Experts Claim: MH17 Brought Down by Air-to-Air Missile, Finished Off by 30-mm Cannon

Blogged first on: 9 Aug 2014
Updated: 20 Aug 2014


Pockmarks look like from very, very heavy machine gun fire, says first OSCE monitor on-scene 


INTELLIGENCE analysts in the United States had already concluded that Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down by an air-to-air missile, and that the Ukrainian government had had something to do with it.

This corroborates an emerging theory postulated by local investigators that the Boeing 777-200 was crippled by an air-to-air missile and finished off with cannon fire from a fighter that had been shadowing it as it plummeted to earth.

In a damning report dated Aug 3, headlined “Flight 17 Shoot-Down Scenario Shifts”, Associated Press reporter Robert Parry said “some US intelligence sources had concluded that the rebels and Russia were likely not at fault and that it appears Ukrainian government forces were to blame”.

This new revelation was posted on GlobalResearch, an independent research and media organisation.

In a statement released by the Ukrainian embassy on Tuesday, Kiev denied that its fighters were airborne during the time MH17 was shot down. This follows a statement released by the Russian Defence Ministry that its air traffic control had detected Ukrainian Air Force activity in the area on the same day.

They also denied all allegations made by the Russian government and said the country’s core interest was in ensuring an immediate, comprehensive, transparent and unbiased international investigation into the tragedy by establishing a state commission comprising experts from the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and Eurocontrol.

“We have evidence that the plane was downed by Russian-backed terrorist with a BUK-M1 SAM system (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation reporting name SA-11) which, together with the crew, had been supplied from Russia. This was all confirmed by our intelligence, intercepted telephone conversations of the terrorists and satellite pictures.

“At the same time, the Ukrainian Armed Forces have never used any anti-aircraft missiles since the anti-terrorist operations started in early April,” the statement read.

Yesterday, the New Straits Times quoted experts who had said that photographs of the blast fragmentation patterns on the fuselage of the airliner showed two distinct shapes — the shredding pattern associated with a warhead packed with “flechettes”, and the more uniform, round-type penetration holes consistent with that of cannon rounds.

Parry’s conclusion also stemmed from the fact that despite assertions from the Obama administration, there has not been a shred of tangible evidence to support the conclusion that Russia supplied the rebels with the BUK-M1 anti-aircraft missile system that would be needed to hit a civilian jetliner flying at 33,000 feet.

Parry also cited a July 29 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation interview with Michael Bociurkiw, one of the first Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) investigators to arrive at the scene of the disaster, near Donetsk.

Bociurkiw is a Ukrainian-Canadian monitor with OSCE who, along with another colleague, were the first international monitors to reach the wreckage after flight MH17 was brought down over eastern Ukraine.

In the CBC interview, the reporter in the video preceded it with: “The wreckage was still smouldering when a small team from the OSCE got there. No other officials arrived for days”.

“There have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really pockmarked with what almost looks like machinegun fire; very, very strong machinegun fire,” Bociurkiw said in the interview.

Parry had said that Bociurkiw’s testimony is “as close to virgin, untouched evidence and testimony as we’ll ever get. Unlike a black-box interpretation-analysis long afterward by the Russian, British or Ukrainian governments, each of which 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. Bociurkiw arrived there fast because he negotiated with the locals for the rest of the OSCE team, who were organising to come later,” Parry had said.

Retired Lufthansa pilot Peter Haisenko had also weighed in on the new shootdown theory with Parry and pointed to the entry and exit holes centred around the cockpit.

“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 30mm caliber projectile.

“The edge of the other, the larger and slightly frayed exit holes, show 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.”

He deduced that in order to have some of those holes fraying inwardly, and the others fraying outwardly, there had to have been a second fighter firing into the cockpit from the airliner’s starboard side. This is critical, as no surface-fired missile (or shrapnel) hitting the airliner could possibly punch holes 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. This is Haisenko’s main discovery. 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,” Parry had said.

SOURCE | New Straits Times - MH17: Pockmarks look like from very, very heavy machine gun fire, says first OSCE monitor on-scene  - 7 AUGUST 2014 |

Also see | MH17 Brought Down by Air-to-Air Missile, Finished Off by 30-mm Cannon, Experts Allege
(August 07, 2014)


MH-17: Will the truth ever be known?

04.08.2014 | By Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey

The Malaysian Airlines MH 17 flight over an active war zone in Ukraine has been chalked up by Western news agencies as a terrorist strike by President Putin, as a terrorist strike by Russia, as a terrorist strike by Pro-Russian forces. Predictably. Now let us examine the facts and let the law suits begin for slander.

The western version is that a BUK missile fired from anti-Fascist freedom fighters hit the Malaysian Airlines MH-17. They have repeated this time and time again.

Then let us ask our western partners to answer these questions:

1. The flight recorders are being examined in the UK. Why? Is the UK a reliable source of information, after the lies regarding Iraq, after the lies regarding Libya, after the lies regarding Syria? Prime Minister David Cameron has been silent over the Zionist massacre in Gaza, because as his ministers state, it is better to remain silent than to take sides, yet he is vociferous in his attacks against President Putin, whose popularity ratings outstrip Cameron's by far;

2. Maybe the examiners of the flight recorders could explain why the cockpit is riddled with hundreds of rounds of 30-mm.-guage bullet holes. There are entry and exit holes. Is this compatible with a missile strike? Why then does BBC have today a piece about a missile strike, why do the western media outlets keep pressing the missile strike button before the investigation has been carried out? Do these same western media outlets admit they copied and pasted images from 1991 of Russian citizens complaining about the voluntary dissolution of the USSR without a voting process, and portrayed them as images of Russians complaining about President Putin some 2 decades later?

Do these same western news outlets admit they used images of Iraqi children murdered by NATO and portrayed them as Syrian children supposedly murdered by the forces of President Assad some two decades later?

Ask the British Bullshit Corporation, the BBC.

3. What about this testimony from the German pilot Peter Haisenko? "In sifting through the available images one thing stands out: All wreckage of the sections behind the cockpit is largely intact, except for the fact that only fragments of the aircraft remained. Only the cockpit part shows these peculiar marks of destruction. This leaves the examiner with an important clue.

"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 [the cockpit] is constructed of specially-reinforced material. This is on account of the nose of any aircraft having to withstand the impact of a large bird at high speeds...[one is reminded of] the crash of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie...a large segment of the cockpit, that due to this special architecture survived the crash in one piece.

"In the case of flight MH17, it becomes abundantly clear that an explosion also took
place inside the aircraft."

4. What about the Russian recordings of the Ukrainian military aircraft Su-25 in close proximity to the MH-17?

5. What about the Spanish air traffic controller (since disappeared mysteriously) who complained about the ATC tower in Kiev being invaded by Ukrainian government personnel at the time, who said two Ukrainian fighter jets were behind MH-17?

6. What about the eye witness accounts that fighter jets were seen behind Mh-17?

7. SU-25 is equipped with a double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302 /

AO-17A; a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells; splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum), arranged in alternating order;

8. The evidence points towards the cockpit of the aircraft being hit from both sides, due to the entry and exit holes of the bullets, anti-tank incendiary shells. The remnants of these should be found on the ground but the Ukrainian army is now in the area and is therefore able to tamper with the evidence and cover up what really happened;

9. Why has Google removed a critical piece of evidence, regarding a bullet hole in the wing of this aircraft? Why has Facebook started a massive campaign closing accounts speaking about the event? (as if anyone needed an answer);

10. Was the cause of the crash the rapid-firing sequence of the GSh-302 cannon? This would have caused a rapid sequence of explosions in the cockpit, and then caused the cabin to explode. Why then do the western media outlets insist on a missile strike? How does a missile cause machine-gun entrance and outlet holes?

11. Why do the largely intact sections of the rear of the aircraft point towards explosion in mid-air due to extreme internal pressure caused by multiple puncture entrance and exits by machine-gun bullets, rather than fragmentation caused by a missile?

SOURCE | MH-17: Will the truth ever be known? | Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey | Pravda.Ru |  ( |

Video (6 minutes):


Bullet holes on the MH17 - For better view see the image on the pdf file on the link below:


Malaysia wants the ‘missing’ Ukrainian ATC tapes


UKRAINE has denied that its State Security Service (SBU) had seized the air-to-ground transmission tapes between its air traffic controllers and Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 on the day the jetliner was shot down.

Its ambassador to Malaysia Ihor Humennyi, in an exclusive interview with the New Straits Times, said that reports alleging that the SBU had seized the recordings had not been independently verified or confirmed by Kiev.“There is no proof or any evidence that the tapes were confiscated by the SBU.
“I only read this in the newspapers.”

