BBC documentary claims MH17 Downed by Air-to-Air Missiles from Ukrainian Jet

[AZJoe]

BBC documentary claims MH17 Downed by Air-to-Air Missiles from Ukrainian Jet
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz46s9DZWrE

New evidence suggests that the downing of the Malaysian Airlines plane MH17 was caused by a shot from a Ukrainian fighter jet rather than a ground-to-air missile. The damning allegations will be revealed in a BBC documentary which puts forward a number of theories as to why the aircraft exploded. …

Although the official report states that the plane was hit by a Russian-made Buk missile fired from an area of the Ukraine that was under the control of Russian-backed rebels, the program notes that people saw the aircraft being shot down by a fighter jet. …

They believed that two jets were present and that one fired an air-to-air missile, while the other fired a canon from the back into MH17's cockpit. …
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz46s97imAt

See also:
Support MH17 Truth: Machine Gun-Like Holes Indicate Shelling from a Military Aircraft. No Evidence of a Surface-to-Air Missile Attack.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/support...attack/5394324

The evidence amply confirms that Malaysian Airlines MH17 was not brought down by a surface to air missile. It was brought down by military aircraft. …

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

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 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. … 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




…

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

…

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 …

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. …

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 …
http://www.globalresearch.ca/support...attack/5394324

Report of Coalition of Russian Engineers
http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-cont...eers140818.pdf

… Of particular note are the holes folded inward in the fuselage. They are round‐bored, and usually grouped. Such holes can only be formed by metal objects with a circular cross‐section, possibly rods or shells from an aircraft gun. …

No‐one, up until now, has been able to produce credible evidence of the launch of a surface to air missile, the launch of which, as is well known, is accompanied by significant audio‐visual effects. The launch trails extend to the clouds and will remain in the air for up to 10 minutes. The sound of the rocket launch is audible to anyone standing within a radius of 7—10 Km from the launch‐site.
The flight of the missile is accompanied by a loud noise. The flight is easily observed thanks to the trail which is produced as a result of the fuel being consumed by the rocket. …

At the time when the Boeing 777 was shot down, there was an American satellite on station. …

it is evident from the way the holes are arranged in the fragments of the flat surfaces and the fuselage that they do not reflect the typical picture of the impact of "Buk‐ M1" missiles, which would have left a very noticeable and characteristic pattern of damage marks. …


The picture of the entry and exit holes in the cockpit of the Boeing 777 are fully consistent with the passage through the flight of shells from the 20‐30 mm caliber guns found on military aircraft. This confirms the second version of what brought down the Boeing. This is further supported by the way the puncture holes are dispersed along the surface of the aircraft. The edges of the fragment of the fuselage from the left side of the cockpit are folded from the inside outward, which indicates that a significant blast occurred within the cockpit as a result of the dynamic impact of the shells on the right side. On the trim panel the characteristic entry holes are visible as well as some exit points. The edges of the holes are bent inward; they are much smaller and are circular in shape. The exit openings are less clearly formed; their edges are torn outward. In addition, it is clear that exit holes broke through double luminum lining and tilted it outward. …

Based on the above, we can draw the following conclusions:
… manual control was turned off and the plane was on autopilot, flying in a horizontal plane along the route laid out and adjusted by air traffic controllers on the Ukrainian side. … At 17.17‐17.20, the Boeing 777 was in Ukrainian airspace near the city of Donetsk at the height of 10100 m. An unidentified combat aircraft (presumably a Su‐25 or MiG ‐29), which was a tier below, on a collision course, in the cloud layer, sharply gained altitude and suddenly appeared out of the clouds in front of the civilian aircraft and opened fire on the cockpit, firing from a 30 mm caliber cannon or smaller. …

As a result of multiple hits from shells there was damage to the cockpit, which suddenly depressurized, resulting in instant death for the crew due to mechanical influences and decompression. The attack was sudden and lasted a fraction of a second; in such circumstances the crew could not sound any alarm as the flight had been proceeding in regular mode and no attack was expected.

Since neither the engines or hydraulic system, nor other devices required for the continuation of the flight were out of commission, the Boeing 777, running on autopilot (as is standard), continued on its horizontal flight path, perhaps gradually losing altitude.
The pilot of the unidentified combat aircraft maneuvered to the rear of the Boeing 777. After that, the unidentified plane remained on the combat course, the pilot provided a target tracking aircraft equipment, took aim and launched his R‐60 or R‐73 missiles.
The result was a loss of cabin pressure, the aircraft control system was destroyed, the autopilot failed, the aircraft lost the ability to maintain its level flight path, and went into a tailspin. The resulting overload led to mechanical failure of the airframe at high altitudes.
The aircraft, according to the information available from the flight recorders, broke up in the air, but this is possible only in the case of a vertical fall from a height of ten thousand meters, which can only happen when the maximum permissible overload is exceeded. … The aircraft broke up at a high altitude, which explains the fact that the wreckage was scattered over the territory of more than 15 square kilometers. …

To establish the truth, it is necessary to objectively and impartially investigate all the circumstances of the destruction of the Malaysian Boeing 777, to interview the thousands of citizens who may have seen something. ... Important information is contained in the wreckage of the aircraft and the remains of the dead, but this precise information is easy to destroy, distort and hide. And there are plenty of parties interested in concealing the real facts. As confirmation, Ukraine, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia signed an agreement on August 8 providing that information about the crash investigation would be disclosed only upon the consent of all parties.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-cont...eers140818.pdf

More:
http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/07/2...e-flag-attack/

[Zippyjuan]

Commie propaganda.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...-shows-mh17-d/

BBC says Russian media wrong to suggest documentary shows MH17 downed by Ukrainian jet


Russia's Kremlin-friendly media have portrayed an forthcoming BBC documentary that debunks MH17 conspiracy theories as proof of its claim that a Ukrainian fighter jet may have downed the plane.

Nearly two years after the catastrophe claimed the lives of 298 people, the film, titled “The Conspiracy Files: Who Shot Down MH17?” and set to air on May 3, promises to delve into alternative versions of events as to who shot down the Boeing over war-torn eastern Ukraine in July 2014.

Kremlin figures and state-run news outlets have claimed it will vindicate Moscow's allegation that Ukraine was responsible, a theory which is dismissed by experts in the programme as unlikely, according to the BBC.

“Experts in fact tell the programme it was unlikely a Ukrainian fighter jet could have shot down MH17, as they cannot fly at such high altitudes," the BBC's press service told The Telegraph.

"This impartial documentary takes a balanced viewpoint in reporting the competing theories surrounding the fate of MH17, including the evidence for and against those involving Russia, Ukraine and the CIA. It also examines in detail the findings of the official Dutch inquiry into the incident, which provide compelling evidence that the plane was brought down by a powerful ground to air missile.”

[Danke]

I can tell you just looking at the SU-25, it can definitely reach the altitude the MH-17 was flying at.

Maybe not fully loaded with bombs and fuel.

My guesses that the max service ceiling of 23,000' is because it is unpressurized. In the U.S. Air Force we use 25,000' for unpressurized aircraft.

But you can go higher. Even airline aircraft have limits (because of emergency descent time to 10,000') even though the aircraft can go higher.

You Can look up the service ceiling of a F-16, it says 50,000'

I know for a fact it goes higher than that , but that is the Air Force limit if you don't wear a pressure suit.

[TER]

Commie propaganda.

When you say 'Commie', to whom are you referring to? The BBC?

And what of your propaganda? What shall we call it?

[AZJoe]

"Experts" in fact tell the program it was unlikely a Ukrainian fighter jet could have shot down MH17, as they cannot fly at such high altitudes," the BBC's press service told The Telegraph.

MH17 was only flying at under 10,100 meter (Thanks to Kiev ATC dropping its altitude and routing directly over the active war zone). SU-25 are rated above 10,000 meters and at that altitude have air to air missile range to 12,000 m. However in actual practice SU-25 have repeatedly flown to 12,000 meters.

Further the analysis reflects the Kiev fighter could have been either an SU-25 or a MIG-29. Kiev had both and they appear identical on radar. The MIG-29 is rated to above 18,000 meters and again, like the SU-25, has in actual practice exceeded the rating ceiling.

None of us can ever know for sure what events occurred, but what we do know is who has been trying to hide the evidence.

To date Kiev has still not released its air traffic control recordings for that time, and Washington and the west haven't pushed them to do so.
Likewise to date, Kiev has still not released its radar recordings for the time, and Washington and its puppets haven't asked them to do so.
For that matter, Kiev has yet to explain why Kiev ATC routed the plane directly over a combat zone in deviation of prior flight paths that were routed south of the combat. Nor has it explained why the Kiev ATC routed the plane to fly under 33,000 feet while doing so (under 10,058 meters).

Washington had continuous satellite coverage of the area where the shoot down occurred. However, Washington has steadfastly refused to release its satellite images of that day.

Further, the nations of Netherlands, Ukraine, Belgium and Australia, conducting the investigation - all of them signed an agreement that no evidence would be released without unanimous consent, and no report would be released unless signed by all.

Why is Washington stonewalling on the evidence. Are these the actions of transparency and openness? Does it sound like the actions of governments seeking full disclosure and truth? Or does it reflect the actions of government trying to suppress or hide something?

The families of the victims have a right to know all the evidence. The people of Ukraine and Donbass have the right to see and and know all the evidence. The people of the world have a right to assess the evidence and know the truth.


More on Washington's stonewalling: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/03/1...er-mh-17-case/
https://off-guardian.org/2015/07/12/...ilty-for-mh17/

[AngryCanadian]

Commie propaganda.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...-shows-mh17-d/

The telegraph is a joke.

“Experts in fact tell the programme it was unlikely a Ukrainian fighter jet could have shot down MH17, as they cannot fly at such high altitudes

These experts are the same experts who dont know anything about Syria let alone Ukraine or the strength of Ukrainian cold war era jet fighters.

[AZJoe]

Western Suppression About The Downing Of MH-17
http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-ne...malaysian-jet/
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/...ent-seeps.html

The cause of the shooting-down of the Malaysian passenger plane MH-17 on July 17th (while that plane was flying over the conflict-zone during Ukraine’s civil war) is becoming clearer and clearer, despite the rigorous continuing attempts by Western ‘news’ media to cover it up and to hide from the public the evidence that clearly shows what brought down this airliner.

… the leaders of Western nations want these black-box and other basic data to remain hidden, additional evidence has nonetheless become public, and all of it confirms and adds yet further details to the explanation that was first put forth by the retired German Lufthansa pilot Peter Haisenko, whose independent investigation had concluded that Ukrainian Government fighter-jets intentionally shot down this civilian plane. …

… despite this continuation of Western secrecy regarding the contents of the black boxes, and of the U.S. satellite images, and of the Ukrainian air-traffic-control radar recordings, and of other evidence-sources that are held by the West and not made available to their ‘news’ media nor to anyone outside a tight official circle of those Western nations’ intelligence agencies.

Russia has thus been releasing its own investigations regarding MH-17; and, in the process, Russia is not only providing further details as to how the downing actually happened (it wasn’t by mistake, as the West contends it was), but they are also exposing the absurd impossibility of the Ukrainian Government’s ‘explanation’ of this event, which is the ‘explanation’ that is still being parroted unquestioningly and unflinchingly by officials in Washington, Europe, and NATO, and also by Western ‘news’ media. …

Ukraine, Belgium, Australia, and Netherlands … granted to the Ukrainian Government a veto over anything that the team’s official report would say …

… The BBC had previously posted to their website on 23 July 2014, just six days after the event itself, a news report in Russian via their Russian service, about the downing, but they quickly removed it without explanation. Fortunately, however, some Russian-speakers had managed to download it before it was yanked; and at least two of those downloads is still up at youtube, …

So, now we know why Western governments have hidden, instead of making available to the public, the black-box data and the other evidence that they still refuse to provide to the public. They are aiming to scam the public, not to inform it. Lying is their game. And they call it ‘patriotism.’ …
http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-ne...malaysian-jet/
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/...ent-seeps.html

[Zippyjuan]

http://aviationweek.com/blog/how-su-...lying-aircraft

How An Su-25 Can Shoot Down A Faster, Higher-Flying Aircraft

Early in Len Deighton's Funeral in Berlin, his nameless British agent (he was Harry Palmer in the movies) confronts his long-time adversary, Colonel Stok. The KGB man goes all sentimental and explains that his plan is to use the defection of a top scientist to fund his own escape and retirement.

