The Downing of MH17 & Its Curious Convolutions

The Dutch investigation into  the  crash  of Malaysian  Airlines MH17 on 17th  July 2014 in  Eastern  Ukraine where  fighting between  “Russian-backed”  Eastern Ukrainian separatists and government forces was occurring , with  the death  of  all 298  passengers and crew,  has finally been  released.

The crash  followed the disappearance of another Malaysian  Airlines plane flight 370  over the Indian  ocean on 8th  March  2014:  again  with  all  passengers and crew lost-  a rather unusual  coincidence .

To  no-one’s surprise, the investigation has indicted 3 Russians and one Eastern Ukrainian,  who  will  be unlikely to  face the court because both  countries’  extradition laws would forbid  their extradition.

Several  hours before the investigation results were announced ,  the “independent” investigative online journalist  Bellingcat (according to  Wikipedia “Half of (Bellingcat’s)  funding comes from grants and donations, the other half from running workshops training people in the art of open-source investigations”,  released their more comprehensive list  of Russians supposedly involved in  hauling a BUK ground to  air launcher and targetting system across the Russian/Ukrainian  border,  shooting down  the civilian jet  and then  hauling it back  across into  Russian  territory. The reasons for going through  this elaborate process to  shoot down  a civilian  jet   with  Malaysian, Dutch  and Australian nationals on-board are not explored….

However the OffGuardian  notes that  Bellingcat’s funding is largely “from the Atlantic Council and the National Endowment for Democracy’-   institutions not known  for their pro-Russian,  let alone neutral  stance on  anything.  Bellingcat  is well-known for his  very dubious  statements  and ‘proof” of direct  Russian  involvement in  the Eastern Ukraine war, his curious MI6 related account of the Skripal poisonings (well-debunked by  Craig Murray),  and his  accusations of Syrian (Russian  supported)  SAA involvement in  gas attacks against   civilians,  recently  debunked by  leaked  reports from  the OPCW.

The U.K.  express noted  that  ‘Dutch investigators maintain there is photo and video evidence showing the BUK system used to shoot down the plane came from the 53rd anti-aircraft missile brigade, which is based in Kursk, western Russia.” As far as can be  ascertained,  this “photo  and video  evidence’  had been  provided to  the investigative team  by  Bellingcat’s  ‘independent’ journalists.

And, as The Saker notes; the list of these (four)  “suspects” can be randomly expanded, up to the country’s top brass. After all, in order to transfer the Buk across the border, a whole interdepartmental operation is necessary. It is possible to take it only from a military unit. And before this – the (Russian) Ministry of Defence. It has to move to the border along roads and through settlements. This means the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which such a movement has to be coordinated with.

And lastly, protecting the border is a prerogative of the FSB. It is clear that any officer of any of the listed departments will not take part in such an operation without the approval of the highest administration.

Well, and the heads themselves will not involve themselves in such complex and dangerous work without having coordinated it first with the Supreme Commander – the president.

While such   further accusations  will suit many in the Russophobe West-  they  simply do  not stack  up  as being  possible, plausible  or rational. For what  possible reason would the Russian  Government authorise the shooting down of a Malaysian  civilian  airliner over  disputed  Ukrainian territory ?

The Dutch   investigators  say the missile launcher  crossed the border from the  Kursk  Oblast,  Russia, into Eastern Ukraine, and returned after the aircraft had been brought down,  a one way  distance of approximately 130 kms. The BUK launcher would have travelled at  a maximum  speed of 65 km/hour.

Despite an all-Malaysian  crew,  and Malaysian passengers being the second largest  group  of nationals on  the plane, and the  owner of the airline ,  Malaysia (along with  Russia)  was denied access to  the plane’s black  boxes and other parts of the investigation,  while the Ukraine,  who  may  or may  not have been  the guilty party,  was allowed free access and the right to deny the public access to  any parts  of the information collected by  the investigative team.  A curious state of affairs.

Malaysia only supports some aspects of the investigative team’s conclusions, and describes the investigation as “politically motivated”

There is much  dispute online about the weapon  used to bring down  the plane, but the current evidence does seem  to  suggest  a Russian -made  BUK type  ground  to  air missile with  a fragmentation head.  The missile appears to  have  hit the plane  primarily in  the cockpit area,  causing catastrophic immediate damage  and immediate loss of  flight recording –  although   curiously little external  damage   aft of the cabin  until  the plane hit the ground and exploded. Russia  maintains the missile numbers found indicate that  it was an  early version of the BUK missile which  was likely owned by  Ukrainian government forces,  but the investigation states that  it was a recent BUK version only owned by  the Russians.

A very  curious state of affairs…



Discuss: MH17 “suspects” named

MH17: "New evidence", same issues

The case of MH17 and the imitation of a Maidan in Georgia: the provocations of globalists

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: