Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 18:57:46 +0200
Subject: [nowaroma] Fwd: [ScienzaepaceNews] Fwd: WG: [JUGOINFO] Due caccia ucraini hanno abbattuto il volo MH17
From: lorettamussi48@???
To: nowaroma@???
Due caccia ucraini hanno abbattuto il volo MH17
e per non doverlo dire da molti giorni la RAI-TV nasconde le cronache
dall'Ucraina
1) OSCE Monitors Identify “Shrapnel and Machine Gun-Like Holes” indicating
Shelling (Michel Chossudovsky)
2) Schockierende Analyse: Dieses Flugzeug wurde nicht von einer Rakete
getroffen (Peter Haisenko)
3) Evidence Is Now Conclusive: Two Ukrainian Government Fighter-Jets Shot
Down Malaysian Airlines MH17 (Eric Zuesse)
4) VIDEO: NDR Extra 3 zum Ukraine Krieg / German TV show ridicules
'evidence' of Russian involvement in Ukraine crisis
--- Von Y&K Trümpy:
Oggetto: MH17 nicht von Rakete sondern von Kampfjet abgeschossen
Data: 10 agosto 2014 15:54:30 CEST
Die ukrainische Armee erschwert und verzögert mit Angriffen auf die
Volksmilizen, welche das Gebiet der Absturzstelle der malaysischen MH17
kontrollieren, die internationalen Aufklärungsarbeiten an den Wrackteilen
der Passagiermaschine. Es mehren sich aber schon seit längerem die Hinweise,
dass das Flugzeug von einem ukrainischen Kampjet abgeschossen wurde, siehe
untenstehende Links. Das wird die USA jedoch nicht daran hindern, mit im
besten Fall zusammengestrickten "Beweisen" aus Sozialen-Netzwerken des
Internets, die ostukrainischen Volksmilizen für den Abschuss verantwortlich
zu machen und gegen Russland weitere Sanktionen zu verhängen. Im Gegensatz
zu den Russen haben die Amerikaner keine Daten ihrer eigenen
Aufklärungssatelliten veröffentlicht, auch die Auswertung der Black-Boxes
bleibt weiter unter Verschluss.
--- More links:
The Video Report Deleted by the BBC - ENG SUBS (25/lug/2014)
VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUvK5m2vxro
Russische Radardaten: Ukrainischer Kampjet unweit von Boeing gesichtet
(21.7.14)
http://de.ria.ru/society/20140721/269068827.html
Moskau: Boeing kurz vor Absturz wurde von ukrainischem Kampfjet begleitet
(21.7.14)
http://de.ria.ru/society/20140721/269070446.html
US spy plane incident raises more questions over MH17 crash (WSWS, 6 August
2014)
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/08/06/side-a06.html
Ucraina: Volo MH17 abbattuto da un cannoncino 30mm
Osservatore Osce: ‘Aereo abbattuto da caccia ucraino’ / MH17: Pockmarks look
like from very, very heavy machine gun fire, says first OSCE monitor
on-scene
https://it.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/crj-mailinglist/conversations/message
s/8077
PTV News 2 agosto 2014 – Volo MH17: la parola all’OSCE
Il network canadese CBC ha intervistato un inviato dell’OSCE, Michael
Bociurkiw. Bociurkiw, un canadese di origine ucraina, è stato tra i primi al
mondo ad arrivare sul sito del disastro, quando il relitto del Boeing 777
era ancora fumante. Cosa ha notato l’inviato della missione internazionale
dell’OSCE arrivato sul posto?
http://www.pandoratv.it/?p=1639
VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4aL1BIDuYo
VIDEO: Osservatore Osce: ‘Aereo abbattuto da caccia ucraino’
Lombardia Russia 3/ago/2014 - In questo video la testimonianza di un
osservatore dell’OSCE – un canadese di origine ucraina. Il video mostra le
foto della fusoliera dell’aereo malese ‘caduto’ nell’Ucraina orientale, con
inequivocabili fori di proiettili sparati da una mitragliatrice e le
conclusioni dell’osservatore. Entrambe confermano la versione russa: un
aereo Sukhoi-25 ucraino che seguiva da vicino il Boeing malese abbattuto.
VIDEO:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIaHKJVRLes
=== 1 ===
Auf Deutsch: Prof. Michel Chossudovsky von Global Research in Kanada geht
davon aus, dass MH17 nicht mit einer Rakete, sondern von einem Kampfjet
abgeschossen wurde:
http://www.luftpost-kl.de/luftpost-archiv/LP_13/LP11914_070814.pdf
---
http://www.globalresearch.ca/support-mh17-truth-osce-monitors-identify-shrap
nel-like-holes-indicating-shelling-no-firm-evidence-of-a-missile-attack/5394
324
“Support MH17 Truth”: OSCE Monitors Identify “Shrapnel and Machine Gun-Like
Holes” indicating Shelling. No Evidence of a Missile Attack. Shot Down by a
Military Aircraft?
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, July 31, 2014
According to the report of German pilot and airlines expert Peter Haisenko,
the MH17 Boeing 777 was not brought down by a missile.
What he observed from the available photos were perforations of the cockpit:
The facts speak clear and loud and are beyond the realm of speculation: The
cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The
edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes,
round and clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30
millimeter caliber projectile.
<
http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-t
he-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111> (Revelations of German Pilot:
Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was
Not Hit by a Missile” Global Research, July 30, 2014)
Based on
<
http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-t
he-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111> detailed analysis Peter Haisenko
reached the conclusion that the MH17 was not downed by a missile attack:
This aircraft was not hit by a missile in the central portion. The
destruction is limited to the cockpit area. Now you have to factor in that
this part is constructed of specially reinforced material
The OSCE Mission
It is worth noting that the initial statements by OSCE observers (July 31)
broadly confirm the findings of Peter Haisenko:
Monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
reported thatshrapnel-like holes were found in two separate pieces of the
fuselage of the ill-fated <
http://quotes.wsj.com/MY/MAS> Malaysia Airlines
aircraft that was believed to have been downed by a missile in eastern
Ukraine.
Michael Bociurkiw of the OSCE group of monitors at his daily briefing
described part of the plane’s fuselage dotted with “shrapnel-like, almost
machine gun-like holes.”He said the damage was inspected by Malaysian
aviation-security officials .(
<
http://online.wsj.com/articles/mh17-pieces-with-shrapnel-like-holes-osce-sa
ys-1406230555> Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2014)
The monitoring OSCE team has not found evidence of a missile fired from the
ground as conveyed by official White House statements. As we recall, the US
ambassador to the UN Samantha Power stated –pointing a finger at Russia–
that the Malaysian MH17 plane was “likely downed by a surface-to-air missile
operated from a separatist-held location”:
The team of international investigators with the Organisation for Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) are uncertain if the missile used was fired
from the ground as US military experts have previously suggested, the Wall
Street Journal (WSJ) reported. (
<
http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/mh17-investigators-say-m
achine-gun-like-holes-on-wreckage-suggest-missile-f#sthash.MYY6IwFE.dpuf>
Malay Mail online, emphasis added)
The initial OSCE findings tend to dispel the claim that a BUK missile system
brought down the plane.
Evidently, inasmuch as the perforations are attributable to shelling, a
shelling operation conducted from the ground could not have brought down an
aircraft traveling above 30,000 feet.
Ukraine Su-25 military aircraft within proximity of MH17
Peter Haisenko’s study is corroborated by the Russian Ministry of Defense
which pointed to a Ukrainian Su-25 jet in the flight corridor of the MH17,
within proximity of the plane.
Ironically, the presence of a military aircraft is also confirmed by a
<
http://www.globalresearch.ca/deleted-bbc-report-ukrainian-fighter-jet-shot-
down-mhi7-donetsk-eyewitnesses/5393631> BBC report conducted at the crash
site on July 23.
All the eyewitnesses interviewed by the BBC confirmed the presence of a
Ukrainian military aircraft flying within proximity of Malaysian Airlines
MH17 at the time that it was shot down:
Eyewitness #1: There were two explosions in the air. And this is how it
broke apart. And [the fragments] blew apart like this, to the sides. And
when …
Eyewitness #2: … And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it.
Everybody saw it.
Eyewitness #1: Yes, yes. It was flying under it, because it could be seen.
It was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.
Eyewitness #3: There were sounds of an explosion. But they were in the sky.
They came from the sky. Then this plane made a sharp turn-around like this.
It changed its trajectory and headed in that direction [indicating the
direction with her hands].
BBC Report below
[VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUvK5m2vxro ]
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.
Media Spin
The media has reported that a surface to air missile was indeed fired and
exploded before reaching its target. It was not the missile that brought
down the plane, it was the shrapnel resulting from the missile explosion
(prior to reaching the plane) which punctured the plane and then led to a
loss of pressure.
According to Ukraine’s National security spokesman Andriy Lysenko in a
contradictory statement, the MH17 aircraft “suffered massive explosive
decompression after being hit by a shrapnel missile.” (See
<
http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/560900/20140729/mh17-downing-russia-rebels-c
rash-site.htm> IBT, Australia)
I <
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28532525> n an utterly absurd
report, the BBC quoting the official Ukraine statement says that:
The downed Malaysia Airlines jet in eastern Ukraine suffered an explosive
loss of pressure after it was punctured by shrapnel from a missile.
They say the information came from the plane’s flight data recorders, which
are being analysed by British experts.
However, it remains unclear who fired a missile, with pro-Russia rebels and
Ukraine blaming each other.
Many of the 298 people killed on board flight MH17 were from the
Netherlands.
Dutch investigators leading the inquiry into the crash have refused to
comment on the Ukrainian claims.
“Machine Gun Like Holes”
The shrapnel marks should be distinguished from the small entry and exit
holes “most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile” fired from a
military aircraft. These holes could not have been caused by a missile
explosion as hinted by the MSM.
While the MSN is saying that the “shrapnel like holes” can be caused by a
missile (see BBC report above), the OSCE has confirmed the existence of what
it describes as “machine gun like holes”, without however acknowledging that
these cannot be caused by a missile.
In this regard, the GSh-302 firing gun operated by an Su-25 is able to fire
3000 rpm which explains the numerous entry and exit holes.
According to the
<
http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-t
he-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111> findings of Peter Haisenko:
If we now consider the armament of a typical SU 25 we learn this: It is
equipped with a double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302 / AO-17A, equipped
with: a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and
splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum), arranged in alternating order. The
cockpit of the MH 017 has evidently been fired at from both sides: the entry
and exit holes are found on the same fragment of it’s cockpit segment (op
cit)
The accusations directed against Russia including the sanctions regime
imposed by Washington are based on a lie.
