it was Ukraine, but still does not know where the order came from

13:36/1:36 PM

Hace dias lo dije aquí, militares de kiev querían alzarse contra el actual presidente, esto puede ser una forma, a las órdenes de timoshenko

Days ago I said here, kiev [sic. ]military wanted to rise against the current president [Petro Poroshenko], this may be a way [to oust him], ordered by [Yulia] Tymoshenko

13:38/1:38 PM

Los cazas volaron cerca del 777, hasta 3 minutos antes de desaparecer de los radares, solo 3 minutos

The fighters flew close to 777, up to 3 minutes before disappearing from the radar, just 3 minutes

13:43/1:43 PM

Se cierra el espacio aéreo

Airspace closed

13:45/1:45 PM

Se cierra el espacio aéreo, por miedo a más derribos

Airspace is closed, more downings feared

15:17/3:17 PM

Control militar entrega ahora mismo de forma oficial que el avión fue derribado por misil

Military control now officially [say] the plane was shot down by missile

15:23/ 3:23 PM

El informe oficial firmado por las autoridades militares de control de kiev ya lo tiene el gobierno,,,, , derribado

«Government has the official report signed by the military control authorities in kiev [sic.],,, , [sic.] [the airplane was] blown»

15:26/3:26 PM

En el informe se indica de donde abría salido el misil, y se especifica que no proviene de las autodefensa en las zonas rebeldes

The report indicates where the missile had originated, and specified it is not self-defence from the rebel areas

15:34/3:35 PM

Los radares militares si recogieron los datos del misil lanzado al avión, los radares civiles no

Military radar collected data from missile fired to the plane, civilian radars did not

15:36/ 3:36 PM

Los altos mandos militares no ordenaron el lanzamiento del misil, alguien se le fue la mano en nombre de ukraine

The military high command did not give the order to fire the missile, someone did it in the name of ukraine [sic.]

15:38/3:38 PM

Para el que no lo sepa, digamos así, hay militares a las órdenes del ministro de defensa y militares a las órdenes del ministro del interior

For those who do not know, let us say, there are soldiers under the orders of the defence minister and soldiers under the orders of the minister of interior

15:38/ 3:38 PM

Los militares a las órdenes del ministro del interior conocían en cada momento lo que sucedió

The soldiers under the orders of minister of interior knew what happened the whole time

16:06/4:06 PM

Mandos militares aquí (ATC) torre de control, confirman que el misil es del ejercito de ukraine,

Military commanders here (ATC) control tower, confirm that the missile is from the army of [sic.] ukraine,

16:07/4:07 PM

Mandos militares que si lo sabían y otros mandos que no,

«[There are] military commanders that knew it and others that did not,

16:08/4:08 PM

290 personas inocentes muertas. Por una guerra inútil, donde el patriotismo se compra con dinero

290 innocent people dead. What a useless war, where patriotism is bought with money

16:09/4:09 PM

La forma de tomar la torre de control minutos después sabiendo todo los detalles, rápido nos hizo pensar que habían sido ellos

The way the control tower was taken minutes after and knowing all the details, quickly made us think that they [did it]

16:10/4:10 PM

La cara de los militares que llegaron más tarde diciendo pero que habéis echo, no dejo dudas

«The faces of the soldiers who came later saying [what you just did], no chance for doubts»

16:12/4:12 PM

Es tal la decadencia que los militares acompañados de extranjeros que llegaron primero nos llegaron a pedir que dijéramos su versión

Such is the decadence that the soldiers who came first accompanied by foreigners came to us asking us to tell their version [of the MH17’s downing]

16:13/4:16 PM

Nuestra respuesta, fue, estos radares no recogen el lanzamiento de misiles, los militares si, ya no quedaban dudas

Our response was, these radars do not collect the launching of missiles, the military ones does, there were no doubts

—————————————————————-

Mahdi Darius NAZEMROAYA

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a social scientist, award-winning writer, columnist, and researcher. His works have been carried internationally in a broad series of publications and have been translated into more than twenty languages including German, Arabic, Italian, Russian, Turkish, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, Korean, Polish, Armenian, Persian, Dutch and Romanian. His work in geopolitical sciences and strategic studies has been used by various academic and defense establishments in their papers and defense colleges for military officers. He is also a frequent guest on international news networks as a geopolitical analyst and expert on the Middle East.

Source:
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/08/28/looking-who-talking-mh17-and-us-role-downing-passenger-airplanes.html

Reposted at
http://www.globalresearch.ca/looking-who-is-talking-mh17-and-the-us-role-in-downing-passenger-airplanes/5398153