Five years ago, on July 17, 2014, a Malaysian Boeing with 298 passengers on board was shot down in the skies over Donbass by a surface-to-air missile. All of them, including 80 children, died in the air from barotrauma and very low temperatures due to instantaneous depressurization. In the bodies of the pilots, destructive elements were found - I-beams - shaped like a bow tie, with which the warhead of the Buk air defense missile begins.
Photo: Zinaida Burskaya / Novaya Gazeta
Data. Instead of an An-26 transport aircraft, a civilian airliner was shot down
The missile was fired at a civilian aircraft from the village of Pervomaiskoye (outskirts of the city of Snezhnoye). The Buk anti-aircraft complex, as later international investigators (JIT), was delivered to the conflict zone from Russian territory and handed over to representatives of the “DPR”. The external features of the Buk air defense system, which fired at MH17 from Pervomaisky, are identical to the 332 anti-aircraft complex from the Kursk 53rd Air Defense Brigade of the Russian Federation; as Novaya found out, representatives of this military unit were on the Russian-Ukrainian border in July 2014.
How the weapons of the Russian army ended up on the territory of a neighboring state, and who authorized their transfer, remains to be seen. But one way or another, it was during that period that the separatist forces in the Donbass experienced an urgent need for air defense systems. Ukrainian aviation actively transferred troops to the rear of the separatists, threatening to cut them off from the Russian border and, accordingly, cut off all types of assistance that went to the “DPR” and “LPR” from the Rostov region.
Eliminating the air threat became a matter of survival for the separatists, who could not reach ships flying at high altitude with conventional portable anti-aircraft systems.
In early summer 2014, in particular, the “head of the Ministry of Defense” of the “DPR” Igor Strelkov-Girkin spoke about this, turning to the head of the annexed Crimea Sergei Aksenov for help.
“If there is no large-scale assistance in the near future, we will be crushed,” Strelkov-Girkin tells him. “If the issue of Russian help is not resolved, with air cover at least, with artillery support, then we will not be able to hold the southeast. We need anti-tank artillery, we need tanks, we need normal air defense. We can no longer do without PZR, and all this is needed with specialists who are already ready. We won’t have time to cook them [ourselves] anymore...”
“I understand, Igor,” says Aksenov. “There [in Russia] they are preparing documents...”
The situation changes by mid-July; the calls of the “Head of the Ministry of Defense” Strelkov-Girkin are probably heard.
On July 14, 2014, the separatists manage to shoot down a military transport An-26 of the Ukrainian Air Force; the board flies at an altitude of more than 6000 meters, which is only accessible to long-range air defense systems like the Buk.
On the morning of July 17, 2014, representatives of the “DPR” receive information about the departure of the next An-26 transport aircraft. The DPR air defenses are attacking a flying object from the outskirts of Snizhne, which was almost immediately reported by official Russian media. Strelkov-Girkin writes about the “continuing bird fall.” In intercepted telephone conversations between the “militia” about the downed An-26.
Only upon arriving at the scene of the plane crash do the separatists realize that a civilian airliner has been shot down.
Fakes. It was not the “militia” that was shot down, but a Ukrainian plane
From the very first day after the tragedy, the Russian authorities declared that the “DPR” and “LPR” forces were not involved in the attack on the Boeing passenger plane, not to mention their own role. In this regard, the denial of responsibility became one of the reasons for the introduction of sectoral EU sanctions against Russia. And perhaps the denial of responsibility is the only constant point in Moscow’s sprawling, at first glance confusing and constantly changing line in the case of the death of MH17.
Moscow built its line with the help of not only official speakers, but also controlled media, through which alternative versions of the crash were broadcast. In the first year after the MH17 tragedy, pro-government media were the main source of versification and disinformation.
Propaganda circulated several fakes at once, the most famous of which was the legend about a Ukrainian military plane that attacked a Boeing.
To support this version, pro-government media always used data that turned out to be completely falsified or incomplete.
The source of the main fake in the first months after the crash turned out to be the Russian Ministry of Defense. At a press conference on July 21, 2014, the military stated that a Ukrainian plane was near MH17 at the time of the crash, which was allegedly confirmed by data from Russian radars (two years later, the military would refute its conclusion by presenting other data). Thus appears the story of the Su-25 under the control of Captain Voloshin. Komsomolskaya Pravda wrote about Captain Voloshin with reference to an anonymous mechanic from Dnepropetrovsk. Returning with empty ammunition, the upset captain Voloshin allegedly told his mechanic: “The plane is not the same.” Later, the RF IC stated that it had checked the information and trusted the testimony of an anonymous witness. However, Su-25 designer Vladimir Babak explained that the attack aircraft does not have weapons that could be used to shoot down a large airliner, and its maximum flight altitude is 7 km, while MH17 was at an altitude of 10 km.
The life of the Su-25 fake was extended by a tweet from a “Spanish dispatcher” who allegedly worked at the Kiev Boryspil airport: a user under the nickname spainbuca wrote that a few minutes before the tragedy he saw two Ukrainian military aircraft on the radar near MH17. Later it turned out that under the guise of a “Spanish dispatcher”, posts on Twitter were posted by Jose Carlos Barrios Sanchez, who was wanted on suspicion of forgery, and had nothing to do with aviation; The fake dispatcher said that he wrote posts on social networks for money that the Russia Today TV channel paid him.
Finally, the author of Channel One and the current press secretary of Rosneft, Mikhail Leontyev, contributed to the spread of disinformation. At the end of 2014, Leontiev broadcast a black-and-white supposedly satellite image that captured the movement of a missile fired at a Boeing by a Ukrainian military aircraft.
This time, thanks to the low quality of the fake, even Twitter and LiveJournal users were able to uncover the falsification.
While propaganda was inventing new confusing versions (for example, that instead of the Boeing, the target of the Ukrainian Air Force was Air Force One carrying Putin), the official investigation in the Netherlands was collecting evidence and testimony. In October 2015, the Dutch Safety Board announced that a Buk missile fired at the plane from the outskirts of Snizhne was the sole cause of the downing of MH17. At the same time, it became known that the Council turned for help to the Russian side, and in particular to the manufacturer of the Buk, the Almaz-Antey state corporation.
With the coordination of the Netherlands, an international criminal investigation began, which was supposed to answer questions about how the Buk ended up in the hands of the separatists, who was in the crew and, finally, who gave the orders to move the installation and open fire.
Experts from an international investigative team at a conference for journalists. Netherlands. Photo: Pavel Kanygin / Novaya Gazeta Fakes. Shot down a Buk, but it was Ukrainian
They began to work on their own “official version” in Russia, having understood where the Dutch investigation was going.
It became obvious: fakes broadcast even on federal channels can no longer compete with the factual material and calculations presented.
By the summer of 2015, the “Russian version” was entirely built by the Almaz-Antey state concern. It was that the Malaysian Boeing 777 was indeed attacked by a Buk, but not a Russian one, but a Ukrainian one - from the village of Zaroshchenskoye, allegedly controlled by the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
But the conclusions of Almaz-Antey contradicted the real state of affairs in Zaroshchenskoye. In its investigation dated June 8, 2015, Novaya Gazeta wrote about the residents of Zaroshchenskoye, who stated that on July 17 and earlier there were no Ukrainian military in the village and its environs, and in the fields around it there were no traces of the movement of equipment - from the wheels or tracks of the air defense system. Moreover, there was a “DPR” checkpoint in Zaroshchenske. Almaz-Antey’s conclusions were later refuted by independent experts Bellingcat.
Nevertheless, to confirm their words, the engineers of the state concern conducted a “full-scale experiment”, during which they twice exploded a Buk complex missile at a test site in Nizhny Novgorod: in the first case, simulating a shot at a Boeing from Zaroshchensky using props, in the second - from the side of Snezhny, in this case the missile attacked the hull of a decommissioned Il-86 aircraft on the ground.
The engineers also presented supercomputer calculations, which confirmed the Russian state concern’s version of the rocket launch point from Zaroshchenskoye, calculating it “out of all possible 14 million options.” One of the main arguments of Almaz-Antey, which insists on launching a Buk from Zaroshchensky, is the pattern of the missile’s destructive elements scattering on the aircraft body. The State Concern states that when a rocket explodes, fragments fly strictly perpendicular to the direction of its flight, “cutting” the target of attack like a scalpel. This means that in the event of a rocket launch from Snezhny (it was moving towards MH17), the fragments should have “pierced” the cockpit across, but they, according to Almaz-Antey, “pierced” the Boeing 777 cockpit exclusively “along” .
At the same time, when launching a rocket from Zaroshchenskoye, according to the conclusions of engineers and a full-scale experiment, the dispersion of destructive elements looks exactly like on the body of a Malaysian Boeing 777.
However, both the Dutch and Russian experts doubted the reliability of the Almaz-Antey full-scale experiment, pointing out gross errors and excessive assumptions during its implementation. For example, one of the main mistakes, as aviation expert Vadim Lukashevech told Novaya, is that
The state concern, when simulating the conditions of a shot from Zaroshchensky, used for unknown reasons the technical characteristics of the Boeing 767 (the diameter of its fuselage is 5 m instead of 6.2, like that of the Boeing 777).
At the same time, the wind direction was incorrectly calculated (according to A.A., the wind was blowing from the northeast, although in fact it was from the southwest), the azimuth of the missile’s approach was confused with the true magnetic course. In general, the flight conditions at an altitude of 10,000 meters of two objects moving towards each other at high speed are not taken into account. But what is most remarkable is that in the calculations and experiments of the state concern, the direction of movement of MH17 turned out to be deviated to the right by 8.26 degrees in the horizontal plane, which automatically shifted the desired missile launch area to the west - towards Zaroshchensky.
Infographics: Anna Zhavoronkova / Novaya Gazeta Also, according to Lukashevich, the decision to use the Il-86 body for the second explosion turned out to be erroneous in order to establish the truth: it is distinguished from the Boeing 777 by the contour of its nose, which is of critical importance. Finally, Lukashevich notes that the missile’s destructive elements “pierced” the cockpit really “across” (that is, perpendicular to the movement of the missile), this is evidenced by the elements demonstrated by the Dutch - the upper panel of the cockpit trim, the co-pilot’s seat, the end part of the right wing. Almaz-Antey ignored these details in its research. (Lukashevich wrote more about this in his material for the Dutch publication NRC Handelsblad and Forbes magazine.) Thus, it turns out that the state concern, again, either consciously or by mistake, put forward a thesis that does not correspond to reality as a justification for the wrongness of the Dutch.
It should be noted that the works of Almaz-Antey workers have hardly been mentioned in recent years either by propaganda or by officials. Which is not surprising: such complex work with calculations and expensive experiments ended in complete debunking.
However, the version of the “Ukrainian Buk” continues to live, but it is supported by new stuffing, less expensive to produce, but at the same time difficult to verify.
For example, here is another point that is used to justify the version with the Ukrainian Buk - "new data" from the Utes-T radar in Rostov. The Russian Ministry of Defense announced their existence at a special presentation only in the fall of 2016;
Based on “new data”, there were no combat aircraft near MH17, although the military had previously claimed the opposite.
At the same time, the radar did not detect the missile’s departure from the outskirts of Snezhnoye. But could “new radar data” have seen the missile take off from Zaroshchensky? “No,” said VKS Major General Andrei Koban:
“The technical capabilities of Russian means of objective control do not allow us to conclude whether the missile was launched from territories located south or west of the point of the disaster.”
An amazing situation arose - data from the radar that suddenly came out of nowhere could only record a state of affairs favorable to the Russian side - one that does not give a complete picture of the event, but only refutes a fact proven by international investigation.
Despite the fact that the military, without blinking, refuted their own conclusions from July 2014 and completely deprived the competent public of illusions about trust in themselves, the main goal was still achieved. “New data” allowed Moscow to again question the conclusions of the international JIT investigation in the public space. Repetitive questions about radars, as if copied from one thread, have since then been asked by employees of pro-government media at every public event dedicated to MH17. And when they are not answered, official speakers in Moscow talk about unwillingness to cooperate, double standards, the West’s attempt to shift all the blame to Russia and, finally, Russophobia.
In this context, it is worth taking a look at one more – so far the last – piece of “new information” from the official Russian side; it arrived in September 2018. At the next presentation at the Russian Ministry of Defense, they showed documents indicating the Ukrainian origin of the missile from the Buk launcher - according to the papers of the Ministry of Defense, back in the late 80s, a missile with engine serial number 9032 was delivered to a military unit in the Ukrainian Ternopil.
Let us recall that in May 2018 the Dutch with serial number 9032 stated that it may be important evidence.
Members of the international investigative team presented journalists with evidence containing the serial number. Photo: Pavel Kanygin / Novaya Gazeta (It should be noted that the Buk air defense missile system does not collide with the target of attack, but explodes in the immediate vicinity of it, throwing out destructive elements perpendicular to its axis. In this case, the missile body, its wings, engine, and so on become secondary destructive elements.)
According to Novaya, the engine came into possession of JIT thanks to the mediation of unknown persons from the DPR, who asked for a fee for the find.
Novaya's source called the amount several tens of thousands of dollars.
updated
However, the editors do not know whether this request was fulfilled.
One way or another, the authenticity of this material evidence and the true motives of the “intermediaries” are today the only unclear issue in the MH17 case. According to JIT head Fred Westerbeke, international experts are still studying data on the missile.
Silence of the officers
Throwing in confusing information and discrediting the international investigation - all this has become the corporate style of the Russian authorities in everything related to the MH17 tragedy. For each new JIT certificate, Moscow presents its own - confirmed by papers, statements of officials and “objective data”.
In response to the evidence base consistently built according to all the canons of criminology, the Russian authorities respond with consistent trolling in the media space.
As they say, a spoon is dear to dinner.
These are like precise time signals:
For those who do not understand about November 1, we repeat:
November 4, 2015
TASS
14:29
Media: there were about 50 people on board the An-12 with a Russian crew that crashed in South Sudan.
***
November 1, 2015
Crash over Sinai of a plane with Russian passengers (more than 220 people,
reported that everyone was killed) flying to St. Petersburg, Egypt. Plane crashes, most often - and this is easy to see by analyzing the situation around such events around the world over the last 10 years at least - occur as planned!!!
1. against the background of information hunger, when there is nothing to fill the media with
2. on the eve of events for which it is necessary to prepare the public consciousness (suppress self-control, unite on the most base principle - a great disaster unites the people best of all),
3. respond to someone’s demarche
4. as a training for disaster medicine workers
5. organ harvesting, where would we be without it?
A lot of things are confusing today:
1. a hasty statement that not a single person survived, and this was long before all the bodies were found (search radius 15 sq. km).
2. statement on the day of the disaster from Egypt that 4 people survived and they are in the hospital
3. presentation of information to the media: a lot of tears, close-ups of the crying faces of relatives, pitiful stories about the fate of the dead... But without this, don’t you feel sorry for people? Or is it just nice to pick at an open wound? Or is the goal to create general fear?
4. reluctance to admit the obvious; everything will again be attributed to circumstances or accident. After all, admitting the truth will force an adequate answer, but no one wants to answer on the merits, so they are cowardly and hide their heads under their wings, and hastily pour out the grief of their relatives and friends with money, which also creates a reason for reflection (in the USA there were many cases when a poor person, in despair another way to provide for his family, he insured his life for a large sum and blew up the plane).
5. The moral in all this seems to be this: do whatever you want with us, and we will still be your friends - just let us into the world pie, give us control of at least a piece of the globe..
***
July 13, 2015
Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Ukraine call on members of the UN Security Council to support the proposal to create an international tribunal for the tragedy of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, which crashed in July 2014 in eastern Ukraine, the Belgian Foreign Ministry press service reported on July 12, 2015.
BUT if this tribunal is as biased as those who conducted the official investigation, then there will be no sense in it; those who are directly suspected of involvement in organizing the crash of the Boeing cannot be part of the tribunal. Why is the USA, for example, or France not there? Let's not even talk about Russia. Because these countries have significant evidence that in reality everything was different from what Ukraine and the Netherlands say.
****
Families of the dead Germans are suing Poroshenko, accusing him of involvement in the death of their relatives during the Boeing crash on July 17. And that’s right - he is guilty simply because he did everything. in order to cover up the traces of the crime and interfere with the investigation in every possible way (meaning, of course, the collective Poroshenko).
Y. Latynina stated
14.09.2014
that we live in a time of secular religions, and that the sect of supporters that Putin blew up houses is as crazy as the sect of supporters that “ukry” blew up a Boeing // TRUE!! There are few adequate people there.
BOEING actually KILLED NATO, BUT ONLY FIRST IT WAS UNDERFUELED IN THE NETHERLANDS,
IN ADDITION, THEY DILUTED THE KEROSENE WITH WATER.
BUT everything is in order.
***
A Malaysian Boeing 777 just crashed into Ukraine, killing all passengers, more than 200 people. The plane began to lose altitude from h=10 thousand m. It should be noted that this is a convenient altitude at which planes are shot down. This happened at a distance of 50 km from the Russian border. The plane from Copenhagen, according to the plan, was supposed to crash, most likely, on Russian territory. But we missed the mark a little, warriors.
Larisa Mironova 07.17.2014 17:44
When 4 Oct. In 2001, TU 154 of the SIBERIA company fell into the Black Sea, it was officially decided that it was Ukrainian. Air defense during training shooting ranges shot down a plane flying to Israel. But according to independent investigations, including mine, the fall from a height of about 11 km occurred due to external damage to the plane’s wing. The wing was literally riddled with shrapnel, and the death of the Tu 154 passengers occurred from a baroaccident while still in the air, which would be unlikely , if the plane was shot down by Ukrainian. rocket.
However, even now the official version remains the same. There is a suspicion that the Boeing 777 on July 17, 2014 was deliberately shot down over the specified territory, 50 km before entering Russian airspace, and this was done, most likely, from Europe. Actually, everything will become clear when the wreckage of the plane is studied, their relative position, and the crash site is examined.
Larisa Mironova 07.17.2014 20:16
The fact that the Boeing 777 suddenly began to wobble and lose altitude from about 10 km may indicate that failures in the cyber control system began and the automation began to malfunction. As a result, the fall occurred. The plane did not burn in the air; there is no such data yet. And this would be visible from a great distance. This means that the reason could be a lack of fuel in the tanks, underfilling of kerosene or more water than permissible, as well as faulty control devices - this could lead to a sudden shutdown of the engines and a forced decrease in altitude.
However, it could also be this: the decrease in altitude did not occur as a result of the Boeing 777 being fired upon by a missile, but because in the last minutes of the flight both engines suddenly stopped, and the Boeing 777 began to descend due to the fact that the supply of fuel was limited - !! !due to ice accumulation in the fuel system!!! The ice could have formed from water, which is always present in the fuel, during a long stay of the aircraft in conditions of low temperature (at 11 km altitude) of the outside air during flight. I repeat, there could have been more water than possible. (The water content in jet fuels reaches 0.008 - 0.010% of the total mass of the fuel).
Water - as an option or as an alternative to underfilling fuel. Economic calculation - they wanted to save on fuel. Or they used fuel that was not sufficiently purified from water. Intentional or unintentional?
Larisa Mironova 07.17.2014 20:23
Euronews outlined two versions of the Boeing 777 crash:
1. with reference to Potroshenko, they say that the pro-Russian forces recently seized from them (the Ukrainian Armed Forces) equipment in working condition, with which they shot down a Boeing (this is nonsense, because the equipment abandoned by the Ukrainians was disabled in advance, about which the Ukrainian military themselves stated, i.e. it was a prepared conscious provocation on the part of Kyiv)
2. Ukrainian military aircraft Su27 attack aircraft (less suited for hitting ground targets than the SU-25, but quite suitable for this operation, however, there is no exact data - which, the 25th or 27th Su were involved) accompanied the Boeing and attacked it in air, this is the version of the DPR militia with reference to eyewitnesses - local residents. Some saw two attack aircraft accompanying the Boeing 777. They also saw the moment the plane attacked and the fall of the passenger plane, and then the fall of the Ukrainian SU-27 attack aircraft. There is already a video recording of the moment of the fall, before that a characteristic noise is heard - an attack on the Boeing by an attack aircraft. The Boeing, it was clear, no longer had a wing when it flew over the territory controlled by the DPR.
However, an airplane can lose a wing on its own due to a sudden loss of speed, because The aerodynamics of the wing are such that at low speeds it loses its ability to resist, so low speeds are extremely undesirable, and here, from the moment the altitude was reduced, the Boeing actually began planning.
There are no burn marks on the bodies of the passengers, there are also clean books and documents, personal belongings of the passengers, which means there was no fire inside the plane, but the destruction of the plane occurred while still in the air, the scattering area of debris and bodies is too large. When the smoking debris fell to the ground, the grass naturally caught fire, and from it, parts of the aircraft. The scatter of bodies and debris is large - only one hundred bodies have been found at the main crash site so far, but there should be about 300.
I watch Potroshenko’s interview with Western media - he indiscriminately accuses the “seperatists”, it’s clear from his face that he is lying, although he is very nervous.
The black boxes seem to have been found, which means we are closer to the truth. But those who found them don’t even know what they should look like. Possibly a mistake. We found something else.
Still, I am inclined to a complex two-stage or even three-stage terrorist attack - first, the control system was disabled, because of which the plane began to lose altitude and wobble, then, immediately before the crash site, the engine and/or another part of the plane, possibly from the accompanying Boeing, was damaged 777 attack aircraft or from ground devices.
The West urgently convenes the UN Security Council on the issue of this tragedy - of course, they will unanimously blame the militias. And this is even before receiving the conclusion of the commission on deciphering the black boxes! And Potroshenko, from the very first minutes after the disaster, demands that NATO immediately begin a ground operation in the southeast. Biden himself decided to join the investigation, so the results will have a deliberately incriminating bias towards the militias, this has already been stated in advance. But at least Biden knows geography, doesn’t confuse Iraq with Iran, and distinguishes Slovenia from Slovakia. He also knows that Georgia, with its capital Tbilisi, is not a continental US state. And this is encouraging.
Potroshenko demands and demands that NATO immediately begin a ground operation against the DPR and LPR! It will turn out like in Iraq - first they executed Saddam for weapons of mass destruction, and then they did not find these very weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. But millions of Iraqis did. This is the price of the total madness that has struck the minds of Western politicians.
Larisa Mironova 07/17/2014 23:51
What is happening now at the Security Council is beyond good and evil.
Now there should be no doubt whose job it is. I didn’t think that the West would substitute itself so primitively. Today is the last calendar day of this world order.
On June 17, 2014, a dirty, cheap adventure put an end to the history of the destruction of the old world. I strongly suspect that we will also have to return to the story of the downing of the SIBIR company TU-154, flying to Israel, on October 4, 2001 over the Black Sea. And to the crash of a Polish plane near Smolensk. There is some connection here. Then, in 2001, Ukraine began to turn away from the gates of Russia towards the West; this was still under Kuchma. Defense Minister Kuzmuk resigned, he was very offended, but you can’t argue against the president. What actually happened, no one knows yet. But this was also dirty work, and not at all a “blunder” (?!) of the Ukrainian riflemen. Thank God, Kuzmuk is alive and he knows a lot. Let's ask him. But Kuchma was taught how to say it, and he said it. And everyone is still repeating this “fool”.
***
Premature announcement of the culprit in the downing of the Malaysian airliner
BOEING 777 - they say, this was done, as they put it, by “southeastern separatists and Russia”, which in itself is significant. Although, according to all the data available at this time, the criminal adventure was organized precisely by Kiev with the full support and according to the plan of the West. Now it's obvious. We must stop making excuses before the UN Security Council and begin an offensive on the propaganda front. Now we need to conduct a thorough investigation with a full base of evidence, inviting Malaysia, the Netherlands and representatives of all interested countries to participate in it. And the best place to conduct this investigation is in Moscow. Openly, under video camera, and shown in the media. Time to go on a propaganda offensive. Enough with the cohabitation. Now this is a surprisingly advantageous situation for Russia to turn the tide of events - paranoia is incurable, they do not negotiate with the paranoid, their status is diagnosed and they are isolated in the international arena. I mean the Western political establishment of 2014 and, of course, the Kyiv junta.
And let's put things in order in Russia already! Without this it will be difficult to move on. “Collective Putin” is mired in the liberal swamp up to his head. And all of Russia is being drawn into this swamp.
Larisa Mironova 07/18/2014 19:40
We need to quickly identify the bodies and be sure to record the coordinates where each body was taken from. This will be important for determining from what places these passengers fell, so it is possible to determine how the plane fell apart, and where other debris flew away; the fact that many bodies have not yet been found may indicate that part of the plane, perhaps. the tail or side fell earlier, because the Boeing 777 was already flying over the territory of the DPR without a wing. It is also necessary, without touching the object, to take a photo of where the remains and wreckage of the aircraft are located; perhaps the tail or one wing fell earlier, and the search radius will be larger.
3rd option, fantastic: some of the passengers and crew ejected, but died during the fall. Perhaps it was a lake. But, if they fell on the territory of Ukraine or Poland, then the traces could have already been cleared. It is necessary to include an inspection of the area directly from the point where the Boeing wobbles along the trajectory. This is approximately 150-250 km northwest of the crash site or even earlier.
However, by the way they lie, you can also understand something about the truth.
***
So, what are Kyiv politicians so hastily and aggressively mythologizing about:
1. That the militias do not allow a commission from Malaysia to visit the accident site, so the Malaysians sit in Kyiv for three days, and the bodies of the dead decompose in the heat. - This means that the junta is deliberately delaying time, does not want an investigation, is afraid of it.
2. They have also already convinced the Netherlands that the militias are dragging bodies and aircraft parts from place to place, i.e. actively changing the pattern of scattering of debris and bodies - sign. The junta is aware that the plane was falling apart in parts, first one part fell, then, at a considerable distance, another, which is why they deliberately reduced the expected radius of scattering of bodies and search - to 6-9 km. That is why they needed a version that the militia had already hidden some of the bodies (they do not admit how many bodies there are actually in the refrigerators, and where some of the debris is)
.
3. In fact, the bodies and debris may be (or were) on Ukrainian (from the Polish side) or even on Polish territory itself, and not just on the territory of the DPR controlled by the militia. It was from there that these bodies were dragged to the territory of Novorossiya. (It's pink on the map.)
We need to start the search from the place where the trajectory began to decline, and this was 250 km from the crash site. It is obvious that we must keep in mind that on Ukrainian or Polish territory all traces of bodies and debris could have already been swept away. But we still need to check, there will still be some traces of debris and bodies there. Service dogs must be used.
In the meantime, there are still many misunderstandings and outright speculation.
However, the Kiev junta still stupidly claims that the Boeing 777 was shot down by militias, citing reports that they had air defense systems half an hour before the tragedy. Experts say that the militia does not have such weapons - the Ukrainian side itself stated that they “fell into the hands of rubbish.” Nevertheless...
Since July 17, after the first report of the Boeing 777 crash, official Kyiv has been calling on NATO to immediately destroy Novorossiya. Experts of all stripes are intensely sifting through versions of the tragedy that claimed the lives of almost 300 innocent foreign citizens.
The version about the seizure and use of Ukrainian Buk missile systems by militias, which was replicated with unprecedented tenacity by the Ukrainian media, as well as by Euronews and other Western media, was personally denied by the Prosecutor General of Ukraine Vitaly Yarema. As Ukrayinska Pravda reports, he reported this to Petro Potroshenko immediately after the crash of the Boeing 777 plane.
After the passenger plane was shot down, the military reported to the president that the terrorists did not have their Buk and S-300 missile systems. The army did not capture these weapons!!!
Thus, the words of Advisor to the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Anton Gerashchenko, who stated that the plane was shot down by the militia with a Buk missile system, as well as the words of Potroshenko, who blamed the plane crash on the militia, were refuted. Nevertheless, all this misinformation is still circulating in the media, no longer as the main version, but as a working version. And the European media publishes articles under a large headline:
"Putin killed 300 Europeans."
Never known for their speed of work, the Ukrainian media, exactly five minutes after the disaster, immediately issued massive messages that could not be written in 20 minutes, much less thought about or investigated in that time. Even I can't always think that fast. The immediate filling of the information field with detailed analytical materials suggests that the Ukrainian media were prepared in advance for hasty and uncontested coverage of the disaster with an accusatory bias towards the militias and Russia.
This version is also supported by the prompt dissemination of fake negotiations between the “militia” about the downed Boeing, as well as a fake video in which supposedly “pro-Russian” forces are ferrying a Buk from Russia and then back with one fired missile... “Evidence” instantly spread throughout the blogosphere , blogger gmorder was one of the first to publish them.
We look at the creation date 2014-07-16 19:10:24.
There is no way to change this date, July 16, 2014, unless you re-upload the same video with a more recent date.
It is also noteworthy that, unlike most other airlines, the route of the Malaysian Boeing 777 flight did not go around the conflict zone, but flew directly over it. At the same time, the route trajectory of the same flight previously ran significantly to the west, as can be seen on the map. According to reports from a Spanish dispatcher working at the Ukrainian Boryspil airport, the flight of a Malaysian Boeing 777 was accompanied by two Ukrainian fighters. Some eyewitnesses of the Boeing crash also saw two planes in the sky next to the Boeing 777. In the video posted online, only one plane is visible, going to altitude, at the very moment when the Boeing flies to the ground in clouds of black smoke (which usually happens when an engine is damaged). At the point where the Boeing contacts the ground, a mushroom rises, “the cap consists of three prominences of different shapes. This information is confirmed by many sources. Experts believe that the flight path could have been significantly adjusted.
***
Having analyzed the latest events in the international political arena, we come to the following conclusions:
The logical chain that resulted in the deaths of almost 300 passengers on the Malaysian plane becomes apparent. Let us remember what the situation was in the world the day before. On July 15, it became known that nine European countries intend to block the introduction of sanctions against Russia by the EU. Already on July 16, the United States, bypassing the European Union, unilaterally tightened sanctions against Russia.
The next day, July 17, a Malaysian Boeing crashes over Donbass. And they blame pro-Russian militias and Russia, as usual. And they demand an immediate ceasefire - from the militias, of course, because there are no complaints against the junta’s punitive battalions; they act, in Washington’s opinion, very “restrained.”
It’s high time to end the lawlessness. An impartial investigation into the disaster on July 17, 2014 will put everything in its place. The bandits must sit down. And not in the Rada or the Beldom, but in places for other purposes.
However, we can already see a complex, seemingly three-stage structure of this international terrorist attack. (A terrorist attack is not necessarily when an Islamist with a suicide vest self-detonates in a crowd, or who was in the cabin of a Boeing 777 during the flight,
A terrorist attack is any violent act committed in a public place with the aim of intimidating people, society, a state, or a group of states. The goals of a terrorist attack and its nature can be very different.
Of course, logically, all possible parties should be involved here - the Malaysian and the Netherlands, including, so that, by avoiding responsibility, it would be more convenient for the Kyiv junta to incline the investigation to the version that it was the DPR militia that were guilty of the Boeing 777 crash. NATO, of course, must inevitably be present here.
In short, the organizers of the Boeing 777 crash near Donetsk needed the maximum internationalization of this crime, so that it would be easier to attack innocent militias and Russia with the whole world, tied by one blood. The Malaysian pilots can be completely excluded from the list of suspected complicity only after all 15 bodies of the crew members are found and identified. So far, only about 250 bodies (out of 298) have been found.
So, it can be assumed with a high degree of probability that the events of July 17, 2014 developed according to a pre-prepared, yet three-stage scenario; Kyiv would never have arbitrarily decided on such an adventure, even if all the American consultants had demanded that Potroshenko do just that.
***
So, the alleged three-part plan for the terrorist attack on July 17, 2014, which led to the crash of the Boeing 777 at about 16-30 Moscow time. 50 km from the border with Russia in territory controlled by the DPR:
1. 07/17/2014 in the Netherlands at the airport they underfill fuel; there is only enough fuel in the tanks to fly to the crash point (presumably to the border with Russia, but due to the fact that the plane, having lost one wing, did not fly straight, but wobbled from side to side, which further reduced both the speed of the Boeing and changed the coordinates of the point of impact downwards, as a result it fell 50 km closer than planned), or there was significantly more water in the fuel tanks more than permissible, and then pieces of ice clogged the fuel flows and blocked the supply of kerosene to the engine.
2. Perhaps, on the border with Poland or not far from the border with Poland, on the territory of Ukraine, a Boeing 777 was attacked by a missile that exploded nearby, causing one wing to fall off and the cabin to depressurize. Some of the bodies could have fallen out of the plane right there and then. As a result, the Boeing 777 lost one wing, and parts of it began to creep away from the impact of the shock wave after the rocket explosion, but maintaining the general direction of movement for some time. The missile attack was most likely carried out from a NATO base on Polish territory; it was a NATO missile, or a Polish one, not a Ukrainian one, because there were no military operations in the northwestern part of Ukraine, where the already shot down Boeing 777 was flying, and there were no combat positions deployed from which the Malaysian Boeing 777 could be hit.
The fuss with dragging beeches, the seizure of recordings of conversations between dispatchers and pilots, when the Ukrainian military created fog beyond all measure, looks more and more like a diversionary maneuver to divert suspicion from the Polish side, which, very likely, could not only launch a missile towards the Boeing 777 17 July 2014, but also took part in the bombing of the Southeast.
3. In the immediate vicinity of the crash site, the Boeing 777, already flying with one wing and would inevitably crash if it fell to the ground, was attacked by a SU-27 fighter-attack aircraft (some believe it was a Su-25), which is clearly visible in the video recording, obviously, in the engine area (in order for the plane to be completely destroyed when falling, so that no one survives and to hide the traces of the previous attack and confuse everything even more),
the Boeing 777 fell, i.e., where it was planned, although it was still 50 km closer than planned, otherwise it could have gone significantly deeper into the territorial space of Russia, and the version of the plane being shot down by militias would have disappeared by itself, especially since it would have been completely Russia's own involvement in this catastrophe is excluded. That's why the attack aircraft was needed at the final, third stage - it destroyed the traces of the two previous stages and corrected the crash site. The second attack aircraft could provide escort.
You can check whose “dryers” were in the air at that moment over the specified territory.
In addition, near the ground, the aircraft cabin could be fired from mobile ground means, from both sides of the aircraft simultaneously (grenade launchers, etc.), in order to kill the pilot and ensure the inevitable death of all passengers during the collapse of the aircraft in the air.
***
21. 07.14 15:45
Now all the bodies have already been found, only fragments of 15 bodies remain, perhaps all of them belonged to the crew of the Boeing, if this is so, then we can assume that the main blow, perhaps an air-to-air missile fired by a Ukrainian or Polish attack aircraft shortly before the Boeing landed, or from ground means, it fell on the front part of the aircraft, in the place where the raft cabin is located, and there is also a compartment for personnel. This is another argument in favor of the fact that the blow fell precisely on the engine, which could still work, although the Boeing was already descending due to the loss of a wing, as well as proof that there was no longer any fuel in the tank - hence the black smoke without flames when falling within a few seconds after the attack on the Boeing.
***
And the world has been living in such a madhouse for decades now!
The world must change not only its configuration, polarity, but also its semantic field, because few people want to live in a madhouse, unipolar or multipolar. Even if there are great opportunities for earning big money.
What is the point in them if tomorrow everything can collapse in one moment?
There is no need to immediately demand a truce from the militias, it will only benefit the junta - the Kyiv hawks will not calm down, they want one thing, for the militias to capitulate, since they cannot be broken. But this will be the worst option of all possible. After all, the junta was created not for peace, but for violence against the world. She will never improve.
The militias should not be prevented from winning.
They need to be helped in every possible way and worldwide.
They are the world's only hope for peace so far.
***
21. 07. 14 23:25
The vote in the UN Security Council has just taken place.
The resolution is this: to conduct an international investigation into all the circumstances of the Boeing 777 crash. So far, no threats either towards Novorossiya or towards Russia are reflected in the resolution. Well, at least it's something.
Sanctions against Russia will be discussed tomorrow at the Council of Ministers of Europe and the United States. Today, all the media in Western countries published editorials accusing Russia and whitewashing Kyiv. Who made up these accusations? It is clear that the BBC and SNN set the tone: everything they copy is copied by other world media, everyone repeats the same lies voiced by Potroshenko. This is what freedom of the press is in the Western world. How will they be laundered when the results of the investigation are ready and a different point of view prevails? Poland will never admit it, it will hide behind Ukraine, and NATO will certainly not give itself away. And the USA...
In England, flight recorders - the contents of black boxes - are already being deciphered.
There is nothing secret that will not become apparent over time.
***
But not the whole West is so funny.
For example, Hollywood star Steven Seagal sings the anthem of Novorossiya from the stage with great inspiration.
***
August 28, 2014
The mystery of the black box will never be revealed!!!
All the deadlines that were set and postponed again have passed, about the black boxes - a minute of silence that threatens to never end. And it’s simple - I turned out to be right, as always. The culprits are the Netherlands and NATO, first of all, how do they admit this? Russia and the militias have nothing to do with it. Ukraine is a pawn in someone else's game.
July 27, 2015
If the official public in Russia continues to sluggishly mumble something unintelligible in its justification, they say there is no need to hold a tribunal for the Boeing 777, because If he is biased, then the matter will end with the inevitable defeat of Russia. Putin is a defeat for Russia, this is what everyone, everyone, everyone needs to understand a long time ago. This is a creeping defeat, but a defeat! Instead of taking an active position, our diplomats endlessly shake the air in justification mode - there is nothing to justify, we must finally take an offensive position. A Boeing tribunal is needed, but it will be wide and open, and then it will become clear that the crime was planned back in the Netherlands. Ukraine joined this conspiracy to the best of its ability and desire to spoil Russia. And this is obvious. There is no need to be afraid of the tribunal. But this tribunal should be initiated by Russia. in the meantime, Putin continues to actively play for his own goal, supporting the Poroshenko regime.
July 27, 2015
A Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 was flying MH17 from Amsterdam, the Netherlands, to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in eastern Ukraine. There were 298 people on board the liner (including 15 crew members), among them 85 children. Citizens of 10 countries died, including 43 Malaysians. Most of the dead - 193 people - were Dutch citizens.
The plane, following the established international transit corridor, passed Donetsk, and further north 14 kilometers and began a maneuver to return to the established air corridor. The crew did not have time to complete the maneuver they had begun; at 17.20 Moscow time, at an altitude of 10 thousand meters, the plane began to sharply lose speed and disappeared from the radar screens at 17.23 Moscow time. The wreckage of the airliner was located in the area of the village of Grabovo near the city of Torez, Donetsk region, in territory controlled by the militia of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR).
On the evening of July 17, President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, after the “terrorist attack”, adviser to the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Anton Gerashchenko announced that the plane was shot down from the Buk anti-aircraft missile system (SAM). Kyiv in the crash of a militia liner, which, according to the West, is supported by Russia. The militia stated that they did not have the means to shoot down an aircraft at such an altitude.
In mid-September 2015, the Prosecutor General's Office of the self-proclaimed DPR reported a crashed Malaysian plane, which was found by local residents. She appealed to the Prosecutor General of the Netherlands with a request to take away the debris collected in Donbass. On September 28, Dutch experts together with the OSCE mission visited the village of Grabovo, Donetsk region. They spoke with local authorities and also examined the area.
Dutch Safety Board October 13, 2015 plane crash. The report noted that the crash of the airliner was caused by an explosion on the left side of a 9N314M type warhead mounted on a 9M38 series missile fired from the Buk system. However, the document shows from which territory the aircraft was shot down and who is to blame. The Chairman of the Dutch Security Council said that further investigation would be required to establish the exact location of the missile launch on the Malaysian airliner.
The Russian concern Almaz-Antey (manufacturer of the Buk anti-aircraft missile system), in turn, reported on its study of the MH17 plane crash. According to his data, Boeing launched from the area of the village of Zaroshchenskoye, which was controlled by Ukrainian security forces. It was this area that the Russian Ministry of Defense mentioned a few days after the tragedy.
In January 2016, after Russian experts studied the final report of the Netherlands, the deputy head of the Federal Air Transport Agency, Oleg Storchevoy, sent a letter to the Security Council of the Netherlands, in which he indicated that research and full-scale experiments conducted by Russian experts indicate that the conclusions of the Dutch side are unreliable.
In June 2016, a joint international team of investigators investigating the crash of a Malaysian airliner in Ukraine acknowledged the difficulties associated with the lack of experience in investigating disasters of this scale and knowledge of special terms.
In the summer of 2016, the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, together with the National Prosecutor's Office of the Netherlands, as part of the investigation into the crash, requested the competent Russian departments, including the Almaz-Antey concern, to provide materials that could contribute to the progress of the investigation. In particular, Holland also requested raw primary radar images of the Ukrainian airspace of the Lugansk-Donetsk region for the period when the airliner crashed.
In July 2017, members of the international investigation team announced that the trial in the case of the crash of the Malaysian Boeing would take place in the Netherlands. In the same month, Ukraine signed an agreement on international legal cooperation with the Netherlands, which gives the Dutch side the right to conduct a trial in the case of the plane crash. The signed document provides that the Netherlands has the competence to prosecute persons for crimes related to the crash of the Malaysian Boeing, as well as
Illustration copyright Getty Images Image caption According to Dutch investigators, a Buk missile exploded to the left of the Boeing cockpit.
More than two years have passed since the crash of the Malaysian Boeing in the skies over Ukraine. During this time, Russian media have repeatedly questioned the results of the official investigation into the causes of the tragedy, which claimed the lives of 298 people. The BBC monitoring service tracked how the versions of the disaster changed in the interpretation of the pro-Kremlin media.
Spanish dispatcher
July 17, 2014 at 19:00 Moscow time news channel LifeNews reported about a “new victory for the Donetsk militias,” who allegedly managed to shoot down another An-26 transport plane of the Ukrainian Air Force. This time - near the city of Torez.
“It all happened around five o’clock in the evening, Moscow time. An An-26 was flying over the city, suddenly a rocket hit it, there was an explosion, the plane began to fall,” the presenter noted, commenting on an amateur video from the scene. The news was immediately picked up by many news sites and the Rossiya 24 TV channel.
However, less than an hour later it became clear that the footage shown on Russian television channels was not an An-26 at all, but a Malaysian Boeing flying to Kuala Lumpur from Amsterdam.
In the first hours after confirmation of information about a downed passenger airliner in the skies over Ukraine, Russian media rejected the possibility of Donetsk separatists being involved in the disaster.
“Experts assure that it is impossible to shoot down the airliner with the means that the rebels have at their disposal so high,” said a correspondent for the Vremya program on Channel One.
“The plane crashed in the area of the village of Grabovo, not far from the village of Snezhnoye, which was bombed the day before yesterday, very intensively bombed by the Ukrainian Air Force,” noted a journalist from the Rossiya TV channel.
In parallel with this, alternative theories, including conspiracy theories, began to actively spread in the media. Late in the evening of July 17, the Russian-language website of the RT television channel published a tweet from a “Spanish dispatcher” in Kyiv that a few minutes before the Boeing crash, Ukrainian military aircraft were spotted near it.
The message was soon picked up by the Rossiya-24 TV channel, as well as a number of online publications. Soon the Twitter account of the “dispatcher” was recognized as fake and blocked.
Illustration copyright AFP Image caption There was even a version in the Russian media that the target was not the Malaysian Boeing, but the plane of the Russian presidentPutin's plane
Another version that gained wide currency in the Russian media in the evening of the same day was the theory that the likely target of those who shot down the Boeing was probably Air Force One of the Russian President, returning from a Latin American tour.
“The contours of the aircraft are generally similar, the linear dimensions are also very similar, and as for the coloring, at a fairly distant distance it is almost identical,” Interfax quoted a source in the Federal Air Transport Agency as saying.
