2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

[nomo]

LONG article, but worthwhile for putting together what we know and don't know about MH17.

MH17 Verdict: Real Evidence Points to US-Kiev Cover-up of Failed False Flag



As a side note, it's a terrible shame this incident didn't get its own thread. There is so much going on here and it has nothing to do with the previous Malaysia Airlines case.

[JackRiddler]

I wrote to RocketMan and a mod about the possibility of re-titling this "2 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine." No receipt indicated yet from either, i.e., it's still in "Outbox."

[JackRiddler]

Yay!

RocketMan agreed to same thread, new title!

[NOTE: Original thread title changed July 31 to reflect that the discussion shifted to encompass in depth the second air disaster suffered by Malaysia Airlines in 2014, the downing of MH17 in the Ukraine on July 17.]

Cross-posting from the other, newer thread this round-up of the evidence for an intentional shoot-down, much of it I have to say very weak. Like "Carlos the Spanish Pilot" claiming to have been present at Ukrainian ATC, an inherently implausible story. Or the historical precedent of Operation Northwoods, are you kidding? We don't need proof that states are capable of such crimes, we need evidence showing the potential criminals actually did something. (Why not throw in the Moscow 9/99 apartment bombings, I wonder?)

I don't know why those arguing to establish evidence for speculated conspiracies do this kitchen sink approach of throwing all claims in, the credible with the ridiculous, the confirmed with the implausible, without distinctions. Also, why they feel compelled to suggest authoritative answers to all questions, rather than acknowledging and demarcating the unknowns. This is counterproductive and discrediting. Less is usually more! Stick with the strengths. The funny thing is many of the same writers will deny every detail of an official story, even the confirmed ones, if they find that even one official claim is a lie. (The implication of including Northwoods is that now any claim against the U.S. government must be true.) They don't seem to get the same treatment will be accorded to them (and never mind the further anti-conspiracist propaganda tropes and guilt-by-association passed on to every other writer on the same subject, which we all hate).

There seems to be little understanding furthermore of how plausible deniability works. If Kiev wanted this or any other passenger plane shot down to blame the separatist militias, they could have (may have) accomplished simply by routing it over the warzone, flying their own warplanes in the same area at the same time, and waiting for the high likelihood that the separatists would fuck up and hit the passenger plane.

... is any last vestige of the West's credibility.


From the US and its Western allies surfaced only groundless blames and accusation, not to mention fake evidence and tirades of war-mongering propaganda. No answers at all to the following central issues of this MH-17 event:


http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-malays ... ed/5393296

By Julie Lévesque
Global Research, July 26, 2014

The Malaysian Airline MH17 Crash: Sixteen Central Issues Which Cannot be Ignored

In establishing who was behind the shooting down of MH17, there are a number of central issues as well as factual evidence which cannot be overlooked:


1. Malaysian Airlines confirmed that the pilot was instructed to fly at a lower altitude by the Kiev air traffic control tower upon its entry into Ukraine airspace. (Malaysian Airlines MH17 Was Ordered to Fly over the East Ukraine Warzone)

2. The flight path was changed. We still don’t know who ordered it, but we know it was not Eurocontrol:

MH17 was diverted from the normal South Easterly route over the sea of Azov to a path over the Donetsk. Oblast. (The Flight Path of MH17 Was Changed. July 17 Plane Route was over the Ukraine Warzone)

According to Malaysian Airlines “The usual flight route [across the sea of Azov] was earlier declared safe by the International Civil Aviation Organisation. The International Air Transportation Association has stated that the airspace the aircraft was traversing was not subject to restrictions.”

…

The regular flight path of MH17 (and other international flights) over a period of ten days prior to July 17th ( day of the disaster), crossing Eastern Ukraine in a Southeasterly direction is across the Sea of Azov (click on the article link below to see the map). While the audio records of the MH17 flight have been confiscated by the Kiev government, the order to change the flight path did not come from Eurocontrol. Did this order to change the flight path come from the Ukrainian authorities? Was the pilot instructed to change course? (Malaysian Airlines MH17 Was Ordered to Fly over the East Ukraine Warzone)

3. The presence of the Ukrainian military jet was confirmed by Spanish air traffic controller “Carlos” at Kiev Borispol airport shortly after the plane was shot down, as well as eyewitnesses in Donetsk. (How American Propaganda Works: “Guilt By Insinuation”, Spanish Air Controller @ Kiev Borispol Airport: Ukraine Military Shot Down Boeing MH#17

The Spanish air traffic controller documented the event on Twitter as it happened. He claimed it was not an accident, that the Ukrainian authorities shot down MH17 and were trying to “make it look like an attack by pro-Russians” . His Twitter account was closed down shortly after the tragedy. Although his account has yet to be fully corroborated, some of his claims have been confirmed by Malaysian Airlines and the Russian authorities.

There have been some reports to the effect the Spanish Air controller is fake and that the twitter message were sent out of London. Upon further investigation, the Spanish Air Controller conducted several media interviews in the last 2-3 months, see his interview with RT (Spanish Air Controller @ Kiev Borispol Airport: Ukraine Military Shot Down Boeing MH#17)

4. Russia has made available public radar and satellite imagery as evidence. Its images suggest the following:

a) Kiev’s regime deployed anti-air missile systems in Donetsk in and around the area where flight MH17 crashed.

b) An Ukrainian warplane SU-25 trailing flight MH17

c) the report pointed to the possibility of an air-to-air attack on MH17

d) the report also pointed to inconsistencies pertaining to the reports of the Ukrainian air traffic control

The Russian authorities did not come to any conclusion regarding who was to blame for shooting down the plane. (MH17 Show & Tell: It’s the West’s Turn – Russian Satellites and Radars Contradict West’s Baseless Claims)

5. The U.S., despite its global spying apparatus, has not shown any radar or satellite imagery to back its claim that Russia and the Eastern-Ukrainian opposition are responsible for the downing of MH17. The evidence it has presented so far is weak and based on pro-Kiev documents consisting of YouTube videos and various social media – “all of which are admittedly unverifiable and some of which is veritably fabricated.”:

Is US intelligence simply reading blogs? Or are the blogs somehow a clearinghouse of US intelligence? Or are the blogs fabrications by US intelligence in an attempt to frame Russia? One in particular, “Ukraine at War,” is a definitive collection of fabrications, biased propaganda, and dubious claims that appear to precede “US intelligence” claims. (Assigning Blame to East Ukraine Rebels: US Appeals to “Law of the Jungle” in MH17 Case)

6. “The Russian Defense Ministry pointed out that at the moment of destruction of MH-17 an American satellite was flying over the area”:

The Russian government urges Washington to make available the photos and data captured by the satellite.(How American Propaganda Works: “Guilt By Insinuation”)

7. A U.S. intelligence source claimed the “U.S. intelligence agencies do have detailed satellite images of the likely missile battery that launched the fateful missile, but the battery appears to have been under the control of Ukrainian government troops dressed in what look like Ukrainian uniforms”. These images could confirm the evidence presented by Russia to the effect that Kiev’s regime deployed anti-air missile systems in Donetsk in and around the area where flight MH17 crashed. (Fact number 4, Whistleblower: U.S. Satellite Images Show Ukrainian Troops Shooting Down MH17)

8. Russia called for an expert independent investigation:

President Putin has repeatedly stressed that the investigation of MH-17 requires “a fully representative group of experts to be working at the site under the guidance of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).” Putin’s call for an independent expert examination by ICAO does not sound like a person with anything to hide. (How American Propaganda Works: “Guilt By Insinuation”)

9. The U.S. claimed, without evidence, but “with confidence” that Russia was involved:

[On July 20, the US Secretary of State, John Kerry confirmed that pro-Russian separatists were involved in the downing of the Malaysian airliner and said that it was “pretty clear” that Russia was involved. Here are Kerry’s words: “It’s pretty clear that this is a system that was transferred from Russia into the hands of separatists. We know with confidence, with confidence, that the Ukrainians did not have such a system anywhere near the vicinity at that point and time, so it obviously points a very clear finger at the separatists.” (Ibid.)

10. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry's statement above regarding Russian involvement is contradicted by the Russian satellite photos and numerous eye witnesses on the ground. (Ibid.)

11. US intelligence officials said there is no evidence of the Russian government’s involvement, also contradicting John Kerry's statement above. (US Intelligence on Malaysian Flight MH17: Russia Didn’t Do It. “US Satellite Photos do not Support Obama’s Lies”, The author refers to this news item by the Associated Press: US INTELLIGENCE: No 'Direct' Russian Involvement In Downing Of MH17)

12. A few hours after the crash, Kiev authorities presented a video in which the opposition admitted shooting down the plane. Experts who studied the video concluded that it was a fabrication:

“The tape’s second fragment consists of three pieces but was presented as a single audio recording. However, a spectral and time analysis has showed that the dialog was cut into pieces and then assembled. Short pauses in the tape are very indicative: the audio file has preserved time marks which show that the dialog was assembled from various episodes.” (Ibid.)

The encoding of the video file shows it was created on July 16, the day before the plane was shot down. This information remains to be confirmed, but if it is accurate, it would mean that the Ukrainian authorities shot the plane down and fabricated evidence to frame the opposition (Did Ukraine Fabricate Evidence to Frame Russia for MH17 Shoot Down?, How American Propaganda Works: “Guilt By Insinuation”)

13. John Kerry “referred to a video that the Ukrainians have made public showing an SA-11 unit heading back to Russia after the downing of the plane with 'a missing missile or so.'” The video was “posted on the Facebook account of the Ukrainian Interior Minister.”According to numerous sources the video was “taken in or near Krasnoarmeisk”, a town under Kiev's control since May and located “ 120 kilometers from the Russian border and 80 kilometers from where the Malaysian Boeing 777 crashed”:

At least one other clip of the “Russian Buk” that has been made available also suggests that the Ukrainians are showing their own equipment. I’m still working on researching that one for you. (Key Piece of Video “Evidence” for Russian Responsibility for Malaysian Plane Shootdown Debunked)

14. Ukrainian Prosecutor-General Vitaly Yarema said the Ukrainian opposition did not possess a Buk missile system:

“Ukrainian Interior Minister Anton Gerashchenko said on July 17 that the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 airliner had been downed by the Buk missile system...Ukrainian Prosecutor-General Vitaly Yarema told Ukrainian Pravda newspaper on Friday: 'After the passenger airliner was downed, the military reported to the president that terrorists do not have our air defense missile systems Buk and S-300... These weapons were not seized'” (Militias Do Not Have Ukrainian Buk Missile System — Ukraine General Prosecutor)

15. The MH17 incident is used to wage economic war against Russia. Sanctions imposed in the wake of the event, without any evidence of Russian implication, are used to weaken the ruble and destabilize the Russian Monetary system. (The Malaysian Airlines MH17 Crash: Financial Warfare --against Russia, Multibillion Dollar Bonanza for Wall Street)

16. In 1962, the U.S. Joint Chief of Staff planned Operation Northwoods, a secret "false flag operation" (declassified) in which a civilian airliner was to be shot down and blamed on the Cuban government. The objective was to manufacture a pretext to wage war on Cuba. (The Implementation of Operations Northwoods was turned down by President John F. Kennedy).

[JackRiddler]

But this reply is very interesting!

This is a sobering read, too: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/07/ ... onomy.html

But, let us not wander too far afield.

The fumbling desperation of these propaganda plays is, indeed, remarkable. The United States has always been better at branding than messaging.

However, I see this -- and please bear in mind how dumb I am -- but I see this as a Neocon/Neolib beltway faction making hail mary plays because the actual machinery of NatSec is preparing to spit them out. Obamadmin's "smooth transition" in 2008, which kept on most of the Bush-appointed players, led to this weird conglomeration. Almost none of these people are veterans, almost all of them are wonks. Wonks can't all be Henry Kissinger...and in fact, by mathematical law, the vast majority of them cannot be, they are merely being fattened for the Feast, at which time their throats will be slit and they'll either retire to think tanks or, you know, actually die, not an uncommon fate for hungry lil' predators in DC.

Nuland's "Fuck the EU" comment was more than a gaffe, more than a scandal, it was a very clear signal that she's been operating in a bubble and has probably never appreciated the game she was playing. (She would not be useful for her employers if she did.) I suspect that NATO will survive a very long time in the peak oil endgame, even once most other alliances are "reverting to primary allegiances," in classic collapse form. Only an insulated and carefully groomed DC "insider" could be dumb enough to think the EU doesn't matter.

2016 is going to be fucking fascinating.

[Morty]

Just to get these comments on the right thread, I wrote the following in response to this article from over on the Color Revolution thread:

I didn't pay much attention to the Global Research articles because the idea that the damage to the cockpit was caused by 30mm machine gun doesn't seem to correspond to the damage on the cockpit to my eyes. I'm no expert, of course, but it just doesn't. It looks like something exploded in front of the plane. There are many different size holes, and the entire surface is scorched. Projectiles have entered from the outside, but as mentioned, the outer layer of aluminium is mostly peeled outwards, even in areas surrounding entrance holes, which needs some explaining. Apparently the cockpit broke away and landed separate to the rest, so you'd think the scorching would likely not be caused by jet fuel explosions on impact with the ground.

The BUK works on radar, and air-to-air missiles work on heat, so a BUK is more likely to hit the nose. And an air-to-air fired from behind, which is where the Russians say the Ukie fighter was, would hit the plane from behind, you'd think. Though again, I'm no expert. (I just want to state for the record that the German expert guy clearly doesn't know what he's talking about )

Thinking about it a bit more, I'm starting to think the hard-to-explain damage to the MH-17 cockpit could be caused by air pressure. The nose of the jet is extra strong so it can withstand bird strikes at 700mph, and is made up of numerous layers of very strong aluminium. Whether it was bullets, or non-explosive projectiles from a missile (the non-explosive projectiles are exploded out of the missile the split second before impact with the target), when the projectiles penetrate the skin of the plane, not only is there air trying to force its way into the perforations from the enormous wind pressure created by the jet travelling through the air at 5-600mph, but if, as is likely, there was air trying to force its way out of the perforation due to depressurisation, for a split second, right at the perforation - i.e. right where the laminated alloy sheeting is exposed - there would have been huge p.s.i pressure. Quite possibly enough pressure to cause the reverse direction ripping/tearing/breaking away damage to the exterior aluminium sheet as seen in the photo.

[Ben D]

The BUK works on radar, and air-to-air missiles work on heat, so a BUK is more likely to hit the nose.

While it would be correct to say that BUK would be a radar guided surface to air missile, we can't say for sure what guidance system any air to air missile would be based on.....they vary, some work on heat, some on semi active radar, some on active radar, some combinations of heat and radar. Also there is no good reason why a radar guided SAM would hit the cockpit, if it did not have a proximity fuse and many do, it would be more likely to strike the aircraft at the point of strongest radar signature reflection.....probably the middle of the fuselage where wings join.

[Morty]

Found this pic from here:

18. Upper Fuselage Skin

The violence of Flight 17’s destruction is evident in how it came to rest after its fall from 33,000 feet. The white-painted skin of the forward fuselage is pocked with what appear to be shrapnel holes. This piece, when installed on the aircraft, is just behind and above the pilot’s flight deck windows in the side or upper ceiling.

This is evidence that it still doesn't look much like 30mm machine gun fire, and that whatever hit it likely didn't hit it from below. And from what I've heard, SAMs generally hit from above - they fly higher than the target, then lose height to hit the target.

Also there is no good reason why a radar guided SAM would hit the cockpit, if it did not have a proximity fuse and many do, it would be more likely to strike the aircraft at the point of strongest radar signature reflection.

This looks like a missile that did have a proximity fuse, you agree? I guess the cockpit could be the "point of strongest radar signature reflection.....probably the middle of the fuselage where wings join" if the missile (/radars) were approaching the airliner head on.

[Ben D]

Yes, Morty...the proximity fuse scenario seems the most likely...and....as the aircraft exploded. there would be also secondary 'shrapnel' damage on various pieces of fuselage.

[conniption]

Washington's Blog



Systematically Reconstructing the Shoot-Down of the Malaysian Airliner: The Guilt Is Clear and Damning

Posted on August 7, 2014
by Eric Zuesse.

On July 22nd, zerohedge bannered sarcastically, “Flight MH-17 Black Boxes To Be Analyzed In ‘Impartial’ London,” and reported that they would be analyzed by the U.S.-allied, anti-Russian, pro-Ukrainian, British Government. A mere four days later, on the 26th, CBS News headlined the results, “Black box findings consistent with missile blast,” but they declined to report who, or even what country’s government, had actually done the analysis. CBS reported merely: “Unreleased data from a black box retrieved from the wreckage of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 in Ukraine show findings consistent with the plane’s fuselage being hit multiple times by shrapnel from a missile explosion. ‘It did what it was designed to do,’ a European air safety official told CBS News, ‘bring down airplanes.’ The official described the finding as ‘massive explosive decompression.’” That’s all. Nothing more. However, this “explosive decompression” would have happened with bullets too, if the pressurized airliner were punctured by bullets instead of shrapnel. Why did that person (whomever it was) assume that the plane had been hit by a missile’s shrapnel, instead of by hails of bullets fired by machine-guns from a fighter-plane flying alongside it? Maybe because Britain is allied with the Obama-installed Ukrainian Government, against the anti-Government rebels who have no airplanes at all and thus cannot get gunmen 33,000 feet up into the air to shoot directly at the Malaysian airliner’s pilot, and that that’s what actually brought this plane down. We’ll show that the latter scenario is, indeed, correct.

Only idiots would trust Britain to interpret these black boxes to determine what and who brought down that plane. But, fortunately, the physical evidence lying on the ground at the site in Ukraine was photographed very quickly by locals there and uploaded to the Internet sometimes before any fighters and any governments were able to tamper with anything; and there happened to be one modest-looking item found at the site that tells a remarkably complete and entirely credible and convincing account of how this plane came down.

It tells that the Ukrainian Government itself did this airliner-downing, with bullets, not with shrapnel. You’ll see the evidence laid out before you here; you won’t need to rely upon the British Government to tell you how this event happened. The evidence will tell you that.

continued...

[smiths]

well there's a bonus for us, as well as being something of an expert on atmospheric science and dynamic systems

BenD also appears to be qualified in the field of ballistics and high explosives

tell me, Ben, what other advanced competencies have you got up your sleeve? the articulation of random bovine fecal patterns perhaps?

[Ben D]

well there's a bonus for us, as well as being something of an expert on atmospheric science and dynamic systems

BenD also appears to be qualified in the field of ballistics and high explosives

tell me, Ben, what other advanced competencies have you got up your sleeve? the articulation of random bovine fecal patterns perhaps?