"What would you do in my position, Mr Dorf? What would you do?"

I let the sound of the lorry rumble away down Keibelstrasse.

I said, "I'd stop telling lies to old liars for a start, Stok. Do you really think I came here without dusting off your file? I know everything about you from the cubic capacity of your Westinghouse refrigerator to the size your mistress takes in diaphragms."

Which is just about my reaction to the Sovi... er, Russian explanations, official and otherwise, for the shootdown of MH17. Let's take two that have floated around the Internet.

The first is that the Ukrainian air force shot the Boeing 777 down itself, using a Sukhoi Su-25 Frogfoot carrying an R-60 Aphid air-to-air missile (the only AAM normally carried by the Su-25). This would require some remarkable timing and a pilot immune to nose-bleeds, because the Su-25 can manage Mach 0.82 flat out, on a good day, and a 777 can do 0.89, and furthermore the Su-25 is unpressurized and has a normal service ceiling of 23,000 feet. No doubt coincidentally, on the day this claim was published, a Wikipedia editor with a Russian address was found trying to insert a 33,000-foot ceiling on the Su-25 page. As for the R-60, the 3 kg warhead's ability to assure a kill on a large aircraft with highly redundant systems is dubious at best.

A second theory is that two Ukrainian Su-27 fighters trailed the Boeing and somehow drew the missile on to it. Aside from the fact that the Buk-M1 is about as discriminating as a Rottweiler with ADHD, and that it could be activated at such a short range that the Su-27s would be inside its no-escape zone, the weakness of this story is its extreme similarity to the KGB-disseminated excuse for the shootdown of KAL 007, 31 years ago. The story then was that an RC-135 was deliberately shadowing the civilian 747, possibly using it to "ring the fire alarm" and gather data on Soviet air defenses.

MH-17 was at 33,000 feet.

[AZJoe]

MH-17 was at 33,000 feet.

Yes Zippy, 33,000 feet is 10,058 meters.

Commenting on the jet’s ability to maneuver at higher altitudes, the former commander of an aviation division, Major General Sergey Borysyuk, noted that the jet would have had the capability to “maneuver comfortably,” even at such a high altitude.

“I personally flew, and not once, at an altitude of 12,000 meters...,” he said. “My colleagues have risen to an altitude of 14,000 meters. The altitude of 10,500 was officially authorized during operations in Afghanistan. Therefore the plane, even at an altitude of 12,000 meters, has the capability to maneuver comfortably, its aerodynamic characteristics enable it to do so.” ...

Borysyuk explained that the R-60 missiles on the SU-25 ...

“The firing range of the missile is 7.5km. And in those conditions, the probability of hitting the target increases,” he added.

The former chief commander of Russia’s Air Force, Vladimir Mikhailov, also said he flew the SU-25, reaching an altitude of 12,000 meters and even 14,000 meters. He also stated that the plane “comfortably maneuvers” at such heights.

“If the plane was downed by Buk [missile defense system], it would have almost immediately fallen to pieces in the air and we could not have witnessed such large debris on the ground,” he said.

... he also questioned why the MH17 flight stayed within the flying corridor until it reached Donetsk, but then deviated from the route to the north.

In July 2014, Russia’s Ministry of Defense presented military monitoring data which showed Kiev military jets tracking MH17 shortly before the crash and posed a set of questions to Ukraine over the circumstances of the tragedy, which have still not been answered.
‘You can’t fire Buk missile in broad daylight with no witnesses’
https://www.rt.com/news/239881-mh17-...e-fighter-jet/

And the Specs:

Further, its not determined from radar whether the Kiev plane was SU-25 or MIG-29

Now, why is Washington and its cronies suppressing all the evidence? hmmm
Why has Kiev refused to produce its radar records?
Why has Kiev refused to produce its Air Traffic Control recordings?
Why has Washington refused to produce its satellite images?
Why has it taken two years and continuing (look how fast they rushed the 911 "investigation")?
Why did they give veto power to Kiev over any evidence or reports from the Joint Investigative Team?
Why did the investigative team not use the technical information from the BUK manufacturer?
Why has the investigative team not even reviewed the Russian radar recordings?
Why is the investigation shrouded in secrecy?

Now reread the rest below.

[UWDude]

Yes Zippy, 33,000 feet is 10,058 meters.



And the Specs:

Further, its not determined from radar whether the Kiev plane was SU-25 or MIG-29

Now, why is Washington and its cronies suppressing all the evidence? hmmm
Why has Kiev refused to produce its radar records?
Why has Kiev refused to produce its Air Traffic Control recordings?
Why has Washington refused to produce its satellite images?
Why has it taken two years and continuing (look how fast they rushed the 911 "investigation")?
Why did they give veto power to Kiev over any evidence or reports from the Joint Investigative Team?
Why did the investigative team not use the technical information from the BUK manufacturer?
Why has the investigative team not even reviewed the Russian radar recordings?
Why is the investigation shrouded in secrecy?

Now reread the rest below.

Pfft, that specs chart was obviously, somehow hacked by a Russian wiki kid. Zippy says 7000 M is max! I'll take Zippy's word over a fact sheet any day!

[Zippyjuan]

Pfft, that specs chart was obviously, somehow hacked by a Russian wiki kid. Zippy says 7000 M is max! I'll take Zippy's word over a fact sheet any day!

What does that spec sheet say that the maximum altitude of that plane is? I don't read Russian but here is an English page on it by the maker: "Service ceiling: 7 km" (which happens to be 7,000m) http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/military/su25k/lth/

7 km is 23,000 feet or 10,000 feet below the altitude of the plane it supposedly shot down.

Russian propaganda isn't necessarily any better than American propaganda.

[AZJoe]

Kerry Balks at Supplying MH-17 Data
[Because Washington believes the best way to establish the truth is to hide and conceal the evidence]

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/03/2...ng-mh-17-data/

Secretary of State John Kerry has rebuffed a request … to disclose the radar and other data that he cited in 2014 in claiming to know the precise location of the missile launch that allegedly downed the airline …

Despite Kerry’s claim on July 20, 2014 – three days after the shoot-down – to know the location of the missile launch, the Dutch Safety Board reported last October that it could only place the likely launch site within a 320-square-kilometer area that included territory under both government and rebel control. (The safety board did not seek to identify which side fired the fateful missile.)

Why the U.S. government has dragged its heels about supplying the evidence that Kerry claimed to possess … has become a secondary mystery … That Kerry would not even elaborate on that information in response to the father of the lone American victim is even more striking. …

Plus, Kerry’s credibility has come under a darkening cloud because of recent disclosures undermining his repeated claims on Aug. 30, 2013, that “we know” that Syrian government forces were responsible for the Aug. 21, 2013 sarin gas attack … in that case, he presented no verifiable evidence and it has since been confirmed that the U.S. intelligence community lacked “slam dunk” proof. …

Kerry’s MH-17 assertions have shown cracks as more information has become available. For instance, … Western intelligence now says the only functioning Buk anti-aircraft missiles in the area were under the control of the Ukrainian military.

According to Dutch intelligence – and implicitly corroborated by U.S. intelligence – Ukraine’s Buk batteries were the only anti-aircraft missiles in the area capable of hitting a commercial airliner flying at 33,000 feet. … U.S. intelligence, which had eastern Ukraine under intensive overhead surveillance in summer 2014, implicitly corroborated MIVD’s conclusion in a U.S. “Government Assessment” … In other words, based on satellite imagery and other intelligence reviewed both before and after the shoot-down, U.S. and other Western intelligence services could find no proof that Russia had ever given a Buk system to the rebels or introduced one into the area. …

At the time, the Ukrainian military was mounting an offensive against the rebels, … the Ukrainian military moved several Buk anti-aircraft missile batteries toward the front, …

Kerry then added, “… your family, and the families of all the others who died that day deserve such justice, and we will continue to do everything possible to achieve it.” But the “everything” doesn’t apparently include releasing the data that Kerry claimed to have just days after the crash. …

… Kerry appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and declared, “we picked up the imagery of this launch. We know the trajectory. We know where it came from. We know the timing. And it was exactly at the time that this aircraft disappeared from the radar.” … “We saw the take-off. We saw the trajectory. We saw the hit. We saw this aeroplane disappear from the radar screens. So there is really no mystery about where it came from and where these weapons have come from.”

Yet where the missile launch occurred has remained a point of mystery to the Dutch-led investigation. Last October, the Dutch Safety Board put the missile launch in a 320-square-kilometer area. …
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/03/2...ng-mh-17-data/

[Zippyjuan]

Russia released radar data which claimed to show another plane in the area. Only problem is that if the track was accurate, the plane was down around 5,000 meters while the MH- 17 was at 33,000 feet (over 10,000 meters). That and the fact it doesn't show up on the screen until just AFTER the plane was hit. http://www.whathappenedtoflightmh17....hter-aircraft/

Now lets us have a closer look at the radar screen and what the Russians presented. The Russian Ministery of Defense press conference is here. They show the route MH17 had taken. This was proven to be wrong. See my post here titled ‘ Moscow lies about MH17 route‘

Here is another video of the radar screen. And here you will find another video. An this is the YouTube version of the radarrecording.

This is the same video but showing more details.

And this video shows a closeup of the same radar screen zoomed in to MH17

Then they showed a recording of the radar screen. Coincidently the Russian started the video a few moments before MH17 dissapprears from the radar screen. Strangely enhough they do not show that strange curve MH17 made. If the Russians were confident about their statement, why not show it.

Next they claim that immediatelty after the aircraft was loosing speed, another aircraft appeared on the radarscreen. The Russians say aircraft flying below 5000 meters cannot be detected on radar.

So if MH17 was hit by an aircraft the aircraft must have fired at MH17 from an altitude below 5000 meters. MH17 was flying at flightlevel 330 which is 33.000 feet which is 10058 meters.

Around 21:31 in the video the translator explains that the aircraft was initially flying lower than 5000 meters. It is also said that a Ukraine Air Force aircraft appears on the radar at 17 hour 21 minuts 35 seconds. That is 1 minute,32 seconds after the Flight Data Recorder and Cockpit Voice Recorder stopped working according the Dutch Safety Board report.

The radar shows that around 13:20:29 the speed of MH17 drops very fast. This is the moment the aircraft was hit. The time is shown in the righthand side of the screen. The recording of the radar continues till 13:24:58. Then the radar screen freezes while the video continues.

Are you SURE you want the US to release their data?



What happened to Russia claims it was shot down by a surface to air missile- but one not in their area of control? Here they agree it probably was a surface to air missile. The investigators "used wrong interpretations of the data" to determine where it came from.

“The report presented by the Dutch commission uses the calculations by the Almaz-Antey company [the maker of the BUK missile system] on the area of the missile launch, but they are just taken out of context,” Storchevoy said.

“The possible area, indicated in the report, was established basing on the wrong interpretation of the missile-plane encounter,” he added.

https://www.rt.com/news/318628-russi...-dutch-report/

"It was Ukraine's fault for not closing the airspace!"

The agency, however, supports the Dutch comment on Kiev’s responsibility for not closing the airspace over the armed conflict zone before the MH17 catastrophe.

Here again in Russian media they agree it was a surface to air missile -"Just not one of ours!"

https://www.rt.com/news/318613-usa-rebels-mh17-buk/

Despite a 15-month-long Dutch-led probe not definitively concluding who fired the BUK surface-to-air missile or the precise location from which it originated, the US continues to pursue its “belief” that it was east Ukrainian rebels who downed flight MH17.

Even the missile maker said "yes, it was one of our missiles".

The Russian arms manufacturer determined that the missile had been an older BUK model, 9M38, fired from an area under the control of Ukrainian forces, thereby contesting the preliminary findings of the Dutch-led investigation.

[AZJoe]

OMG how many logical fallacies can be squeezed into one post. Such irrational acrobatic arguments in steadfast defense of the neocon Department of State Propaganda.

The responses are so selective. Ignoring so much, and still never even attempting to explain some of the most important questions posed.

• Why is Washington and its cronies suppressing all the evidence? hmmm
• Why has Kiev refused to produce its radar records?
• Why has Kiev refused to produce its Air Traffic Control recordings?
• Why has Washington refused to produce its satellite images?
• Why has it taken two years and continuing (look how fast they rushed the 911 "investigation")?
• Why did they give veto power to Kiev over any evidence or reports from the Joint Investigative Team?
• Why did the investigative team not use the technical information from the BUK manufacturer?
• Why has the investigative team not even reviewed the Russian radar recordings?
• Why were the 4 countries involved in the investigation required to sign an agreement giving Kiev veto power over release of nay evidence and any reports.
• Despite being a Malaysian airline, why was Malaysia locked out of participation in the investigation for months, and only reluctantly permitted to participated after the 4 JIT nations had locked away the evidence and only after Malasia also signed onto the agreement granting Kiev veto power over the investigation results and evidence?
• Why did Kiev reroute the plane to fly over a combat zone?
• Why did Kiev require the plane to drop its altitude to 33,000 feet?
• Why is the investigation shrouded in secrecy?

I don’t profess to know what happened, but we do know that Washington and the Western “investigators” are certainly not being forthright. We know they are concealing highly relevant evidence (black box data, radar records, ATC records and recordings, satellite images). We know they made conclusions immediately prior to any investigation and pressed that accusation hard and continuously on a 24/7 basis immediately following the event. We know Washington admitted its conclusions were drawn heavily based upon “social media”. We know the western media went massively silent at a certain point. We know they have selectively revealed limited pieces of evidence.

Z defends hiding the evidence. Of course hide the evidence because that helps us all determine the truth – riggghhht. We should believe the folks that are intentionally concealing the evidence. “We don’t need to reveal the evidence” – right. Yes, that inspires so much confidence in their explanation. Because openness and transparency, evidence and proof is not the way to inspire confidence and serve the interests of the victims and their families.

Washington claims it has satellite images showing the missile launch and the exact time and location. However they refuse to release this concrete evidence. But they are sure a BUK missile was fired by rebels from rebel territory. Of course it makes perfect logical sense. And it is because the evidence is so solid that Washington must continue to conceal it.

Yes a BUK missile that would leave a missile exhaust trail visible for 50 km radius that would linger well after the shoot-down. Reason dictates that there would be hundreds of photographs as well as video of this missile launch trail. Yet not only not a single photograph, but not a single soul alleges to have seen the missile launch or its exhaust trail. It must be the invisible missile and missile exhaust. Of course it makes more perfect sense. Zippy’s theory must be correct. There cannot possibly be any other alternative whatsoever, regardless of any evidence.

Buk missile trails.


Buk missile launch video

We know that multiple journalists, and the BBC in particular documented scores of eyewitnesses immediately after the event all stating another plane was with MH17 at the time of the shoot down. We also know that the BBC pulled those videos within a couple of days, but not before many people downloaded them to keep them available. Of course all those witnesses are to be ignored. No need to even consider the eyewitnesses. Washington already said it was a BUK missile and that must be true, and no evidence need be presented.

Yes Kiev routed the civilian plane of the planned course and directly over a combat zone while instructing it to lower altitude to below 10,100 meters. Yes, of course there is no negligence there at all. A perfectly responsible thing to do. Absolutely no negligence on the part of Kiev. No fault there.

We also know that well prior to the shoot-down, Kiev was accused of routing civilian aircraft over the combat zone to use as cover so its fighters could fly beneath them.

We know that to this date Kiev hides it radar records. Kiev hides it Air Traffic Control records and recordings. In fact, Kiev claims conveniently that none of its civilian or military primary or secondary radar is available because they had switched off the military radar at that particular time, and they had also switched off civil primary radar for maintenance at that particular time. How conveeeenient for Kiev. This all at a time when Kiev was directly controlling multiple aircraft simultaneously. This explanation doesn’t pass the straight face test.

And of course, Washington continues to hide its Satellite images that it claims proves everything beyond any doubt per Kerry. All this alleged secret evidence that can put to rest any questions, must perpetually remain hidden. Yes, Z is correct. The conclusions must be made from evidence no one is allowed to see.

Of course Zippy cites an article that not only claims the Russian radar images show no fighter plane at all, but the fighter plane it does show was not in the vicinity of MH17. Wow – how’s that for logic? But hey, this radar record is from Russia and therefore it cannot be considered and we must accept what is kept hidden instead. The article Zippy quotes alleges that the radar readings are debris from the plane. However the radar recording shows that the “debris” remained in the air patrolling for a full 20 minutes in the area. That’s some pretty special debris. Perhaps the radar is inconclusive, but it is nevertheless the only radar documentation produced at all. There are no other radar records to dispute it.

There is also some evidence that controverts both Washington’s theory and the jet shoot down. For instance Kiev had moved multiple Buk systems to the eastern front just prior July 17. Kupol-M1 radars (that provide target detection for Buks The number of stations active grew from 7 to 9 from July 15 to 17, then dropped to 4 on July 18 and then to 2 on July 19. This would implicate that if it was a BUK (which currently I am finding to be less likely), then it was operated by Kiev forces. What is also curious is that given the Donbass fighters have no aircraft at all, why was Kiev deploying these anti-aircraft weapons? These are legitimate questions for proper and open investigation, but refusing to release evidence and refusing to investigate these issues is not the answer. If the evidence is so solid, why is Washington doing everything that looks like an attempt to cover up?

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, regardless of accident or intentional, who or how the MH17 was brought down, there never would have been a civil war faction and there would be no shooting down of the MH17 if the US government had not funded a coup overthrowing the Ukraine government in the first place.

More: http://www.globalresearch.ca/mh-17-t...stions/5465618
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cra...-later/5462671

[luctor-et-emergo]

The only question I have is;

Qui bono ?

Certainly if the 'rebels' fired on the aircraft, it was an accident, as I see no reason why firing at a civilian airliner would do any good for their cause. I don't think they are stupid enough to not realize that. I think it's highly unlikely they shot down MH17 on purpose.

[UWDude]

What does that spec sheet say that the maximum altitude of that plane is? I don't read Russian but here is an English page on it by the maker: "Service ceiling: 7 km" (which happens to be 7,000m) http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/planes/military/su25k/lth/

7 km is 23,000 feet or 10,000 feet below the altitude of the plane it supposedly shot down.

Russian propaganda isn't necessarily any better than American propaganda.

потолок = ceiling.

7000 to 10000M

You lose, again, loser.

Hacked, Zip, right zip!? Hacked by a russian hacker, zip!

We know they made conclusions immediately prior to any investigation and pressed that accusation hard and continuously on a 24/7 basis immediately following the event.

This is all you really need to know. An hour after the plane was shot down the US was already condemning Russia for it. Of course Zippy is just another stupid american cow who believes first, accepts lies later.

[Danke]

Two years ago today, on July 17, 2014, 298 civilians from 11 countries perished when Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot down over eastern Ukraine.

The Dutch Safety Board concluded in its October 2015 final report that MH17, traveling from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was hit by a Buk surface-to-air missile fired from territory controlled by Russian-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine.

" No scenario other than a Buk surface-to-air missile can explain this combination of facts," the report said.

http://www.businessinsider.com/anima...ahoo?r=UK&IR=T

[pcosmar]

Commie propaganda.

Not likely,, for several reasons.

But I do wonder if the Ukrainian Nazis let McCain fly a plane again.

[AngryCanadian]

The only question I have is;

Qui bono ?

Certainly if the 'rebels' fired on the aircraft, it was an accident, as I see no reason why firing at a civilian airliner would do any good for their cause. I don't think they are stupid enough to not realize that. I think it's highly unlikely they shot down MH17 on purpose.

Indeed and who has benefited the downing of MH17? the Ukrankian gov.