The evidence does not support the official US narrative to the effect that
the MH17 was shot down by a BUK missile system operated by the DPR militia.
What next? More media disinformation, more lies?
See:
<
http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-t
he-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111> Revelations of German Pilot:
Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was
Not Hit by a Missile” By <
http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/haisenko>
Peter Haisenko, July 30, 2014
http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-th
e-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111
=== 2 ===
The original text in English: Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis
of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17
“Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” By Peter Haisenko, July 30, 2014
http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-th
e-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111
---
http://www.anderweltonline.com/wissenschaft-und-technik/luftfahrt-2014/schoc
kierende-analyse-zum-abschuss-der-malaysian-mh-017/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/schockierende-analyse-zum-abschuss-der-malaysia
n-mh17-dieses-flugzeug-wurde-nicht-von-einer-rakete-getroffen/5394154
Schockierende Analyse zum Abschuss der Malaysian MH17: Dieses Flugzeug wurde
nicht von einer Rakete getroffen
By Peter Haisenko
Global Research, July 30, 2014
AnderweltOnline.com 26 July 2014
Es will kein Licht ins Dunkel um das Unglück der Malaysian MH 017 kommen.
Die Flugschreiber sind in England und werden ausgewertet. Was kann dabei
herauskommen? Möglicherweise mehr, als man annehmen möchte. Vor allem der
Voicerecorder dürfte interessant sein, wenn man das Bild eines
Cockpit-Fragments betrachtet. Als Fachmann für Luftfahrt habe ich mir die
Bilder der Wrackteile vorgenommen, die im Internet kursieren.
Als erstes war ich erstaunt, wie wenige Fotos von den Wrackteilen mit Google
zu finden sind. Alle sind in niedriger Auflösung, bis auf eines: Das
Fragment des Cockpits unterhalb des Fensters auf der Kapitänsseite. Dieses
Bild ist allerdings schockierend. In Washington hört man mittlerweile
Stimmen, die bezüglich MH 017 von einem „möglicherweise tragischen
Irrtum/Unfall“ sprechen. Angesichts dieses Bilds wundert mich das nicht.
Ein- und Austrittslöcher von Geschossen im Cockpit-Bereich
Ich empfehle, das kleine Bild rechts anzuklicken. Sie können dieses Foto als
PDF in guter Auflösung herunterladen. Das ist notwendig, denn nur so ist zu
verstehen, was ich hier beschreibe. Ich rede nicht von Spekulationen,
sondern von eindeutigen Fakten: Das Cockpit zeigt Spuren von Beschuss. Man
kann Ein- und Austrittslöcher sehen. Der Rand eines Teils der Löcher ist
nach ! innen ! gebogen. Das sind die kleineren Löcher, rund und sauber, etwa
Kaliber 30 Millimeter. Der Rand der anderen, der größeren und etwas
ausgefransten Austrittslöcher ist nach ! außen ! gebogen. Zudem ist
erkennbar, dass an diesen Austrittslöchern teilweise die äußere Schicht des
doppelten Aluminiums weggefetzt oder verbogen ist – nach außen! Weiterhin
sind kleinere Schnitte zu erkennen, alle nach außen gebogen, die darauf
hinweisen, dass Splitter die Außenhaut vom Inneren des Cockpits her
durchschlagen haben. Die offenen Nieten sind nach außen aufgebogen.
Bei Sichtung der verfügbaren Bilder fällt eines auf: Alle Wrackteile der
Sektionen hinter dem Cockpit sind weitgehend unversehrt, wenn man davon
absieht, dass es sich um Fragmente eines Ganzen handelt. Nur der
Cockpit-Teil ist wüst zerstört. Daraus lässt sich eines bereits schließen:
Dieses Flugzeug wurde nicht von einer Rakete in der Mitte getroffen. Die
Zerstörung beschränkt sich auf den Cockpit-Bereich. Nun muss man wissen,
dass dieser Teil aus besonders verstärktem Material gebaut ist. Schließlich
muss der Bug des Flugzeugs auch den Aufprall eines großen Vogels bei hoher
Geschwindigkeit einigermaßen schadlos überstehen können. Man sieht auf dem
Foto, dass in diesem Bereich deutlich stärkeres Aluminium verbaut worden ist
als am Rest der Außenhaut. Man erinnere sich an den Absturz der Pan Am über
Lockerbie. Das einzige weitgehend unbeschädigte Teil war ein großes
Cockpit-Segment. Hier hat zweifelsfrei eine Explosion innerhalb des
Flugzeugs stattgefunden.
Panzerbrechender Munitionsmix
Was kann also passiert sein? Russland hat Radaraufzeichnungen
veröffentlicht, die mindestens eine ukrainische SU 25 in der nächsten Nähe
der MH 017 zeigen. Das korrespondiert mit der Aussage des verschollenen
spanischen Controllers, der zwei ukrainische Kampfflugzeuge in der direkten
Nähe der MH 017 gesehen hat. Betrachten wir dazu die Bewaffnung der SU 25:
Sie ist ausgerüstet mit einer zweiläufigen 30-mm-Kanone, Typ GSch-302
/AO-17A, Kampfsatz: 250 Schuss Panzerbrand- bzw. Splitter-Spreng-Geschosse,
die in einer definierten Reihenfolge in einem Gliederzerfallgurt befestigt
sind. Das Cockpit der MH 017 ist von zwei Seiten beschossen worden: Ein- und
Austrittslöcher auf derselben Seite.
Nun stelle man sich vor was passiert, wenn eine Abfolge von Panzerbrand- und
Splitter-Spreng-Geschossen das Cockpit trifft, die immerhin so ausgelegt
sind, dass sie einen Panzer zerstören können. Die Panzerbrandgeschosse
werden teilweise quer durch das Cockpit aus der anderen Seite leicht
deformiert wieder austreten. Schließlich ist ihre Durchschlagskraft für eine
solide Panzerung ausgelegt. Die Splitter-Spreng-Geschosse aber werden im
Cockpit selbst explodieren, so sind sie ausgelegt. Bei der rapiden
Feuerfolge der GSch-302 Kanone gibt es folglich in kürzester Zeit eine
schnelle Abfolge von Explosionen innerhalb des Cockpit-Bereichs, von denen
jede einzelne ausreicht, einen Panzer zu zerstören.
Welcher „Irrtum“ wurde wirklich begangen – und von wem?
Weil der Innenraum eines Verkehrsflugzeugs ein luftdicht verschlossener Raum
ist, wird durch diese Explosionen der Druck im Innern des Flugzeugs in
Sekundenbruchteilen extrem ansteigen. Dafür ist das Flugzeug nicht gerüstet.
Es wird zerplatzen wie ein Luftballon. Mit dieser Erklärung ergibt sich ein
schlüssiges Bild. Die weitgehend intakten Fragmente der hinteren Sektionen
sind an den Stellen zerbrochen, die aufgrund der Bauart bei extremem
Überdruck am ehesten auseinanderbrechen werden. Das Bild des weit
zerstreuten Trümmerfelds und das brutal beschädigte Cockpit-Segment passen
dazu. Weiterhin zeigt ein Flügelsegment Spuren eines Streifschusses, der in
Verlängerung direkt zum Cockpit führt. Interessanterweise musste ich
feststellen, dass sowohl das hochaufgelöste Foto des Cockpit-Segments als
auch das vom Streifschuss am Flügel mittlerweile aus Google-Images entfernt
worden sind. Man findet praktisch überhaupt keine Bilder mehr von den
Wrackteilen, außer rauchenden Trümmern.
Folgt man den Stimmen aus Washington, die von einem „möglicherweise
tragischen Irrtum/Unfall“ sprechen, bleibt nur noch die Frage, welcher
„Irrtum“ hier begangen worden sein könnte. Ich begebe mich jetzt nicht in
den Bereich der Spekulationen, gebe aber folgendes zu bedenken: Die MH 017
ist in ihrer Lackierung verwechselbar mit der des russischen Präsidenten.
Beide tragen die Farben der russischen Trikolore. Die Maschine mit Putin an
Bord befand sich zur selben Zeit in der Nähe der MH 017, wenn man „Nähe“ mit
Fliegeraugen betrachtet: etwa 200 bis 300 Kilometer. Dazu nehmen wir noch
die Aussage der Frau Timoschenko, sie wolle Putin am liebsten mit einer
Kalaschnikow erschießen. Aber das ist pure Spekulation. Der Beschuss des
Cockpits der MH 017 nicht.
=== 3 ===
http://www.globalresearch.ca/evidence-is-now-conclusive-two-ukrainian-govern
ment-fighter-jets-shot-down-malaysian-airlines-mh17-it-was-not-a-buk-surface
-to-air-missile/5394814
Evidence Is Now Conclusive: Two Ukrainian Government Fighter-Jets Shot Down
Malaysian Airlines MH17. It was Not a ‘Buk’ Surface to Air Missile
By Eric Zuesse
Global Research, August 04, 2014
We’ll go considerably farther than has yet been revealed by the professional
intelligence community, to provide the actual evidence that conclusively
shows that (and how) the Ukrainian Government shot down the Malaysian
airliner, MH-17, on July 17th.
The latest report from the intelligence community was headlined on August
3rd by Robert Parry,
<
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/08/03/flight-17-shoot-down-scenario-shifts/>
“Flight 17 Shoot-Down Scenario Shifts,” and he revealed there that,
“Contrary to the Obama administration’s public claims blaming eastern
Ukrainian rebels and Russia for the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight
17, some U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded that the rebels and
Russia were likely not at fault and that it appears Ukrainian government
forces were to blame, according to a source briefed on these findings. This
judgment — at odds with what President Barack Obama and Secretary of State
John Kerry have expressed publicly — is based largely on the absence of U.S.
government evidence that Russia supplied the rebels with a Buk anti-aircraft
missile system that would be needed to hit a civilian jetliner flying at
33,000 feet, said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.”
It’s actually based on lots more than that; it’s based not on an absence of
evidence, but on positive proof that the Ukrainian Government shot the plane
down, and even proving how it was done. You will see this proof, right here,
laid out in detail, for the first time.