Ok my friend smiths, so you're skeptical of my technical competency to comment on these matters and are being facetious....I will not hold that against you. Being older than you probably thought, my working career is long over and I have been retired many years. Defence avionics and attack radar using radar guided air to air/ground is where I started as a lad....the Mirage III is dated for sure. but the principles endure. Oh..and I worked on a contract for aus gov civil aviation primary and secondary radar site selection for the centralised remote air traffic control system from Cairns airport down the east coast across to Adelaide and even one for the sandgropers at Perth. But satellite systems is where I worked most...Communication Stations, Tracking, Telemetry, and Control Stations, Remote Sensing and Data Acquisition Stations... OTC, ITT, Hughes Aircraft Systems, ACRES....australia and overseas...enough?

[smiths]

yep, thats enough - point well taken

[8bitagent]

MH17, like MH37, is already down the memory hole...until the next Malaysia 777 neets with tragedy.

Now me personally, I am not sure there's clear evidence the plane was shot down knowing it was a commercial liner. Havent the anti Ukrainian forces been shooting down planes in that area before and since then in the last
few months?

[Morty]

The youtube time stamps are one of the main pieces of evidence that the MH17 crash may have been a false flag. This guy is saying that youtube seems to routinely take 24 hours off to create the time stamp. I don't understand it enough to be confident one way or the other, but I can imagine such a thing being done by youtube programmers in order to avoid some kind of programming glitch.

Debunked: MH17 Video Timestamped before the crash, and other timeline issues

Summary: YouTube video creation date seemed to be on the day before the crash, however tests show YouTube subtracts a day from the mp4 creation date of all videos uploaded, so the video was actually uploaded six hours after the crash.

[stefano]

Haven't really been following this, but doesn't this sound more like rounds from a plane-mounted cannon than like a Buk missile? Does it always have a shrapnel head?

MH17 destroyed in instant by 'number of high-energy objects', says report

Preliminary report by Dutch Safety Board reveals objects caused plane to break apart before alarm could be raised

Julian Borger and Gwyn Topham
The Guardian, Tuesday 9 September 2014 19.58 BST

Malaysia Airlines flight 17 was destroyed in an instant when the cockpit and other parts of the fuselage were peppered by "a large number of high-energy objects," causing the plane to break apart over eastern Ukraine before anyone could raise an alarm, according to a preliminary report on the disaster which was released on Tuesday.

The report by the Dutch Safety Board (DSB), does not speculate on the origin or nature of objects, noting its investigators have not been able to visit the crash site because their security could not be guaranteed in the midst of the conflict between Ukrainian government and pro-Russian separatist forces.

The findings are consistent with US and Ukrainian assertions the Boeing 777, flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was brought down by an anti-aircraft missile, which they say was provided by Russia. However, some air-to-air missiles also have fragmentation warheads which spray small shrapnel when they detonate close to a target.

The DSB report rules out other possible causes for the crash, which killed all 298 people on board, saying: "There are no indications that the MH17 crash was caused by a technical fault or by actions of the crew." It found that the shrapnel came from outside the plane and hit the cockpit above the level of the floor, implying it sheared through the space occupied by the pilots. The front parts of the plane broke away first, leaving the rest of the aircraft to fly on for some distance, with parts of the rear and centre ending up miles further east than the cockpit.

The US and Ukraine have accused separatists of shooting down the plane with a surface-to-air BUK missile, which explodes near its target, peppering it with high-velocity shrapnel. Moscow has denied the charge, pointing instead at the Ukrainian air force.

Rebel leaders have by turns admitted and denied possessing a BUK system. On Monday Alexander Zakharchenko, the prime minister of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic, told Russia's Interfax new agency: "We simply do not have the military hardware capable of shooting down a Boeing passenger jet such as the Malaysian plane."
[...]
Kiev and the west have accused pro-Russia separatists of shooting down the plane with a surface-to-air missile supplied by Moscow. Russia, which denies mounting western claims of direct involvement in the five-month conflict in Ukraine, has blamed government forces for the attack.
[...]
The investigators aim to publish the final report by July 2015.