The next day, while the world's headlines were filled with accusations against the Kremlin, Russian state television channels continued to blame Ukraine for the incident.
“Formally, the Malaysian airliner was shot down in peaceful skies. Despite the fact that the Ukrainian authorities declared the area over the southeast no-fly on July 8, transit trains continued to operate,” noted the Vesti correspondent.
At the same time, a new conspiracy theory appeared on the Internet: the Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper reported, citing “eyewitnesses” and one of the then separatist leaders, Igor Strelkov, that perhaps some of the Boeing passengers were dead before the crash.
However, a few days later, this version, as well as rumors about an attempt to shoot down Air Force One, faded into the background, giving way to official statements by the Russian Ministry of Defense.
Disappearing Buk
On July 20, US Secretary of State John Kerry, speaking on CNN, accused Russia of supplying large quantities of weapons to separatists in eastern Ukraine.
On July 21, Russian state television channels stated that, according to Russian military data, a group of Ukrainian Buk anti-aircraft systems appeared in the Donetsk region on the eve of the tragedy and disappeared shortly after it.
“In addition, at the time of the crash, there was another object on the same echelon with the airliner - a Ukrainian Su-25,” the Vesti presenter noted, citing data from the Ministry of Defense.
At the end of May 2015, the international independent group Bellingcat stated that the photographs of the Ukrainian Buk complex, which allegedly recorded its movement on July 14 and 17, 2014, were fake.
On July 25, 2014, the version about the Ukrainian Buk was again heard on TV screens. This time, the NTV channel, citing the opinion of an expert, stated that the Boeing-777 could have been shot down during an exercise by the Ukrainian air defense forces.
On September 9, the Dutch security service published a preliminary report on the causes of the crash of flight MH17. His main conclusion is that the Boeing fell apart in the air as a result of external influence.
On the same day, a correspondent for the Rossiya TV channel criticized the opinion of experts, again recalling that the Ukrainian military allegedly has Buks at its disposal. “This photograph shows a missile system with a rotated launcher. On July 17, it unexpectedly disappeared somewhere,” he noted.
“Specialists are confident that the experts missed the time when a full and objective investigation could have been carried out. The Ukrainian side seemed to have deliberately done everything possible so that the real cause of the disaster could no longer be found out,” the correspondent concluded.
Illustration copyright AFP Image caption Russian authorities have consistently denied that the Malaysian Boeing could have been shot down by a Russian Buk.Sensational photo
However, in November of the same year, the version about the Ukrainian Buk was unexpectedly replaced by a new one - about an air-to-air missile.
The host of the “However” program, Mikhail Leontyev, said that “Channel One has at its disposal a sensational photograph, allegedly taken by a foreign spy satellite in the last seconds of the flight of a Malaysian Boeing over Ukraine.” In the photograph, the presenter noted, “a missile is clearly visible from under the left wing” of the MiG-29 fighter “directly into the cockpit.”
“In short, there was most likely no Buk,” he concluded.
The episode of the "However" program was aired on Channel One on November 14 - a few days before the G20 summit in Australia. According to Leontyev himself, “on the eve of the most important meeting of world leaders... the topic of investigating the deaths of passengers on that flight is more than relevant,” and the sensational footage “speaks in favor of a version that was almost never heard in the West.”
On the evening of the same day, a similar story with “photo evidence” of the destruction of the plane by a fighter appeared on the Rossiya TV channel. On the same day, popular Russian photoblogger Ilya Varlamov discovered signs of fake satellite footage.
Secret Witness
After the loud exposure of the fake photo, the version about the fighter began to be actively discussed in the Russian media again at the end of 2014.
This time the occasion was a publication in the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper on December 22. As the publication reported, journalists “found a witness who claims that the Malaysian Boeing was shot down by a Ukrainian Su-25 attack aircraft.
“In the case of the Malaysian Boeing, a secret witness has appeared whose testimony clears all charges against the militia and Russia,” the authors of the article concluded. Soon this story was picked up by online publications, major TV channels and even the Investigative Committee of Russia. However, the story did not end there.
In early June 2015, the “secret witness” again appeared in the headlines of state media. “The investigation into the Boeing crash in the Donetsk region is progressing noticeably. And today the Investigative Committee of Russia named the name of the main witness,” Channel One reported on June 3. According to journalists, he turned out to be a former Ukrainian soldier, Yevgeny Agapov.
At the same time, Russian media reported the results of an investigation conducted by the developer of the Buk anti-aircraft systems, the Almaz-Antey concern. According to the company's experts, the Malaysian Boeing was shot down over the Donbass by a 9M38M1 missile fired from the Buk-M1 complex. At the same time, representatives of the concern at the press conference did not rule out that the missile could have been fired by Ukrainian air defense.
In response, Bellingcat founder Eliot Higgins said that Almaz-Antey used incorrect and edited images in its report on the MH17 crash.
Special operation
According to this version, on July 17, 2014, a bomb exploded on board the Boeing. “I’m almost sure that the plane was destroyed from the inside, and this was a special operation,” Sergei Sokolov, an expert at the federal information center “Analytics and Security,” said then on the TV channel.
Outdated "Buk"
On October 13, the Dutch Security Council published the final report of its investigation into the causes of the crash, which stated that the airliner was shot down by a missile launched from a Russian-made Buk.
The scenario for the MH17 crash was written by the CIA. Part 1
Today is two years since the tragic crash of a Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 in the skies over Ukraine. There are still more questions than answers.
I. The plane was shot down according to the Operation Northwoods scenario.
Few people paid attention: the scenario of the disaster and subsequent events is fully consistent with the American Operation Northwoods. The operation was planned in 1962 by the US Department of Defense and was intended to prepare American public opinion for an armed invasion of Cuba to overthrow the government of Fidel Castro. The operation involved carrying out terrorist acts with imaginary or real victims in the United States, Cuba and other countries, including hijacking aircraft, simulating hostile acts under a false flag, and state-sponsored acts of terror.
Regarding downed civilian aircraft, the declassified primary source literally says the following:
“It is possible to create an incident that convincingly demonstrates how a Cuban aircraft attacked and shot down a chartered civilian airliner en route from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The direction is chosen to cross Cuba. The passengers may be students or any other group of people with common interests to justify the use of an off-schedule charter flight."
If we assume that in Ukraine we are dealing with such a special provocation operation, it becomes clear why a civilian Boeing seemed to be deliberately sent through the ATO combat zone, where navigation actually no longer worked. Moreover, they released the plane from the transport corridor.
“An aircraft will be prepared at Eglin Air Force Base, painted and numbered as an exact duplicate of a civilian registered aircraft owned by a CIA-sponsored organization in Miami. At the appointed time, the backup aircraft, filled with specially selected passengers under carefully prepared fictitious names, will be replaced by a civil aircraft controlled remotely.”
And let us remember again: on March 8, 2014 and July 17, 2014, two aircraft of exactly the same modification were lost 777-200ER the same airline. Such a coincidence, you see, can hardly be an accident. The point of this situation is to save on the operation: the aircraft does not need to be repainted, you only need to replace a very similar number ( M.O. on M.D.). They fell for greed.
“The take-offs of the radio-controlled and real aircraft will be coordinated in such a way as to ensure that their paths intersect south of Florida. After this, the plane with passengers will descend to a minimum altitude and land on an additional field at the Eglin airbase, where the passengers will be evacuated, and the plane will be returned to its original status.
Meanwhile, the radio-controlled plane will continue to fly along the intended route. Over Cuba, it will begin transmitting a distress signal on an international frequency. SOS that he was being attacked by a Cuban MiG. The transmission of this message will be interrupted by the destruction of the aircraft via radio signal. This will allow International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to report to the US what happened to their aircraft, thereby eliminating the need for the US to 'sell' the incident."
Now let's compare this plan with several key events of 2014:
1. On February 23-27, 2014, a change in the leadership of the executive authorities of Sevastopol and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea was carried out. The new Crimean authorities declared the illegitimacy of the new leadership of Ukraine and turned for assistance and assistance to the leadership of Russia, which provided the Crimean authorities with all possible support.
2. On March 7, 2014, the delegation of the Supreme Council of Crimea met in Moscow with State Duma Chairman Sergei Naryshkin and Speaker of the Federation Council Valentina Matvienko. Naryshkin said that Russia will support the free and democratic choice of the population of Crimea and Sevastopol. Matvienko assured that senators would support the decision to incorporate Crimea into Russia if it is adopted.
3. On March 8, 2014, a Boeing 777 flight goes missing. MH370 Malaysian Airlines. The plane's wreckage was never found. In the future, a version circulates and even testimonies from residents of the Maldives appear, which give reason to believe that the plane was hijacked and landed on the territory of a military base Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. These facts are not commented on by the West in any way.
4. Mid-July 2014 - units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (about 5,000 soldiers and dozens of pieces of equipment) fall into the Izvarin cauldron. On July 16, the cauldron was closed, and hundreds of Ukrainian Armed Forces military personnel died in the “Izvarin cauldron.”
Again, such coincidences are not accidental: expecting such a random coincidence is like waiting for a coin tossed into the air to land on its edge. Therefore, we have no doubt: the operation was planned by US intelligence agencies and implemented by the armed forces of Ukraine in order to blame Russia. Moreover. immediately blame both for the events in eastern Ukraine and for the allegedly downed Boeing. The very next morning after the tragedy, the media came out in the West with such accusations, with portraits of Russian President Putin and an image of the Buk air defense system.
However, a lot has gone wrong - a year later, the West cannot figure out how to hang the plane on us. The problems started from the very first day.
II. Strange video with Ukrainian Buks
Immediately after the disaster on the leading Ukrainian portal liga.net an article was published with the headline: “Poroshenko about Boeing 777: The army has no targets in the air.” Samantha Power at the UN Security Council, she went even further in her lies and stated: “The Ukrainian military had SA-11 (Buk) systems in their warehouses, but there were no such weapons near this area.”
Samantha Power
However, we know what happens when the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing. In this case, all attempts to justify the downing of the plane are refuted by the following video from the Ukrainian media the day before the disaster:
The video shows: the Buk air defense system and the Kupol SOC (target detection system) of the Ukrainian Armed Forces are in full combat readiness in the ATO zone as of July 16, 2014. It turns out: they have targets in the air. Follows: Are Poroshenko and Power lying?
III. Fakes
Immediately after the disaster in Ukraine, many fakes were born. This strategy was also part of Operation Northwoods: Create a Lot of Rumors.
Fake 1. A photograph of a “contrail” in the Snezhny area, capturing an absolutely clear sky! The actual sky at the time of the disaster was quite cloudy.
Fake showing a contrail from Snizhne
The actual situation at the time of the plane explosion.
Actual situation according to meteorological services from the Commission's report. The green dot indicates the last position of the aircraft, followed by maximum cloud cover - 8 out of 8. Doesn't look like a completely clear sky, does it?!
Fake 2. “Telephone conversation” by Igor Bezler (Bes), who reported the downed plane to “his curator” in Russia. But everyone knows that Bezler was defending Gorlovka at that moment, so he could not have first-hand information about the situation in the Grabovo area. Moreover, the recording talks about a plane that fell beyond Yenakievo (32 km from the site of the tragedy), that is, about a completely different plane. This information was then relayed in Western media as obvious evidence of Russia's guilt. Hackers discovered - The recording was made before the plane crash .
Fake 3. The recording of another conversation claimed that the militia, according to them, according to the fake, had already become “easier after the arrival of Buk” - they (Buk) had already “managed to knock down two drying blocks yesterday and a second one today.” At the same time, judging by the chronology of events in the Ukrainian media, Buk arrived at the place of combat duty only a few minutes before the downed plane!
Moreover, not a single plane before the Boeing contained any traces of destruction by the Buk air defense system; all were shot down from portable air defense systems. The recording ends with an intriguing horror story - a statement about an imminent attack by Russian troops on Ukraine.
There were many provocations - a photograph of the “Russian fighter” in Buk, Sanya Sotkin (with identification marks!) with studio quality processing and a theatrical facial expression depicting an idiot. Or the movement of a clean “shot” Buk urgently “back to the Motherland”, and, as you know, to such a state it only takes two or three days to wash it after the shot. Or the version that Russia wanted to shoot down an Aeroflot flight (which actually flew 140 km from the combat zone) and then blame Ukraine. We missed.
It is reasonable to ask the following question to Mr. Poroshenko and the Ukrainian media: if you are so sure that you are right, why do you lie so much? The word "rightness" and the word "truth" are similar, aren't they?
IV. Inconsistencies
Inconsistency 1. Few people bothered to compare the latest video from the plane with real fragments. But in vain. The video clearly shows: the marking of places is to the left of the handle, and at a considerable distance. The markings on the airplane fragments are strictly above the handle, and on the right, not the left.
Photo of the interior in the video - the seat numbers are located on the edge of the shelf, to the left of the handle.
Close-up of interior detail with shelf number 31 HGFED.
The scenario for the crash of flight MH-17 was written by the CIA. Part 2.
V. Mathematical calculations
Location of the lesion
Mathematical calculations show that the plane was hit at a distance of over 34 km from the city of Snezhnoye. The plane began to lose speed no later than 16.20 and disappeared from radar at 16:21.35 at a speed 200 km/h (presumably at altitude 5000 meters). Real cases and mathematical models of such disasters show that the falling time of the debris is unlikely to be less than 2 minutes, and the distance traveled to the point of impact is unlikely to be less than 20 km.
Radar data suggests that until 16:20.43 the plane was still flying at a speed of about 900 km/h 40 seconds of flight at this speed is already 10 km. It is interesting that after the supposed defeat the plane first increased, rather than decreased, its speed. The distance from Snezhnoye to Rassypnoye is 18 km. The cockpit flew 6.5 km to Rassypnoye after its separation from the aircraft. Only after the cabin separated (not earlier) did the speed begin to drop. Obviously, the separation of the cabin did not occur immediately, but some time after the explosion. According to radar data, the cabin separation time was about 40 seconds.
We get:
From Snezhnoye to Rassypnoye: 18 km;
From Rassypnoye to the cockpit separation point: 6.5 km;
From the place of the alleged hit at 16:20.03 to the separation of the cabin and the beginning of the catastrophic drop in speed at 16:20.43 - 10 km.
Total: 34.5 km.
These facts, however, do not coincide with the data of the Preliminary Report of the International Commission, according to which the estimated coordinates of the point of impact of the aircraft are 48º07‘37.7”N; 38º31‘34.7”E, closer to the crash site. It was probably beneficial for the commission to submit a report in which the place where the plane was hit would be as close as possible to the city of Snezhnoye. However, such a conclusion contradicts the laws of physics and mathematics.
The nature of the damage to the aircraft, severe damage is highlighted in red.
According to the materials of the Preliminary Report of the International Commission, the most severe damage included the destruction of the power frame of the aircraft's nose section. It was these damages that led to the further destruction of the aircraft. At the same time, it is obvious that these destructions did not lead to the immediate stalling of the aircraft in its dive.
Until the moment the plane began to disintegrate, it moved horizontally and did not dive. Usually, one missile hit is not enough to immediately destroy an aircraft weighing about 250 tons (the warhead of the missile is 70 km, the mass of the destructive elements is about 2 times less, and most of them do not hit the target). The kinetic energy of the striking elements reaching the target is too small (much less than 0.1% of the corresponding indicator of the aircraft) to lead to a significant change in the characteristics of the movement of the aircraft, or the immediate destruction of its structure. It can be concluded that the plane gradually descended to 5000 meters, where it disintegrated.
At the same time, we are not inclined to judge that the defeat occurred significantly west of Kirovsky (see below). The destruction of the bow led to a relatively rapid loss of speed than would have been the case with standard gliding.
Therefore, it is unlikely that the Buk air defense system could have shot down a plane from Snizhne (the main version of the Ukrainian media), since 35 km is the limit of performance characteristics. And at the limit of performance characteristics, the Beech operates with a low probability of defeat. It is also necessary to take into account the flight time of the rocket during which the approach took place. At the moment of launch, the plane would be even further away, not to mention the fact that having only the Buk air defense missile system launcher, without a target detection system and a command post for processing information, it becomes impossible to hit the target at the considered distance. In this case, the beech will turn into a blind weapon that will fire “from a cannon at sparrows.”
Rocket launch site
We covered cases of aerial terrorism in detail in the article “History of aerial terrorism. Who is to blame for the destruction of planes in the air." We only have one question left to ask: how many more years and how many more victims will it take for the “world community” to pay attention to the “Air Terror” of the United States and stop indulging and broadcasting everything that is beneficial to the United States? Perhaps the existence of an operation "Northwoods" Can this also be attributed to the invention of Russian propaganda? It’s time for the world to say a decisive “no” to US provocations.
Issues that need to be resolved:
3. If another plane crashed, who were the people who were flying on it?
We asked these questions on the Russia-1 TV channel in a program dedicated to the loss of a Boeing 777 in March 2014. Frankly speaking, the fate of the passengers on this flight is unknown. Based on the scenario of Operation Northwoods, these are specially selected people, that is, having connections with the intelligence services. Changing documents and legends for them is not difficult.
However, we understand that this is a sensitive issue, people may have relatives, so if the assumption about their recruitment is incorrect, we would not want to hurt the feelings of relatives. Perhaps time will reveal more information regarding these terrible events.
There has already been a lot of speculation about the fate of the passengers on this flight. However, as of March 27, 2015, 296 bodies had been identified (all but two passengers). Thus, if you follow the official version, the list of people who were flown out corresponds to the list of those found in the Donetsk region.
However, there are also an endless number of questions here - the identification process dragged on for several months and we did not see the indignation of their relatives. In general, we saw unprecedentedly little of them. On April 9, 2015, the Dutch authorities published 569 documents relating to the disaster. Personal Information the dead passengers of the plane and their relatives were retouched.
However, we are not ready to make statements on this topic. In the meantime, there is too much evidence in favor of the scenario of a pre-planned provocation.
4. Why come up with such a complex scenario?
In our opinion, for maximum effect. If special people do not participate in the special operation, the likelihood of failure will increase sharply. Relatives will do their best to get to the bottom of the truth; if something goes wrong, the truth will immediately be revealed. The consequences of such a failure are difficult to overestimate. In complex intricacies it is always easy to hide the ends in the water! The main thing is not to get confused in them yourself.
However, all the details of the operation are unknown. There is no complete picture of the provocation. It is unlikely that we will know the truth in the next 30-40 years. All the information we can count on today is hypotheses.
5. Could the Buk air defense system quickly destroy the plane?
Here experts disagree:
The Russian Union of Engineers claims that the destructive elements “can penetrate the fuselage of the aircraft, but, given the size of the Boeing 777 (63.7 meters long, with a large wingspan of more than 60 meters), they cannot lead to the destruction of the aircraft into separate small parts, as this happens with aircraft seven to ten times smaller in size.” In addition, “there was no recorded plume in the form of thick white condensation from the combustion products of rocket fuel, as well as a contrail, which appear and persist for several minutes after launch and are visible within a radius of at least 10 km from the rocket launch point.”
Experts from the manufacturer of the Buk air defense system insist that the plane was destroyed by the Buk. Corresponding traces of damage by various fractions of damaging elements were found, the damaging elements themselves being of the “I-beam” type. The form of a “heavy” fragment in the form of an “I-beam” is used only in 9M38M1 anti-aircraft guided missiles equipped with a 9N314M high-explosive fragmentation warhead, which makes it possible to unambiguously determine the type of warhead - 9N314M. Only missiles of the 9M38M1 modification are equipped with this warhead.
However, we cannot be satisfied with this answer, since the destructive elements have not yet been presented. The warhead contains 32 kg of destructive elements: about 4,500 I-beams weighing 8 g and about 1,500 cubes of 4 g. Of course, no more than a few percent of this number hit the plane, but the world saw the first sample of the destructive element only on March 19, 2015, later 8 months after the disaster. Why was it impossible to do this before?
6. Perhaps Boeing shot down the plane after all?
An air strike is likely. At the very least, this may be at least some explanation for the changes in aircraft parameters at 16:21.43. A heavy rocket flying at enormous speed can significantly change its speed characteristics.
In addition, this version was voiced in December in Komsomolskaya Pravda by an employee of the military air base in Dnepropetrovsk, who did not want to give his last name for security reasons. On July 17, 2014, in the afternoon, a plane took off for a combat mission. SU-25 Ukrainian Air Force, piloted by Captain Voloshin. On board were R-60 air-to-air missiles with a thermal guidance principle. They can fly up to 10 kilometers in search of a target.
Voloshin returned to the airfield with empty ammunition. Flight director Dyakiv asked the captain: “What’s wrong with the plane?” Voloshin replied: “The plane ended up at the wrong time and in the wrong place.”. Immediately after publication in our newspaper, the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation provided state protection for an important witness. In June, the Russian Investigative Committee decided to declassify him: a citizen of Ukraine Agapov Evgeniy Vladimirovich, who served as an aviation mechanic in the first squadron of the tactical aviation brigade of the Ukrainian Air Force in military unit No. A4465.
When an investigation lasts so long, and neither journalists, nor experts of interested parties, nor the public are allowed access to any information, such an investigation, in our opinion, cannot be considered independent. Any conclusions and evidence of the commission for such a period of time may be falsified. It is worth noting that, at the request of the Ukrainian side, information may be withdrawn from the disclosure of data by the expert commission.
Hence, various versions still have the right to exist. Moreover, the investigation commission has not yet rejected the air attack version. In theory, this could mean having both a ground attack and an air attack. This version is very unlikely, but it could explain such a rapid destruction of the plane.
By the way, we would not take at face value any statements made by the commission of inquiry. So, for example, immediately after the disaster the information was different: the last reliable data was transmitted by the plane’s transponder at 16:18 local time over Gorlovka, after which reliable information stopped arriving and was finally lost at 16:20.
This means that our version of the plane crashing over a longer period of time receives additional confirmation. But this is too inconvenient for the Ukrainian side, because the whole version with Snezhny collapses! If, however, these data are correct, then the probable picture of the incident should be changed: over Gorlovka, the Boeing was fired at the cockpit from a cannon by a military aircraft, and then was finished off by a Buk air defense system in the Zaroshchensky area.
Traces of an attack by a military aircraft.
However, a version of the missile fired by a military aircraft has not yet been ruled out. For example, like this:
The famous collage of a military plane shooting down a Boeing at 16:19.47 local time is most likely a fake.
In particular, the collage claims to be a photo from space, but uses Google maps from 2012, and the time is incorrect (UTC 1:19 instead of UTC 13:19). However, many perceived it as a deliberate hoax to hint to the States that we know everything.
7. Was the Boeing not shot down at all?
There are versions that there was no disaster at all, and that the pre-prepared debris was dropped from a transport plane. This version was presented by Yuri Mukhin. The author convincingly, using photographic material, proves: on the wreckage we see traces of the work of a tool - hydraulic shears. Some of the debris actually contains cuts that could not have occurred in a disaster of this kind. In addition, all the wreckage of the plane is approximately the same size, as if it had been pre-cut into pieces convenient for transportation by transport aircraft. In accidents of this kind, large pieces are always contained; this is ensured by the sufficiently strong materials from which the aircraft is made.
However, the publication New Straits Times tried to explain the presence of many pieces of approximately the same size by constructing a model of the destruction of the aircraft:
However, since the contradictions in the official version of the incident are visible to the naked eye, one can believe in any version, even the most fantastic, since it provides at least some explanation of the events - something that is not in the official conclusion of the commission.
8. The Commission takes too long to provide information to the public.
The Commission's Report contains too little meaningful information.
There is no exact flight route - even a year after the accident, it was not made public. Still would! It is not difficult to imagine how many questions there will be about this “exact route”.
There is no protocol for conversations in the cockpit. At first, there was so much talk about the fact that the last voice on the recording did not belong to the pilots. Everyone was intrigued. Today we only have radio and telephone communications with dispatchers. The Report states that the Commission has 30 minutes of perfectly clear recordings that suddenly end at 16:20.03. There is nothing interesting there, the Commission claims. What about the intrigue? There is a hypothesis - the recordings are interrupted earlier, and the last voice on air on behalf of MH17 may be from another device. But they promised to provide the records a year ago. Was it really that difficult?
There is no information about what traces of destructive elements were found on the plane or in the bodies. No chemical analysis of the debris at the affected sites was carried out.
9. Why did the Commission refuse to deliver all the wreckage of the plane to the investigation site?
This fact is very strange. In conditions of complete confusion of the case, not to use the opportunity to obtain all possible information - this is criminal. This fact indicates that the commission is not interested in the investigation.
10. The plane was flying very strangely.
The maximum cruising speed of the Boeing 777 is 905 km/h, and it must be taken into account that the plane was flying with almost a full supply of fuel, which increased its weight. Why was it necessary to exceed cruising speed, since this is very uneconomical? There is clearly no talk of impressive financial results for the airline; the savings regime is very strict. Typically Boeing 777s fly much slower.
The plane left the transport corridor, and the dispatchers decided to ask it to return there. If you think about the conversation with dispatchers, it gives a lot of ground for doubt about the adequacy of the situation. Dnepropetrovsk's conversation with MH17 begins with an exchange of pleasantries at 16:08 local time. After this, for 12 minutes Dnepropetrovsk does not communicate with the plane at all.
All this time, flight MH17 is not passing through the transport corridor, but is approaching dangerously close to the other two aircraft. Additional tension is caused by flight altitude restrictions, which greatly narrow the air corridor. Why didn’t Dnepropetrovsk air traffic controllers direct the plane back into the corridor? We see only two reasons: they didn’t need it, or the plane had already been attacked by that time.
Protocol of conversations with dispatchers.
The transport corridor was very heavily loaded, and a maneuver to the north looks highly unjustified.
In our opinion, the information presented in this article confirms: the whole picture of the disaster from beginning to end is deliberate performance Western provocateurs, like all the events of the “color revolution” called “Euromaidan”.
Witness: a Malaysian Boeing 777 was shot down by a Ukrainian attack aircraft
Donetsk, Torez. Downed Boeing 777, with my own eyes. Autumn 2014
MH17: aborted flight
More details and a variety of information about events taking place in Russia, Ukraine and other countries of our beautiful planet can be obtained at Internet Conferences, constantly held on the website “Keys of Knowledge”. All Conferences are open and completely free. We invite everyone who wakes up and is interested...