The reader-comments to my July 31st article,
<
http://www.opednews.com/articles/First-Examination-of-Malay-by-Eric-Zuesse-
Activism-Anti-War_Obama-Administration_Peace_War_President-Barack-Obama-POTU
S-140731-170.html> “First Examination of Malaysian MH-17 Cockpit Photo Shows
Ukraine Government Shot that Plane Down,” provided links and leads to
independent additional confirmatory evidence backing up that account, of
retired Lufthansa pilot Peter Haisenko’s reconstruction of this event, to
such an extent that, after exploring the matter further, I now feel
confident enough to say that the evidence on this matter is, indeed,
“conclusive,” that Haisenko is right.
Here is all of that evidence, which collectively convinces me that
Haisenko’s conclusion there, is, indeed, the only one that can even possibly
explain this wreckage:
“There have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really
pockmarked with what almost looks like machine-gun fire, very very strong
machine-gun fire.”
This remarkable statement comes not from Haisenko, but from one of the first
OSCE investigators who arrived at the scene of the disaster.
Go to <
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ze9BNGDyk4>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ze9BNGDyk4 and you will see it.
That youtube snippet in an interview with Michael Bociurkiw, comes from a
man who is
“a Ukrainian-Canadian monitor with the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), [who] has seen up close … the crash site of
Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. Bociurkiw and one other colleague were the
first international monitors to reach the wreckage after the jet was shot
down over a rebel-held region of eastern Ukraine July 17.”
That description of him is from the lead-in to the full interview with him,
at the 29 July 2014 CBC news article,
<
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/malaysia-airlines-mh17-michael-bociurkiw-talks
-about-being-first-at-the-crash-site-1.2721007> “Malaysia Airlines MH17:
Michael Bociurkiw talks about being first at the crash site.” The far
briefer youtube clip shows only what’s presented on 6:10-6:24 of this CBC
interview with Bociurkiw. The CBC reporter in the video precedes the
interview by announcing, “The wreckage was still smoldering when a small
team from the OSCE got there.” So: he had to have been there really fast.
“No other officials arrived for days,” she said.
So: one of the two first international monitors on-site saw conclusive
evidence that the Malaysian plane had been hit by “very very strong
machine-gun fire,” not by ground-based missile-fire.
Peter Haisenko’s reconstruction of the downing of that airliner, was here
being essentially confirmed on-site by one of the two first OSCE
international monitors to arrive on-site, while the wreckage was still
smoldering. That’s as close to virgin, untouched evidence and testimony as
we’ll ever get. Unlike a black-box interpretation-analysis long afterward by
the Russian Government, or by the British Government, or by the Ukrainian
Government, each of which governments has a horse in this race, this
testimony from Bociurkiw is raw, independent, and comes from one of the two
earliest witnesses to the physical evidence. That’s powerfully authoritative
testimony, and it happens to confirm pilot Peter Haisenko’s theory of what
happened. Bociurkiw arrived there fast because he negotiated with the locals
for the rest of the OSCE team, who were organizing to come later: Bociurkiw
speaks the local languages there — Ukrainian and Russian.
Furthermore, this is hardly testimony from someone who is supportive of the
anti-Government rebels. Earlier, there had been this,
<
http://pressimus.com/Interpreter_Mag/press/3492>
http://pressimus.com/Interpreter_Mag/press/3492, which transcribed the BBC’s
interview with Bociurkiw on July 22nd. He said then: “We’re observing that
major pieces, and I’m looking at the tail fin as I said, and then there’s
also the rear cone section of the aircraft, they do look different than when
we first saw them, … two days ago.” So, he had arrived on-scene July 20th at
the latest. (Neither the BBC nor the CBC, both of which interviewed him,
were sufficiently professional to have reported the specific date at which
Bociurkiw had actually arrived on-scene, but, from this, it couldn’t have
been after July 20th. The downing had occurred July 17th. If some of the
debris was still “smoldering” as the CBC journalist said, then maybe he had
arrived there even earlier.)
The youtube snippet of Bociurkiw came to me via a reader-comment to my
article, from Bill Johnson, after which I web-searched the youtube clip for
its source and arrived then at the 29 July 2014 CBC news article and its
accompanying video.
Further, there’s this crucial 21 July photo-reconstruction of that
cockpit-fragment positioned into place on the aircraft as it had originally
been in that intact-airliner: <
https://twitter.com/EzraBraam>
https://twitter.com/EzraBraam. (Sometimes that doesn’t work, so
<
http://i0.wp.com/www.rumormillnews.com/pix7/mh17cockpithit.jpg?w=615>
here’s another screen of it from someone who copied it.) Looking at that
photo-reconstruction, one can easily tell that the SU-25 or other
fighter-jet that was firing into the cockpit from the pilot’s left side
didn’t just riddle the area surrounding the pilot with bullets, but that it
then targeted-in specifically onto the pilot himself, producing at his
location a huge gaping hole in the side of the plane precisely at the place
where the pilot was seated. Furthermore, this gaping hole was produced by
shooting into the plane, precisely at the pilot, from below and to the
pilot’s left, which is where that fighter-jet was located — not from above
the airliner, and not from beside it, and also not from below it.
In other words: this was precise and closely-targeted firing against the
pilot himself, not a blast directed broadly against, and aiming to hit, the
plane anywhere, to bring it down.
Haisenko explained how this penetration of the plane, though it was targeted
specifically at the pilot, caused immediately a breaking-apart of the entire
aircraft.
Other readers have responded to my news-report about
<
http://www.anderweltonline.com/wissenschaft-und-technik/luftfahrt-2014/shoc
king-analysis-of-the-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/> Haisenko’s article,
by saying that shrapnel from a Buk missile could similarly have caused those
holes into the side of the cockpit. However, that objection ignores another
key feature of Haisenko’s analysis. Haisenko said there: “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
likeley that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile. The edge of the other,
the larger and slightly frayed exit holes showing shreds of metal pointing
produced by the same caliber projectiles. Moreover, it is evident that …
these exit holes of the outer layer of the double aluminum reinforced
structure are shredded or bent — outwardly!”
What this means is that in order to have some of those holes frayed inwardly
and the other holes frayed outwardly, there had to have been a second
fighter-jet firing into the cockpit from the airliner’s right-hand side.
That’s critically important, because no ground-based missile (or shrapnel
therefrom) hitting the airliner could possibly have produced firing into the
cockpit from both sides of the plane. It had to have been a hail of bullets
from both sides, that brought the plane down, in that circumstance. This is
Haisenko’s main discovery, by his pointing that out. You can’t have
projectiles going in both directions — into the left-hand-side fuselage
panel from both its left and right sides — unless they are coming at the
panel from different directions. Nobody before Haisenko had noticed that the
projectiles had ripped through that panel from both its left side and its
right side. This is what rules out any ground-fired missile.
Peter Haisenko posted an extremely high-resolution image from that photo
which he used, and it shows unequivocally that some of the bullet-holes were
inbound while others of them were outbound: Here it is, viewed
<
http://www.anderweltonline.com/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF/Cockpit-MH017.pdf>
very close-up.
Although the fighter jets that were said to have been escorting the
Malaysian plane into the war-zone were alleged to be SU-25 planes, a
different type might have been used. SU-25s are designed to be flown up to
23,000 feet without an oxygen-mask, but can go much higher if the pilot does
wear that mask, which was probably the case here. Of course, an airliner
itself is fully pressurized. That pressurization inside the airliner is,
moreover, a key part of Haisenko’s reconstruction of this airliner’s
downing. Basically, Haisenko reconstructs the airliner’s breaking apart as
soon as that hail of bullets opened and released the plane’s pressurization.
The specific photo of that cockpit-fragment, which Haisenko had downloaded
immediately after the disaster, was removed from the Internet, but other
photos of this fragment were posted elsewhere, such as at the British
publication (which, like the rest of the Western “news” media is slanted
pro-Obama, anti-Putin), on July 21st, headlining their anti-Putin
missile-theory bias,
<
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/1d6a9ac2-10e3-11e4-b116-00144feabdc0.html#ax
zz387M3CW00> “MH17 crash: FT photo shows signs of damage from missile
strike.” Their “reporters” opened with their blatant anti-Russian prejudice:
“The first apparent hard evidence that Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 was
brought down by a surface-to-air missile is emerging from the crash site in
eastern Ukraine, after experts confirmed on Monday there were signs of
shrapnel damage to the aircraft.”
Although they didn’t say in their opener that the “surface-to-air missile”
was from the rebels, they made clear their pro-Ukrainian-Government
anti-Russian bias by saying, “Over the weekend, western intelligence
agencies pointed to mounting evidence that backs Ukraine’s claim that the
aircraft with 298 people on board was shot down by mistake by pro-Russian
separatists and Russian military personnel with an SA-11 missile launched
from a Buk-M1 SAM battery.” Their stenographers (or as they would say
“reporters”) stenographed (“reported”) that, “Douglas Barrie of the
International Institute for Strategic Studies, said the photographic
evidence ‘was consistent with the kind of damage you would expect to see
from the detonation of a high explosive fragmentation warhead of the type
commonly used in a SAM system’.” No analyst from the pro-Putin camp was
interviewed by their “reporters.” For example, Russia’s Interfax News
Service headlined on July 29th, the same day as the FT’s article, “Boeing’s
downing by Buk missile system unlikely — military expert,” and they
stenographed their “expert,” as follows:
Chief of the Russian Land Forces’ tactical air defense troops Maj. Gen.
Mikhail Krush said he doubts that the Malaysian passenger liner was brought
down by a Buk surface-to-air missile system. “No one observed a Buk engaging
targets in that region on that day, which provides 95 percent proof that Buk
systems were not used in this concrete case,” the general said in an
interview with the Voyenno-Promyshlenny Kuryer military weekly to be
published on Wednesday [July 30th]. ”This is no more than a theory for now.
However, a guided missile launched by a Buk missile system leaves behind a
specific smoke trail as it flies, like a comet. In daylight this trail can
be clearly seen within a radius of 20-25 kilometers from the missile system.
It cannot remain unnoticed. There are no eyewitnesses to confirm there was
any. No one reported a launch. This is one thing,” he said. “Second. The
holes left by the strike elements on the Boeing’s outer skin indicate that
the warhead blew up from below and sideways. A Buk missile strikes the
target from above,” he said. “The damage done to the plane suggests that a
different missile was used. Our guidance method is a zoom, when the missile
strikes the target from above covering it with a thick cloud of fragments”
the general said. “I cannot state categorically, guided by this data, but I
can suggest, using my experience, that it was not a Buk missile that hit the
Boeing,” the expert said.
General Krush’s statement can fit with Haisenko’s and with Bociurkiw’s, but
not with FT’s or the rest of the “reporters” (just consider them as rank
propagandists) in the West.
U.S. President Barack Obama has been saying all along that Russia –
<
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/06/indications-u-s-planning-nuclear-att
ack-russia.html> against which he is actually systematically building toward
war – and not Ukraine (which he’s using as his
<
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/06/really-need-re-start-cold-war.html>
chief vehicle to do that), is to blame for this airliner-downing.
Previously, he had said that the snipers who in February had killed many
people at the Maidan demonstrations against the pro-Russian Ukrainian
President Viktor Yanukovych came from Yanukovych’s State Security Service
and not from the far-right political parties that were trying to bring
Yanukovych down and that Obama’s agent Victoria Nuland selected to run the
new Ukrainian government. But <
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-RyOaFwcEw>
that too was an Obama lie. He lies a lot, and it’s just about the only type
of statement he ever makes about Russia, and about Ukraine: lies.
If someone wants to verify how rabidly the U.S. Government lies, and has
lied since at least the time of George W. Bush’s Presidency, just look at
<
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg> this video, by starting at
16:00 on it and going to 42:00 on it, and you will be shocked. (It pertains
to lies by Bush that are still being covered up by Obama.) And when you
further consider the many obvious questions it points out, which U.S. “news”
media refused to ask and still refuse to ask about the matter, you’ll
recognize that we are being lied to systematically and with utter contempt
of the public, and with no respect for the public’s right to know the truth,
even regarding massive history like that. It’s really brutal.
Ignorant “reporters” sometimes slip-up and include, in their stenography,
facts that actually support the opposite side’s narrative of events and that
discredit their own story-line. Such has been the case, for example, in the
Financial Times piece, which included the statement that, “Anti-aircraft
missiles are not designed to score a direct hit as they are targeted to
destroy fast, agile fighter jets. Instead, they are designed to explode
within about 20m of their target, sending out a cloud of red hot metal to
increase the chances of inflicting as much damage as possible.”
But rather than merely “a cloud of red hot metal,” what actually brought
down this plane was what Haisenko has said brought it down: magazines-full
of carefully targeted rapid-fire machine-gun bullets pouring forth from
below the plane, at both its left and right.
This was a Ukrainian Government job. It was <
https://twitter.com/EzraBraam>
close-in. (No missile fired from the distance more than 30,000 feet down to
the ground could have been that precise to target the pilot rather than the
far larger target of the plane’s entire body.) It came from
<
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-RyOaFwcEw> the Government that Obama
installed there in February and that’s now carrying out an
<
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/06/ukraine-international-war-criminal-o
bama-putin-2.html> ethnic-cleansing campaign against the residents in
Ukraine’s southeast, the places where Yanukovych’s voters live (
<
http://rinf.com/alt-news/editorials/obama-definitely-caused-malaysian-airli
ner-downed/> to the extent that they still can and do live).Compare that
picture with the following one, which I take from a
<
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/mh17-evidence-a-missile-was-used-shrapnel-
etc.3997/> propaganda-site for the U.S. regime, and so which is intended
instead to support the Administration’s line on this, certainly not
Haisenko’s explanation of how the airliner was downed, though it actually
supports Haisenko’s case:
As you can see there, a plane that’s hit by a ground-fired missile, instead
of by bullets fired from an attack-plane only a few yards away, has the
damage spread rather widely over its body, not concentrated into a tiny
area, such as to where the plane’s pilot is seated. Certainly, the contrast
between that photo and
<
http://i0.wp.com/www.rumormillnews.com/pix7/mh17cockpithit.jpg?w=615> this
one is enormous.
Furthermore, note also that the shrapnel damage to that plane comes from
above it, which is where missiles usually hit a plane from, releasing their
shrapnel from above, down onto the plane. By contrast, the hail of bullets
to the Malaysian plane’s pilot came from below the plane, aiming upward at
the cockpit, from both sides of the cockpit.
As regards whether there were actually two fighter jets firing into the
Malaysian airliner or only one, a proponent of the single-jet hypothesis,
Bill Johnson, posted as a reader-comment to
<
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Evidence-2-Ukrainian-Gove-by-Eric-Zuesse-A
ctivism-Anti-War_Impeachment_Obama-Administration_President-Barack-Obama-POT
US-140803-579.html?show=votes#allcomments> my article on August 4th, a
series of extreme close-ups of the side-panel, in which he inferred that the
explanation of the apparent left-side (pilot-side) bullets was probably the
shape of the bullets. I then asked him why he declined to accept the
possible existence of two jets. He said,
“from what I could find Russian military radar detected only one Ukrainian
fighter jet, not two. I have looked and looked for any type of radar
confirmation of a second fighter jet and can not find it.”
However, the most virginal, earliest, online evidence concerning the matter
was on July 17th, within moments of the downing, headlined in the subsequent
English translation,
<
http://slavyangrad.org/2014/07/18/spanish-air-controller-kiev-borispol-airp
ort-ukraine-military-shot-down-boeing-mh17/> “Spanish Air Controller @ Kiev
Borispol Airport: Ukraine Military Shot Down Boeing #MH17,” and it included,
“@spainbuca’s TWITTER FEED,” which included his observation, only minutes
after the downing, “2 jet fighters flew very close” to the plane.
Furthermore, immediately before that, he had tweeted, “The B777 plane flew
escorted by Ukraine jet fighter until 2 minutes before disappearing from the
radar.” So, perhaps the second jet appeared distinct to him only immediately
prior to the downing.
The accompanying news-report, also on July 17th, said:
“This Kiev air traffic controller is a citizen of Spain and was working in
the Ukraine. He was taken off duty as a civil air-traffic controller along
with other foreigners immediately after a Malaysia Airlines passenger
aircraft was shot down over the Eastern Ukraine killing 295 passengers and
crew on board. The air traffic controller suggested in a private evaluation
and basing it on military sources in Kiev, that the Ukrainian military was
behind this shoot down. Radar records were immediately confiscated after it
became clear a passenger jet was shot down.” If this is true, then the
radar-records upon the basis of which those tweets had been sent were
“confiscated.”
The best evidence is consistent that those bullet-holes came from two
directions not from one. What is virtually certain, however, is that at
least one jet fighter was close up and shot down the Malaysian plane. The
rest of the tweets from @spainbucca, there, described the immediate
hostility of the Kiev authorities toward him on the occasion, and his
speculations as to who was behind it all.
And the European Union has been playing along with
<
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b67OGUsQC44#t=335> this hoax. (If you still
have any further doubts that it’s a hoax, just click onto that link and
look.) And the mass of suckers in the West believe
<
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=81d_1403227131> that hoax: it’s succeeding
to stir a fever for war, instead of a fever to get rid of our own leaders
who are lying us into a war that will benefit only the West’s aristocrats,
while it inflicts massive physical and economic harms against everyone else
– as if it were the invasion of Iraq except multiplied in this case a
thousand-fold, especially with nuclear weapons possibly at the end of it.
If we had a free press, the news media would be ceaselessly asking President
Obama why he doesn’t demand accountability against the Ukrainian Government
for <
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4dJRnI-X8Q> their massacre
perpetrated on May 2nd inside the Trade Unions Building in Odessa, where
that <
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=81d_1403227131> newly Obama-installed
regime’s peaceful opponents were systematically trapped and then burned
alive, which the Obama-installed Ukrainian Government has refused to
investigate (much less to prosecute). Basically:
<
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/05/key-man-behind-may-2nd-odessa-ukrain
e-trade-unions-building-massacre-many-connections-white-house.html> Obama
had sponsored the massacre. So, our “news” media ignore it,
<
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/06/ukraines-civil-war-global-historical
-importance.html> even though it started this civil war on Russia’s
doorstep, and thereby re-started the Cold War, as Obama had intended that
massacre (his massacre, and his subsequent ethnic cleansing) to do.
(Similarly, the “news” media, though all of them receive my articles by
email, virtually all refuse to publish them, because I won’t let them
control what I find and report.)
And while
<
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Obama-Leads-Republicans-W-by-Eric-Zuesse-A
ctivism-Anti-War_Congress-Democrats_Nuclear-Weapons_Obama-Administration-140
723-514.html> Obama leads this Republican policy, and Vice President Dick
Cheney’s top foreign-policy advisor Victoria Nuland actually runs it for
Obama, congressional Democrats are just silent about it, and
<
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/07/republicans-rule-obama-impeachment-d
emocrats-well-see.html> do not introduce impeachment of this fake
“Democratic” hyper-George W. Bush neo-conservative President, who’s a
“Democrat” in rhetoric only – and though Obama’s policy in this key matter
<
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/06/indications-u-s-planning-nuclear-att
ack-russia.html> threatens the entire world.
A reader-comment to an earlier version of this news report and analysis
objected to my identifying Obama as a Republican-in-”Democratic”-sheep’s
clothing, and said:
“They may be rethug policies in origin but they are decidedly BI-PARTISAN to
anyone who wants to admit FACTS. The democratic party you all think still
exists is DEAD and only exists in your brain (the part that doesn’t accept
reality).”
However, U.S. Senate bill 2277, which invites Obama to provide direct U.S.
military support to the Obama-installed Ukrainian regime, has 26 sponsors,
and all of them are Republican U.S. Senators. Democratic Senators, by
contrast, are just silent on Obama’s turn toward nazism (or racist — in this
case anti-ethnic-Russian racist – fascism); the Senate’s Democrats aren’t
seeking for it to be stepped up.
This is a Republican policy, which congressional Democrats are simply afraid
to oppose. Any realistic person knows that however far right Obama turns,
the overt Republican Party will turn even farther to the right, because
they have to be to his right in order for them to be able to win Republican
primaries and retain their own Party’s nomination. Just because Obama’s
game of moving the American political center as far to the right as he can
move it is succeeding, doesn’t mean that the Democratic Party itself should
end. It instead means that progressives need to take the Democratic Party
over, just like conservatives took the Republican Party over with Reagan.
There is no other hope.
If a Democrat in the U.S. House will simply introduce an impeachment
resolution against Barack Obama, then the right-wing takeover of the
Democratic Party might finally end, and the world might yet be saved,
because the Democratic Party itself could then reject Obama as being a fake
“Democrat,” a Democrat-in-rhetoric-only. It could transform American
politics — and American politics needs such a transformation, which would
move the Democratic Party back to progressivism, more like the FDR
Democratic Party was, so that Republican politicians would no longer need to
be so fascist as they now have become (and as they now need to be in order
to be able to win their own Party’s nomination). If Democrats fail to
renounce the conservatism of Obama and of the Clintons, then the Party will
end, and needs to be replaced, just like the Republican Party replaced the
Whig Party immediately before the Civil War. Nazism has become today’s
slavery-type issue – it’s beyond the pale, and Obama’s installation and
endorsement of it in Ukraine is like James Buchanan’s endorsement of slavery
was during the 1850s: either the Democratic Party will become the
progressive party, or else the Democratic Party is over.
But that’s just my own theory of how Obama’s frauds might yet be able to be
overcome and defeated, if they still can be; it’s not part of my
presentation of the explanation of what brought down the Malaysian airliner,
which has been an open case since July 17th, and which is now a closed case.
This is past history, not future.
The present news story is being circulated free of charge or copyright to
all “news” media in the English-speaking world, in the perhaps vain hope
that the cover-ups of our leaders’ constant lies will cease soon enough to
avoid a World War III, even though communism is long since gone from Russia
and so the ideological excuse wouldn’t make any sense here.
This <
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/07/profits-ukraines-war.html>
insanity is actually all about aristocratic conquest, like World War I was.
It’s not for the benefit of the public anywhere. Silence about it (by
“Democrats,” and the “news” media) is a scandal, which needs to stop. The
real Democratic Party (the Party of FDR, who loathed and despised nazis —
and even mere fascists — yet today Obama installs nazis into Power in
Ukraine) must be restored, and a real news media needs to become established
in America. Even Republicans need it, because the very idea of
<
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/61508/keir-a-lieber-and-daryl-g-pres
s/the-rise-of-us-nuclear-primacy> “victory” in a nuclear war is a vicious
<
http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/ToonRobockTurcoPhysicsToday.pdf>
fantasy. It is a <
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8kXQb8MkIk> dangerous
lie, though there are
<
http://rinf.com/alt-news/featured/profits-ukraines-war/> some people who
find it a very profitable one. And time might be short — let’s hope not
already
<
http://www.infowars.com/polls-show-mutual-hostility-soars-between-russians-
and-americans/> too short.
After all, Obama’s hoax of having won from Europe the stepped-up economic
sanctions against Russia after the government that Obama had installed in
Ukraine downed the Malaysian plane and successfully blamed it on “Russian
aggression,” is very encouraging to him. And
<
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=81d_1403227131> European leaders know that
Obama’s entire operation is
<
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/07/america-guilty-dont-prosecute-obama.
html> a very bloody fraud (read the phone-transcript there — it’s a
stunner). So, they certainly won’t save the world from it. It’s up to us.
=== 4 ===
VIDEO: NDR Extra 3 zum Ukraine Krieg (6.8.14)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blm_aJlVMIw
http://rt.com/news/179288-german-show-ukraine-evidence-ridiculed/
German TV show ridicules 'evidence' of Russian involvement in Ukraine crisis
Published time: August 10, 2014
The tenacity of Western attempts to give the Ukrainian crisis an explicitly
anti-Russian slant has been noted by a German political satire show, which
ridiculed the apparent manner the United States presents its evidence.
The host of
<
http://www.ndr.de/fernsehen/sendungen/extra_3/Die-einzige-Satiresendung,sen
dung265176.html> Extra 3, the comedy show, got the program going with a few
pieces of 'evidence': a US-photographed satellite image that supposedly
depicts Russian complicity in cross-border fire with Ukraine, then a picture
that appeared to be drawn by a child with color crayons.
Christian Ehring pulled no punches when sharing his frank belief that the
coverage of the Ukrainian crisis by the Western media has been full of holes
since its start in February.
“Mr. President!” he said, impersonating a White House staffer rushing to
bring evidence to President Obama – “I’m pleased to inform you that we
finally have evidence! …I apologize, this is a picture my daughter drew… oh,
here it is: I drew this one myself!” Ehring proclaimed.
“Really, that’s their only proof? This picture? The American and the West
have hundreds of agents in eastern Ukraine. What are they doing there?
Keeping an eye on those who violate parking rules in the center of Donetsk?”
he added.
Another thing that got the satirical treatment was the situation around the
Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 crash near Donetsk in conflict-ridden eastern
Ukraine.
“Nobody knows what really happened to MH17 flight,” Ehring stressed. “Was
there another plane in the air or not? And how could it happen that a
passenger jet was flying over a war zone? This region is a ‘powder keg’ –
everybody knows that. Even birds of passage dig underground tunnels to avoid
flying over eastern Ukraine.”
“But the West is absolutely sure that Putin must be stopped. Putin should
take our European values for a model,” he added.
The host remembered the 1988 case of the United States downing an Iranian
passenger plane, the Aerobus-300, killing around three hundred people, which
prompted the following question: “Remember those tough economic sanctions
imposed on the USA then? No? Neither do I.”
“I have a feeling that all sides are trying to use this plane tragedy to
their benefit,” Ehring stressed.
The show then visits a 'spin doctor' who explains how media bias is
generated and for what purpose.
VIDEO: NDR Extra 3 zum Ukraine Krieg (6.8.14)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blm_aJlVMIw
__._,_.___
_____
Inviato da: "Coord. Naz. per la Jugoslavia" <jugocoord@???>
_____
<
https://it.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/jugoinfo/conversations/messages/3666
;_ylc=X3oDMTJwdG5zcDJrBF9TAzk3NDkwNDg3BGdycElkAzEzMjA5NTkwBGdycHNwSWQDNTU5MD
AwMzE2BG1zZ0lkAzM2NjYEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDcnBseQRzdGltZQMxNDA3NzU0ODYz?act=reply
&messageNum=3666> Rispondi post su web
•
<
mailto:jugocoord@tiscali.it?subject=Ogg%3A%20Due%20caccia%20ucraini%20hanno
%20abbattuto%20il%20volo%20MH17> Rispondi a mittente
•
<
mailto:jugoinfo@yahoogroups.com?subject=Ogg%3A%20Due%20caccia%20ucraini%20h
anno%20abbattuto%20il%20volo%20MH17> Rispondi a gruppo
•
<
https://it.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/jugoinfo/conversations/newtopic;_ylc
=X3oDMTJlbnFkbTUwBF9TAzk3NDkwNDg3BGdycElkAzEzMjA5NTkwBGdycHNwSWQDNTU5MDAwMzE
2BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQwNzc1NDg2Mw--> Crea nuovo argomento
•
<
https://it.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/jugoinfo/conversations/topics/3666;_
ylc=X3oDMTM0bG03ODN1BF9TAzk3NDkwNDg3BGdycElkAzEzMjA5NTkwBGdycHNwSWQDNTU5MDAw
MzE2BG1zZ0lkAzM2NjYEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDA3NzU0ODYzBHRwY0lkAzM2
NjY-> Messaggi sullo stesso tema (1)
--------------------------------------------------------
DEVASTANTE ALLUVIONE IN SERBIA-BOSNIA-CROAZIA
CNJ-Onlus invita a contribuire alla ricostruzione versando
sul conto di "Non Bombe Ma Solo Caramelle ONLUS"
IBAN: IT18E0892802202010000021816
INFO: http://www.cnj.it/AMICIZIA/poplava2014.htm
--------------------------------------------------------
FOR FAIR USE ONLY
--> La lista JUGOINFO e' curata da componenti del
*** Coordinamento Nazionale per la Jugoslavia - ONLUS ***
*** http://www.cnj.it/
***
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente
le posizioni ufficiali o condivise da tutto il CNJ, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento.
--> Bilten JUGOINFO uredjuju clanovi
*** Italijanske Koordinacije za Jugoslaviju ***
*** http://www.cnj.it/ ***
Prilozi koje vam saljemo ne odrazavaju uvek nas zvanicni stav,
niti nase jedinstveno misljenje, vec svojim sadrzajem
predstavljaju korisnu informaciju i potstrek na razmisljanje.
---> Archivio/Arhiv:
>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
>
http://www.domeus.it/circles/jugoinfo
---> Per iscriversi [o per cancellarsi] / Upisivanje [brisanje]:
crj-mailinglist-[un]subscribe@???
---> EMAIL: jugocoord(a)tiscali.it
---> C.N.J.: DOCUMENTO COSTITUTIVO / OSNIVACKI DOKUMENT:
>
http://www.cnj.it/documentazione/documento_costitutivo.htm
<
https://it.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/jugoinfo/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJlb3ZnbGJoB
F9TAzk3NDkwNDg3BGdycElkAzEzMjA5NTkwBGdycHNwSWQDNTU5MDAwMzE2BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA
3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTQwNzc1NDg2Mw--> Visita il tuo gruppo
<
https://it.groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJkcGx2YW1wBF9TAzk3NDkwNDg1BGdycE
lkAzEzMjA5NTkwBGdycHNwSWQDNTU5MDAwMzE2BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxNDA3Nz
U0ODYz> Yahoo! Gruppi
• <
https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/it/yahoo/groups/details.html> Privacy •
<
mailto:jugoinfo-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Annulla%20iscrizione>
Annulla iscrizione • <
https://info.yahoo.com/legal/it/yahoo/tos.html>
Condizioni generali di utilizzo del servizio
..
<
http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97490487/grpId=13209590/grpspId=559000316/msgId
=3666/stime=1407754863>
<
http://y.analytics.yahoo.com/fpc.pl?ywarid=515FB27823A7407E&a=1000131032227
9&js=no&resp=img>
__,_._,___
----- Fine messaggio inoltrato. -----
---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: "Giuseppe Zambon" <zambon@???>
To: "Giuseppe Zambon" <zambon@???>
Cc:
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 13:50:00 +0200
Subject: WG: [JUGOINFO] Due caccia ucraini hanno abbattuto il volo MH17
(deutsch
/ english / italiano)
Due caccia ucraini hanno abbattuto il volo MH17
e per non doverlo dire da molti
giorni la RAI-TV nasconde le cronache dall'Ucraina
1) OSCE Monitors Identify
“Shrapnel and Machine Gun-Like Holes” indicating Shelling (Michel
Chossudovsky)
2) Schockierende Analyse:
Dieses Flugzeug wurde nicht von einer Rakete getroffen (Peter Haisenko)
3) Evidence Is Now Conclusive:
Two Ukrainian Government Fighter-Jets Shot Down Malaysian Airlines MH17
(Eric Zuesse)
4) VIDEO: NDR Extra 3 zum
Ukraine Krieg / German TV show ridicules 'evidence' of Russian involvement
in Ukraine crisis
--- Von Y&K Trümpy:
Oggetto: MH17 nicht von Rakete sondern von Kampfjet abgeschossen
Data: 10 agosto 2014 15:54:30 CEST
Die ukrainische Armee erschwert und verzögert mit Angriffen auf die
Volksmilizen, welche das Gebiet der Absturzstelle der malaysischen
MH17 kontrollieren, die internationalen Aufklärungsarbeiten an den
Wrackteilen der Passagiermaschine. Es mehren sich aber schon seit längerem
die Hinweise, dass das Flugzeug von einem ukrainischen Kampjet
abgeschossen wurde, siehe untenstehende Links. Das wird die USA jedoch
nicht daran hindern, mit im besten Fall
zusammengestrickten "Beweisen" aus Sozialen-Netzwerken des
Internets, die ostukrainischen Volksmilizen für den Abschuss
verantwortlich zu machen und gegen Russland weitere Sanktionen zu
verhängen. Im Gegensatz zu den Russen haben die Amerikaner keine Daten
ihrer eigenen Aufklärungssatelliten veröffentlicht, auch die Auswertung
der Black-Boxes bleibt weiter unter Verschluss.
--- More links:
The Video Report Deleted by the BBC - ENG SUBS (25/lug/2014)
VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUvK5m2vxro
Russische Radardaten: Ukrainischer
Kampjet unweit von Boeing gesichtet (21.7.14)
http://de.ria.ru/society/20140721/269068827.html
Moskau: Boeing kurz vor Absturz wurde von
ukrainischem Kampfjet begleitet (21.7.14)
http://de.ria.ru/society/20140721/269070446.html
US spy plane incident raises more questions over MH17 crash
(WSWS, 6 August 2014)
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/08/06/side-a06.html
Ucraina: Volo MH17 abbattuto da un cannoncino 30mm
Osservatore Osce: ‘Aereo abbattuto da caccia ucraino’ / MH17: Pockmarks look
like from very, very heavy machine gun fire, says first OSCE monitor
on-scene
https://it.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/crj-mailinglist/conversations/messages/8077
PTV News 2 agosto 2014 – Volo MH17: la parola all’OSCE
Il network canadese CBC ha intervistato un inviato dell’OSCE, Michael
Bociurkiw. Bociurkiw, un canadese di origine ucraina, è stato tra i primi
al mondo ad arrivare sul sito del disastro, quando il relitto del Boeing 777
era ancora fumante. Cosa ha notato l’inviato della missione internazionale
dell’OSCE arrivato sul posto?
http://www.pandoratv.it/?p=1639
VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4aL1BIDuYo
VIDEO: Osservatore Osce: ‘Aereo abbattuto da caccia ucraino’
Lombardia Russia 3/ago/2014 - In questo video la testimonianza di un
osservatore dell’OSCE – un canadese di origine ucraina. Il video mostra le
foto della fusoliera dell’aereo malese ‘caduto’ nell’Ucraina orientale, con
inequivocabili fori di proiettili sparati da una mitragliatrice e le
conclusioni dell’osservatore. Entrambe confermano la versione russa: un aereo
Sukhoi-25 ucraino che seguiva da vicino il Boeing malese abbattuto.
VIDEO:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIaHKJVRLes
=== 1 ===
Auf Deutsch: Prof. Michel Chossudovsky von Global Research in Kanada
geht davon aus, dass MH17 nicht mit einer Rakete, sondern von einem
Kampfjet abgeschossen wurde:
http://www.luftpost-kl.de/luftpost-archiv/LP_13/LP11914_070814.pdf
---
http://www.globalresearch.ca/support-mh17-truth-osce-monitors-identify-shrapnel-like-holes-indicating-shelling-no-firm-evidence-of-a-missile-attack/5394324
“Support MH17 Truth”: OSCE Monitors Identify “Shrapnel and
Machine Gun-Like Holes” indicating Shelling. No Evidence of a Missile Attack.
Shot Down by a Military Aircraft?
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, July 31, 2014
According to the report of German pilot and airlines
expert Peter Haisenko, the MH17 Boeing 777 was not brought down by a missile.
What he observed from the available photos were
perforations of the cockpit:
The facts speak clear and loud and are beyond the realm of
speculation: The
cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The
edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and
clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber
projectile.(Revelations
of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17.
“Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” Global Research, July 30,
2014)
Based on detailed analysis Peter Haisenko reached
the conclusion that the
MH17 was not downed by a missile attack:
This aircraft was not hit by a missile in the central portion.
The destruction is limited to the cockpit area. Now you have to factor in that
this part is constructed of specially reinforced material
The OSCE Mission
It is worth noting that the initial statements by OSCE
observers (July 31) broadly confirm the findings of Peter Haisenko:
Monitors from the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe reported thatshrapnel-like holes were found in two separate pieces of the fuselage of
the ill-fated Malaysia
Airlines aircraft that was believed to have been downed by a missile in
eastern Ukraine.
Michael Bociurkiw of the OSCE group of monitors at his
daily briefing described part of the plane’s fuselage dotted with “shrapnel-like, almost machine
gun-like holes.”He said the damage was inspected by
Malaysian aviation-security officials .(Wall Street
Journal, July 31, 2014)
The monitoring OSCE team has not found evidence of a
missile fired from the ground as conveyed by official White House statements.
As we recall, the US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power stated –pointing a
finger at Russia– that the Malaysian MH17 plane was “likely downed by a
surface-to-air missile operated from a separatist-held location”:
The team of international investigators with the
Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) are uncertain if the missile
used was fired from the ground as US military experts have previously
suggested, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ)
reported. (Malay Mail
online, emphasis added)
The initial OSCE findings tend to dispel the claim
that a BUK missile system brought down the plane.
Evidently, inasmuch as the perforations are
attributable to shelling, a shelling operation conducted from the ground could
not have brought down an aircraft traveling above 30,000 feet.
Ukraine Su-25
military aircraft within proximity of MH17
Peter Haisenko’s study is corroborated by the Russian
Ministry of Defense which pointed to a Ukrainian Su-25 jet in the flight
corridor of the MH17, within proximity of the plane.
Ironically, the
presence of a military aircraft is also confirmed by a BBC report conducted at the crash site on July 23.
All the eyewitnesses
interviewed by the BBC confirmed the presence of a Ukrainian military aircraft
flying within proximity of Malaysian Airlines MH17 at the time that it was shot
down:
Eyewitness #1: There were two explosions in the air. And this is how it broke
apart. And [the fragments] blew apart like this, to the sides. And when …
Eyewitness #2: … And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it.
Everybody saw it.
Eyewitness #1: Yes, yes. It was flying under it, because it could be seen. It
was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.
Eyewitness #3: There were sounds of an explosion. But they were in the sky.
They came from the sky. Then this plane made a sharp turn-around like this. It
changed its trajectory and headed in that direction [indicating the direction
with her hands].
BBC Report below
[VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUvK5m2vxro
]
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.
Media Spin
The media has reported that a surface to air missile was
indeed fired and exploded before reaching its target. It was not the
missile that brought down the plane, it was the shrapnel resulting from the
missile explosion (prior to reaching the plane) which punctured the plane and
then led to a loss of pressure.
According to
Ukraine’s National security spokesman Andriy Lysenko in a contradictory
statement, the MH17 aircraft “suffered
massive explosive decompression after being hit by a shrapnel missile.” (See IBT, Australia)
In an utterly
absurd report, the BBC quoting the official Ukraine statement says
that:
The downed Malaysia
Airlines jet in eastern Ukraine suffered an explosive loss of pressure after it was punctured by
shrapnel from a missile.
They say the information came from the plane’s flight data
recorders, which are being analysed by British experts.
However, it remains unclear who fired a missile, with pro-Russia
rebels and Ukraine blaming each other.
Many of the 298 people killed on board flight MH17 were from the
Netherlands.
Dutch investigators leading the inquiry into the crash have
refused to comment on the Ukrainian claims.
“Machine Gun Like Holes”
The shrapnel marks should be distinguished from the small entry
and exit holes “most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile” fired
from a military aircraft. These holes could not have been caused by a missile
explosion as hinted by the MSM.
While the MSN is saying that the “shrapnel like holes”
can be caused by a missile (see BBC report above), the OSCE has confirmed the
existence of what it describes as “machine gun like holes”, without however
acknowledging that these cannot be caused by a missile.
In this regard, the GSh-302 firing gun operated by an Su-25 is
able to fire 3000 rpm which explains the numerous entry and exit holes.
According to the findings of
Peter Haisenko:
If we now consider the armament of a typical SU 25 we
learn this: It
is equipped with a double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302 / AO-17A, equipped
with: a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and
splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum), arranged in alternating order. The cockpit
of the MH 017 has evidently been fired at from both sides: the
entry and exit holes are found on the same fragment of it’s cockpit segment (op
cit)
The accusations directed against Russia including the
sanctions regime imposed by Washington are based on a lie.
The evidence does not support the official US
narrative to the effect that the MH17 was shot down by a BUK missile system
operated by the DPR militia.
What next? More media disinformation, more lies?
See:
Revelations
of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17.
“Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” By Peter Haisenko, July 30, 2014
http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-the-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111
=== 2 ===
The original text in English: Revelations of German Pilot:
Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17
“Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” By Peter Haisenko,
July 30, 2014
http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-the-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111
---
http://www.anderweltonline.com/wissenschaft-und-technik/luftfahrt-2014/schockierende-analyse-zum-abschuss-der-malaysian-mh-017/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/schockierende-analyse-zum-abschuss-der-malaysian-mh17-dieses-flugzeug-wurde-nicht-von-einer-rakete-getroffen/5394154
Schockierende Analyse zum Abschuss der Malaysian MH17: Dieses
Flugzeug wurde nicht von einer Rakete getroffen
By Peter Haisenko
Global Research, July 30, 2014
AnderweltOnline.com 26 July 2014
Es will kein Licht ins Dunkel um das Unglück der
Malaysian MH 017 kommen. Die Flugschreiber sind in England und werden
ausgewertet. Was kann dabei herauskommen? Möglicherweise mehr, als man annehmen
möchte. Vor allem der Voicerecorder dürfte interessant sein, wenn man das Bild
eines Cockpit-Fragments betrachtet. Als Fachmann für Luftfahrt habe ich mir die
Bilder der Wrackteile vorgenommen, die im Internet kursieren.
Als erstes war ich erstaunt, wie wenige Fotos von den
Wrackteilen mit Google zu finden sind. Alle sind in niedriger Auflösung, bis
auf eines: Das Fragment des Cockpits unterhalb des Fensters auf der
Kapitänsseite. Dieses Bild ist allerdings schockierend. In Washington hört man
mittlerweile Stimmen, die bezüglich MH 017 von einem „möglicherweise tragischen
Irrtum/Unfall“ sprechen. Angesichts dieses Bilds wundert mich das nicht.
Ein- und
Austrittslöcher von Geschossen im Cockpit-Bereich
Ich empfehle, das kleine Bild rechts anzuklicken. Sie
können dieses Foto als PDF in guter Auflösung herunterladen. Das ist notwendig,
denn nur so ist zu verstehen, was ich hier beschreibe. Ich rede nicht von
Spekulationen, sondern von eindeutigen Fakten: Das Cockpit zeigt Spuren von
Beschuss. Man kann Ein- und Austrittslöcher sehen. Der Rand eines Teils der
Löcher ist nach ! innen ! gebogen. Das sind die kleineren Löcher, rund und
sauber, etwa Kaliber 30 Millimeter. Der Rand der anderen, der größeren und etwas
ausgefransten Austrittslöcher ist nach ! außen ! gebogen. Zudem ist erkennbar,
dass an diesen Austrittslöchern teilweise die äußere Schicht des doppelten
Aluminiums weggefetzt oder verbogen ist – nach außen! Weiterhin sind kleinere
Schnitte zu erkennen, alle nach außen gebogen, die darauf hinweisen, dass
Splitter die Außenhaut vom Inneren des Cockpits her durchschlagen haben. Die
offenen Nieten sind nach außen aufgebogen.
Bei Sichtung der verfügbaren Bilder fällt eines auf:
Alle Wrackteile der Sektionen hinter dem Cockpit sind weitgehend unversehrt,
wenn man davon absieht, dass es sich um Fragmente eines Ganzen handelt. Nur der
Cockpit-Teil ist wüst zerstört. Daraus lässt sich eines bereits schließen:
Dieses Flugzeug wurde nicht von einer Rakete in der Mitte getroffen. Die
Zerstörung beschränkt sich auf den Cockpit-Bereich. Nun muss man wissen, dass
dieser Teil aus besonders verstärktem Material gebaut ist. Schließlich muss der
Bug des Flugzeugs auch den Aufprall eines großen Vogels bei hoher Geschwindigkeit
einigermaßen schadlos überstehen können. Man sieht auf dem Foto, dass in diesem
Bereich deutlich stärkeres Aluminium verbaut worden ist als am Rest der
Außenhaut. Man erinnere sich an den Absturz der Pan Am über Lockerbie. Das
einzige weitgehend unbeschädigte Teil war ein großes Cockpit-Segment. Hier hat
zweifelsfrei eine Explosion innerhalb des Flugzeugs stattgefunden.
Panzerbrechender
Munitionsmix
Was kann also passiert sein? Russland hat
Radaraufzeichnungen veröffentlicht, die mindestens eine ukrainische SU 25 in
der nächsten Nähe der MH 017 zeigen. Das korrespondiert mit der Aussage des
verschollenen spanischen Controllers, der zwei ukrainische Kampfflugzeuge in
der direkten Nähe der MH 017 gesehen hat. Betrachten wir dazu die Bewaffnung
der SU 25: Sie ist ausgerüstet mit einer zweiläufigen 30-mm-Kanone, Typ
GSch-302 /AO-17A, Kampfsatz: 250 Schuss Panzerbrand- bzw.
Splitter-Spreng-Geschosse, die in einer definierten Reihenfolge in einem
Gliederzerfallgurt befestigt sind. Das Cockpit der MH 017 ist von zwei Seiten
beschossen worden: Ein- und Austrittslöcher auf derselben Seite.
Nun stelle man sich vor was passiert, wenn eine
Abfolge von Panzerbrand- und Splitter-Spreng-Geschossen das Cockpit trifft, die
immerhin so ausgelegt sind, dass sie einen Panzer zerstören können. Die
Panzerbrandgeschosse werden teilweise quer durch das Cockpit aus der anderen
Seite leicht deformiert wieder austreten. Schließlich ist ihre
Durchschlagskraft für eine solide Panzerung ausgelegt. Die
Splitter-Spreng-Geschosse aber werden im Cockpit selbst explodieren, so sind
sie ausgelegt. Bei der rapiden Feuerfolge der GSch-302 Kanone gibt es folglich
in kürzester Zeit eine schnelle Abfolge von Explosionen innerhalb des
Cockpit-Bereichs, von denen jede einzelne ausreicht, einen Panzer zu zerstören.
Welcher „Irrtum“
wurde wirklich begangen – und von wem?
Weil der Innenraum eines Verkehrsflugzeugs ein
luftdicht verschlossener Raum ist, wird durch diese Explosionen der Druck im
Innern des Flugzeugs in Sekundenbruchteilen extrem ansteigen. Dafür ist das
Flugzeug nicht gerüstet. Es wird zerplatzen wie ein Luftballon. Mit dieser
Erklärung ergibt sich ein schlüssiges Bild. Die weitgehend intakten Fragmente
der hinteren Sektionen sind an den Stellen zerbrochen, die aufgrund der Bauart
bei extremem Überdruck am ehesten auseinanderbrechen werden. Das Bild des weit
zerstreuten Trümmerfelds und das brutal beschädigte Cockpit-Segment passen
dazu. Weiterhin zeigt ein Flügelsegment Spuren eines Streifschusses, der in
Verlängerung direkt zum Cockpit führt. Interessanterweise musste ich
feststellen, dass sowohl das hochaufgelöste Foto des Cockpit-Segments als auch
das vom Streifschuss am Flügel mittlerweile aus Google-Images entfernt worden
sind. Man findet praktisch überhaupt keine Bilder mehr von den Wrackteilen,
außer rauchenden Trümmern.
Folgt man den Stimmen aus Washington, die von einem
„möglicherweise tragischen Irrtum/Unfall“ sprechen, bleibt nur noch die Frage,
welcher „Irrtum“ hier begangen worden sein könnte. Ich begebe mich jetzt nicht
in den Bereich der Spekulationen, gebe aber folgendes zu bedenken: Die MH 017
ist in ihrer Lackierung verwechselbar mit der des russischen Präsidenten. Beide
tragen die Farben der russischen Trikolore. Die Maschine mit Putin an Bord
befand sich zur selben Zeit in der Nähe der MH 017, wenn man „Nähe“ mit
Fliegeraugen betrachtet: etwa 200 bis 300 Kilometer. Dazu nehmen wir noch die
Aussage der Frau Timoschenko, sie wolle Putin am liebsten mit einer
Kalaschnikow erschießen. Aber das ist pure Spekulation. Der Beschuss des
Cockpits der MH 017 nicht.
=== 3 ===
http://www.globalresearch.ca/evidence-is-now-conclusive-two-ukrainian-government-fighter-jets-shot-down-malaysian-airlines-mh17-it-was-not-a-buk-surface-to-air-missile/5394814
Evidence Is Now Conclusive: Two Ukrainian Government
Fighter-Jets Shot Down Malaysian Airlines MH17. It was Not a ‘Buk’ Surface to
Air Missile
By Eric Zuesse
Global Research, August 04, 2014
We’ll go considerably farther than has yet been revealed
by the professional intelligence community, to provide the actual evidence that
conclusively shows that (and how) the Ukrainian Government shot down the
Malaysian airliner, MH-17, on July 17th.
The latest report from the intelligence community was headlined
on August 3rd by Robert Parry, “Flight 17 Shoot-Down Scenario Shifts,” and
he revealed there that,
“Contrary to the Obama administration’s public claims blaming eastern
Ukrainian rebels and Russia for the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight
17, some U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded that the rebels and
Russia were likely not at fault and that it appears Ukrainian government
forces were to blame, according to a source briefed on these findings. This
judgment — at odds with what President Barack Obama and Secretary of State
John Kerry have expressed publicly — is based largely on the absence of
U.S. government evidence that Russia supplied the rebels with a Buk
anti-aircraft missile system that would be needed to hit a civilian
jetliner flying at 33,000 feet, said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.”
It’s
actually based on lots more than that; it’s based not on an absence of
evidence, but on positive proof that the Ukrainian Government shot the plane
down, and even proving how it was done. You will see this proof, right here,
laid out in detail, for the first time.
The reader-comments to my July 31st article, “First
Examination of Malaysian MH-17 Cockpit Photo Shows Ukraine Government Shot that
Plane Down,” provided links and leads to independent additional
confirmatory evidence backing up that account, of retired Lufthansa pilot Peter
Haisenko’s reconstruction of this event, to such an extent that, after
exploring the matter further, I now feel confident enough to say that the
evidence on this matter is, indeed, “conclusive,” that Haisenko is right.
Here is all of that
evidence, which collectively convinces me that Haisenko’s conclusion there, is,
indeed, the only one that can even possibly explain this
wreckage:
“There
have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really pockmarked
with what almost looks like machine-gun fire, very very strong machine-gun
fire.”
This remarkable statement comes not from Haisenko, but
from one of the first OSCE investigators who arrived at the scene of the
disaster.
Go to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ze9BNGDyk4 and you will see it.
That
youtube snippet in an interview with Michael Bociurkiw, comes from a man who is
“a Ukrainian-Canadian monitor with the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), [who] has seen up close … the
crash site of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. Bociurkiw and one other
colleague were the first international monitors to reach the wreckage after
the jet was shot down over a rebel-held region of eastern Ukraine July 17.”
That description of
him is from the lead-in to the full interview with him, at the 29 July
2014 CBC news article, “Malaysia Airlines MH17: Michael Bociurkiw talks about
being first at the crash site.” The
far briefer youtube clip shows only what’s presented on 6:10-6:24 of this CBC
interview with Bociurkiw. The CBC reporter in the video precedes the
interview by announcing, “The wreckage was still smoldering when a small team
from the OSCE got there.” So: he had to have been there really fast. “No other
officials arrived for days,” she said.
So:
one of the two first international monitors on-site saw conclusive
evidence that the Malaysian plane had been hit by “very very
strong machine-gun fire,” not by ground-based missile-fire.
Peter Haisenko’s
reconstruction of the downing of that airliner, was here being essentially
confirmed on-site by one of the two first OSCE international
monitors to arrive on-site, while the wreckage was still smoldering. That’s as close to virgin, untouched evidence and
testimony as we’ll ever get. Unlike a black-box interpretation-analysis long
afterward by the Russian Government, or by the British Government, or by the
Ukrainian Government, each of which governments has a horse in this race, this
testimony from Bociurkiw is raw, independent, and comes from one of
the two earliest witnesses to the physical evidence. That’s powerfully
authoritative testimony, and it happens to confirm pilot Peter Haisenko’s
theory of what happened. Bociurkiw arrived there fast because he
negotiated with the locals for the rest of the OSCE team, who were organizing
to come later: Bociurkiw speaks the local languages there — Ukrainian and
Russian.
Furthermore, this is hardly testimony from someone who is
supportive of the anti-Government rebels. Earlier, there had been this,
http://pressimus.com/Interpreter_Mag/press/3492, which transcribed the BBC’s interview
with Bociurkiw on July 22nd. He said then: “We’re observing that
major pieces, and I’m looking at the tail fin as I said, and then there’s also
the rear cone section of the aircraft, they do look different than when we
first saw them, … two days ago.” So, he had arrived on-scene July 20th at
the latest. (Neither the BBC nor the CBC, both of which interviewed him, were
sufficiently professional to have reported the specific date at
which Bociurkiw had actually arrived on-scene, but, from this, it
couldn’t have been after July 20th. The downing had occurred July 17th. If some
of the debris was still “smoldering” as the CBC journalist said, then maybe he
had arrived there even earlier.)
The youtube snippet of Bociurkiw came to me via a
reader-comment to my article, from Bill Johnson, after which I web-searched the
youtube clip for its source and arrived then at the 29 July 2014 CBC news
article and its accompanying video.
Further, there’s this crucial 21 July photo-reconstruction of
that cockpit-fragment positioned into place on the aircraft as
it had originally been in that intact-airliner:
https://twitter.com/EzraBraam. (Sometimes that doesn’t work, so here’s another screen of it from someone who copied it.)
Looking at that photo-reconstruction, one can easily tell that the SU-25 or
other fighter-jet that was firing into the cockpit from the pilot’s left side
didn’t just riddle the area surrounding the pilot with bullets, but that it
then targeted-in specifically onto the pilot himself, producing at his location
a huge gaping hole in the side of the plane precisely at the place where the
pilot was seated. Furthermore, this gaping hole was produced by shooting into
the plane, precisely at the pilot, from below and to the pilot’s left, which is
where that fighter-jet was located — not from above the airliner, and not from
beside it, and also not from below it.
In
other words: this was precise and closely-targeted firing against the pilot
himself, not a blast directed broadly against, and aiming to hit, the plane
anywhere, to bring it down.
Haisenko explained
how this penetration of the plane, though it was targeted specifically at the
pilot, caused immediately a breaking-apart of the
entire aircraft.
Other readers have responded to my news-report about Haisenko’s
article, by saying that shrapnel from a Buk missile could
similarly have caused those holes into the side of the cockpit. However, that
objection ignores another key feature of Haisenko’s analysis. Haisenko said
there: “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 likeley that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile.
The edge of the other, the larger and slightly frayed exit holes showing shreds
of metal pointing produced by the same caliber projectiles. Moreover, it is
evident that … these exit holes of the outer layer of the double aluminum
reinforced structure are shredded or bent — outwardly!”
What
this means is that in order to have some of those holes frayed inwardly and the
other holes frayed outwardly, there had to have been a second fighter-jet
firing into the cockpit from the airliner’s right-hand side.
That’s critically
important, because no ground-based missile (or shrapnel therefrom) hitting the
airliner could possibly have produced firing into the cockpit from both sides of the plane. It had to have been a
hail of bullets from both sides, that brought the plane down, in that
circumstance. This is Haisenko’s main discovery, by his pointing that out. You
can’t have projectiles going in both directions — into the left-hand-side
fuselage panel from both its left and right sides — unless they are coming at
the panel from different directions. Nobody before Haisenko had noticed that
the projectiles had ripped through that panel from both
its left side and its right side. This is what rules out any ground-fired missile.
Peter Haisenko posted an extremely high-resolution image from
that photo which he used, and it shows unequivocally that some of the
bullet-holes were inbound while others of them were outbound: Here it is,
viewed very close-up.
Although
the fighter jets that were said to have been escorting the Malaysian plane into
the war-zone were alleged to be SU-25 planes, a different type might have been
used. SU-25s are designed to be flown up to 23,000 feet without an oxygen-mask,
but can go much higher if the pilot does wear that mask, which was probably the
case here. Of course, an airliner itself is fully pressurized. That
pressurization inside the airliner is, moreover, a key part of Haisenko’s
reconstruction of this airliner’s downing. Basically, Haisenko reconstructs the
airliner’s breaking apart as soon as that hail of bullets opened and released
the plane’s pressurization.
The specific photo of that cockpit-fragment, which Haisenko had
downloaded immediately after the disaster, was removed from the Internet, but
other photos of this fragment were posted elsewhere, such as at the British
publication (which, like the rest of the Western “news” media is slanted
pro-Obama, anti-Putin), on July 21st, headlining their anti-Putin
missile-theory bias, “MH17 crash:
FT photo shows signs of damage from missile strike.” Their “reporters” opened with their blatant
anti-Russian prejudice:
“The first apparent hard evidence that Malaysia Airlines Flight
MH17 was brought down by a surface-to-air missile is emerging from the crash
site in eastern Ukraine, after experts confirmed on Monday there were signs of
shrapnel damage to the aircraft.”
Although they
didn’t say in their opener that the “surface-to-air missile” was from the
rebels, they made clear their pro-Ukrainian-Government anti-Russian bias by saying,
“Over the weekend, western intelligence agencies pointed to mounting evidence
that backs Ukraine’s claim that the aircraft with 298 people on board was shot
down by mistake by pro-Russian separatists and Russian military personnel with
an SA-11 missile launched from a Buk-M1 SAM battery.” Their stenographers (or
as they would say “reporters”) stenographed (“reported”) that, “Douglas Barrie
of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said the photographic
evidence ‘was consistent with the kind of damage you would expect to see from
the detonation of a high explosive fragmentation warhead of the type commonly
used in a SAM system’.” No analyst from the pro-Putin
camp was
interviewed by their “reporters.” For example, Russia’s Interfax News Service
headlined on July 29th, the same day as the FT’s article, “Boeing’s downing by
Buk missile system unlikely — military expert,” and they stenographed their
“expert,” as
follows:
Chief of the Russian Land Forces’ tactical air defense
troops Maj. Gen. Mikhail Krush said he doubts that the Malaysian passenger
liner was brought down by a Buk surface-to-air missile system. “No one observed
a Buk engaging targets in that region on that day, which provides 95 percent
proof that Buk systems were not used in this concrete case,” the general
said in an interview with the Voyenno-Promyshlenny Kuryer military weekly
to be published on Wednesday [July 30th]. ”This is no more than a theory
for now. However, a guided missile launched by a Buk missile system leaves
behind a specific smoke trail as it flies, like a comet. In daylight
this trail can be clearly seen within a radius of 20-25 kilometers from
the missile system. It cannot remain unnoticed. There are no eyewitnesses
to confirm there was any. No one reported a launch. This is one thing,”
he said. “Second. The holes left by the strike elements on the Boeing’s
outer skin indicate that the warhead blew up from below and sideways. A
Buk missile strikes the target from above,” he said. “The damage done
to the plane suggests that a different missile was used. Our guidance
method is a zoom, when the missile strikes the target from above covering
it with a thick cloud of fragments” the general said. “I cannot state
categorically, guided by this data, but I can suggest, using my experience,
that it was not a Buk missile that hit the Boeing,” the expert said.
General Krush’s
statement can fit with Haisenko’s and with Bociurkiw’s, but not with FT’s or the rest of the “reporters” (just consider
them as rank propagandists) in the West.
U.S. President Barack Obama has been saying all along that
Russia – against which he is actually
systematically building toward war – and not Ukraine (which he’s using as his chief vehicle to do that), is to blame
for this airliner-downing. Previously, he had said that the snipers who in
February had killed many people at the Maidan demonstrations against the
pro-Russian Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych came from Yanukovych’s State
Security Service and not from the far-right political parties that were trying
to bring Yanukovych down and that Obama’s agent Victoria Nuland selected to run
the new Ukrainian government. But that too was
an Obama lie. He lies a lot, and it’s just about the only type of statement
he ever makes about Russia, and about Ukraine: lies.
If someone wants to verify how rabidly the U.S. Government lies,
and has lied since at least the time of George W. Bush’s Presidency, just look
at this video, by starting at 16:00 on it and going to 42:00
on it, and you will be shocked. (It pertains to lies by Bush
that are still being covered up by Obama.) And when you further consider the
many obvious questions it points out, which U.S. “news” media refused to ask
and still refuse to ask about the matter, you’ll recognize that we are being
lied to systematically and with utter contempt of the public, and with no
respect for the public’s right to know the truth, even regarding massive
history like that. It’s really brutal.
Ignorant “reporters” sometimes slip-up and include, in their
stenography, facts that actually support the opposite side’s narrative of
events and that discredit their own story-line. Such has been the case, for
example, in the Financial Times piece, which included the statement that,
“Anti-aircraft missiles are not designed to score a direct hit as they are
targeted to destroy fast, agile fighter jets. Instead, they are designed to
explode within about 20m of their target, sending out a cloud of red hot metal
to increase the chances of inflicting as much damage as possible.”
But
rather than merely “a cloud of red hot metal,” what actually brought down this
plane was what Haisenko has said brought it down: magazines-full of carefully
targeted rapid-fire machine-gun bullets pouring forth from below the plane, at
both its left and right.
This was a
Ukrainian Government job. It was close-in
_______________________________________________
Mailing list del comitato
"Scienziate e scienziati contro la guerra"
scienzaepacenews@???
http://liste.scienzaepace.it/mailman/listinfo/scienzaepacenews
...
[Messaggio troncato]
--
Hai ricevuto questo messaggio perché sei iscritto al gruppo "nowaroma" di Google Gruppi.
Per annullare l'iscrizione a questo gruppo e non ricevere più le sue email, invia un'email a nowaroma+unsubscribe@???.
Per altre opzioni visita
https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