Almost immediately after the shootdown, several news agencies, including the British Broadcasting Corporation, carried reports saying that Ukraine’s SBU security service had confiscated recordings of conversations between Ukrainian air traffic control officers and the crew of the doomed airliner.

If indeed the SBU had not seized the tapes, then where are the air-to-ground communications tapes between MH17 and the ATC?

When asked this, Humennyi said he did not have the answers.

Asked if the tapes had been handed over to the investigators, Humennyi said: “We don’t have any information that it had not been given to the investigation team or that it was not received by the (team of international) investigators.

Humennyi said that if a formal request was made by Malaysia or the international investigation team, Ukraine would extend its cooperation. At one point, Humennyi seemed to question the significance of the ATC tapes, saying that “it is just the same as the flight data and cockpit voice recorders”.

Aviation experts, however, point to the recordings as being another crucial layer of evidence in piecing together the events leading up to the point of missile impact with the airliner and the massive explosive decompression and airframe break-up that followed as the Boeing 777-200 plummeted 33,000 feet to the ground, killing all 298 passengers on board.

Equally puzzling is the international investigation team’s apparent snail’s pace at requesting for the tapes from Ukrainian ATC.

Three weeks into the tragedy and the Ukrainians have yet to receive any formal request for the tapes.

Yesterday, when asked, Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail said Malaysia would make a formal request for the ATC recordings.

However, he did not commit to a definite timeline.



US 'hiding truth' on Malaysian plane

Sat Aug 9, 2014

Former US lawmaker Ron Paul says Washington is “hiding” the truth about the downing of a Malaysian passenger plane in eastern Ukraine last month.

"The US government has grown strangely quiet on the accusation that it was Russia or her allies that brought down the Malaysian airliner with a buck anti-aircraft missile," Paul wrote in an article published by Voices of Liberty on Thursday.

US officials claim the plane was downed by a missile fired by pro-Russian forces in Ukraine but Paul says that claim is baseless because the US has not provided any evidence for it.

"It’s hard to believe that the US, with all of its spy satellites available for monitoring everything in Ukraine, that precise proof of who did what and when is not available," the former congressman said.

“When evidence contradicts our government’s accusations, the evidence is never revealed to the public—for national security reasons, of course. Some independent sources claim that the crash site revealed evidence that bullet holes may have come from a fighter jet. If true, it would implicate Western Ukraine,” he added.

Paul also condemned US officials for not wanting to reveal the truth. "Too bad we can’t count on our government to just tell us the truth and show us the evidence," he wrote. "I’m convinced that it knows a lot more than it’s telling us."



Russia to Demand UN Report on Malaysian Boeing Crash Investigation

NEW YORK, August 18 (RIA Novosti) - Russia is planning to request an official report on the progress of the investigation into the crash of a Malaysian passenger plane in eastern Ukraine, Russia’s UN envoy Vitaly Churkin said Monday.
"We will ask for a briefing by the UN Secretariat on the progress of the implementation of Resolution 2166," Churkin told reporters at the United Nations headquarters in New York.
Churkin said it had been a month since the start of the probe and paragraph 13 of the resolution envisions periodical reports by the UN secretary general on the progress of the investigation.
On August 14, the Dutch Safety Board, which is in charge of victim identification and probing the cause of the disaster, said it had finished its work in Ukraine, and that an initial report on the flight MH17 crash will be released during the first week of September.
A total of 298 people, including 193 Dutch citizens and 27 Australians, died on July 17 as a Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur crashed in Donetsk Region of Ukraine.
The investigation into the circumstances of the crash is seriously obstructed by continuing clashes between independence supporters and Kiev forces in eastern regions of Ukraine.
Ukrainian authorities claim the plane was shot down by independence supporters, whereas the latter say they do not have necessary equipment to hit a target flying this high.

For more, see:

1) Shocking Analysis of the ‘Shooting Down’ of Malaysian MH17 (by German Lufthansa Pilot Peter Haisenko) - July 30, 2014 |

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

3) OpEdNews  8/8/2014 | Was Putin Targeted for Mid-Air Assassination? | By Robert Parry  |

4) Evidence Is Now Conclusive: Two Ukrainian Government Fighter-Jets Shot Down Malaysian Airlines MH17. It was Not a ‘Buk’ Surface to Air Missile

5) Deleted BBC Russia Video: MH17 Witnesses Tell BBC They Saw Ukrainian Jet

6) Not alone: New radar data indicates other jets on MH17 course before crash | November 14, 2014 

No comments: