The Australian headlines (and Australian politicians) leave no doubt that President Putin had a hand in the downing of MH17. Australia is not waiting for the criminal findings. And nothing much has changed since I wrote about the “Disgraceful Reporting” in the Australian media on July 19, 2014.
But let us recap:
MH17 – the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200ER departs Amsterdam at 12.15 pm, on July 17 2014, carrying 298 passengers (38 Australians) and crew, scheduled for Kuala Lumpur. The aircraft flew at approximately 10,000 metres (33,000 feet) over the conflict in Ukraine, where Eastern Ukrainians were fighting the forces of the newly elected Kiev government.
The West had supported a rebellion and a “non-elected” government (in Petro Poroshenko) in Kiev, and the anti-NATO Ukrainians held their ground, resulting in a civil war. These Ukrainians looked to Russia for support and were labelled as “pro-Russian rebels.”
When MH17 was shot down in the conflict zone, the Australian media immediately pointed to President Putin being the culprit. The ex-prime minister Tony Abbott was even threatening to shirt-front Mr Putin. I and others on Gumshoe reported on MH17 many times (see here), and we also wrote about the secret deal between Ukraine, the Netherlands, Australia and Belgium. The non-disclosure agreement, which all governments initially refused to acknowledge, forces a consensus among these parties, potentially tainting an honest investigation. Gumshoe had a breakthrough when Christopher Brooks supplied a letter (from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade) confirming this.
Now, the final report into the downing of flight MH17, from the Dutch Safety Board (DSB), has delivered it’s findings.
The summary of the Dutch report is (BBC article):
1. Brought down by a warhead that detonated outside and above the left-hand side of the cockpit and broke apart. The back of the plane continued for 8.5km before breaking up further.
2. Buk missile system used was carried on a class of missile installed on the Russian-made Buk surface-to-air missile system. The Dutch Safety Board says the weapon used was a 9N314M-model warhead carried on the 9M38M1 missile (from the bow-tie or cube shaped fragments).
The Russians dispute this, insisting that only older warheads and missiles of the 9M38 type were still in the hands of the Ukrainian army and state that the Russian army had phased them out. They argue that investigators should not have discounted an air-to-air rocket.
3. Passengers barely aware of attack, but the report says: “It cannot be ruled out that some occupants remained conscious for some time during the one to one-and-a-half minutes for which the crash lasted.” One passenger was found wearing an oxygen mask, but it was “unclear how the mask got there.”
4. Calculations show that the missile was launched somewhere in an area of 320 sq km in eastern Ukraine. Additional investigations are required.
5. The report found that about 16 military planes and helicopters had been shot down in eastern Ukraine in the weeks before flight MH17 was downed. Ukraine should have closed its airspace to commercial traffic.
We will have to wait to see the detail in the criminal investigation.
However, I made contact with the Russian consulate last night, and they forwarded me these two press releases. I quote:
“First, once again, we express our deepest condolences to those who lost their families, their relatives, their sons and daughters and parents in the air disaster in the skies of Ukraine.
Russia had demanded an objective, all-embracing and transparent investigation into the MH17 crash straight from the start. We were among those who, together with Australia, initiated the adoption of the UN Security Council Resolution 2166, which contains requirements for the investigation. Unfortunately, Russia’s proposal to use the UN Security Council mechanisms to organize a transparent investigation, as it is stipulated by the above-mentioned resolution, was ignored. The United Nations Secretary-General did not present comprehensive proposals to the UN Security Council on measures to assist the investigation. Our questions concerning the investigation that we distributed at the UN Security Council in September 2014 also hang in the air.
Nevertheless, throughout the period of the investigation we sought to ensure our constructive participation in a group of experts and make a maximum contribution to its work. We shared all the intelligence, technical data and analysis which could have helped the purpose of the investigation. We hoped that our experts would in turn gain access to all the information and materials, obtained by the group, which did not happen to be the case. Dutch partners have also ignored the findings made by “Almaz-Antey”, the main manufacturer of the BUK missile systems. Therefore, we have serious doubts whether the true purpose of the Dutch investigation is to establish the real causes of the air crash or justify the previously made accusations.
Here are some issues of particular concern. Ukraine has failed to present to the international community the recording of a conversation of the military air traffic controllers as well as the information on the activities of Ukraine’s air defense forces in the region of the crash. We also called attention to the strange fact that a year after the investigation had begun, fresh information appeared that new fragments of a missile, which allegedly destroyed the plane, had been found. The way in which the investigation had been carried out could not but affect its final results.
Further investigation could show a way out of this situation. The investigation should be duly adjusted and should involve countries that possess materials capable of shedding the light on the MH17 crash. We are certainly ready for this work.
The major finding of the Dutch report, which we agree with, is that Kiev is responsible for not closing its airspace over the warzone to civil aviation which could have prevented the disaster. This fact is indisputable.”
And the second:
“On the findings of the Russian defense system manufacturer “Almaz-Antey” into the causes of the crash of MH17
“Almaz Antey”, a Russian defense manufacturing company, conducted two full-scale field experiments aimed at recreating the real circumstances of the MH17 tragedy in the Ukrainian sky.
In July 2015 a BUK 9M38M1 missile was detonated near the aluminum panel mimicking a Boeing aircraft. According to Yan Novikov, CEO of the company, “in the course of the experiment it became absolutely evident that if the Malaysian Boeing was downed by a BUK missile, it was done with an old BUK model which does not have double-T iron strike elements”. The outcome of the experiment was sent over to the Dutch Safety Board (DSB).
In October “Almaz Antey” conducted a second experiment, this time using the 9M38M1 missile and a decommissioned Ilyushin Il-86 passenger aircraft.
The simulation of the missile attack on the aircraft “unequivocally proved that if the plane was brought down by a BUK system, it was done with an outdated 9M38 missile from the village of Zaroshchenskoye”. The representatives of the company also underlined that the last missile of this type was produced in the Soviet Union in 1986 and that all such missiles were decommissioned from the Russian Armed Forces in 2011 due to the termination of the life span.
Both experiments concluded that the missile that downed MH17 was an old BUK model fired from a government-controlled area of Ukraine. Unfortunately, as the final report of the DSB has shown, the Dutch investigation team neglected the evidence, provided by the technical experts of “Almaz Antey”.”
It is clear and most unfortunate that Australia and the West are not interested in a open transparent process.
The mainstream presstitute journalists waiting for their next instruction on reporting MH17. “Pik–pik–pik–putin–pik–pik–p-p-putin”.