Header Ads Widget

New findings confirm Malaysian Airlines MH17 was shot down by Ukraine fighter-jet.

November 14, 2014
 / August 5, 2014

Update 14 Nov 2014

Revealing new radar data: other jets in same course as Malaysia Airlines MH17

[Click on image below for article]
new radar data

Update 12 Nov 2014

Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. Artist: Amely Rose

art MH17

Updates 6 Nov 2014

West media silence on MH17-downing analyses pointing Ukraine’s responsibility:

Click on image below
new on mh17

On “Evidence Is Now Conclusive”:

update 6-nov MH17 to twitter

Update 5 Nov 2014

Click on screenshot below for the statements of Lt. General Pushkarev (Ret.), who maintains that the MH17 was downed by Ukraine forces.

MH17 further updates

.

Update 22 Sept 2014

Why the Malaysian  plane was diverted to fly over the very war-scenario in East Ukraine – and then got shot down? This report published on the aftermath of the crash shed light on the issue of different routes assigned at different occasions to the same flight: “Questions over why Malaysian plane flew over Ukrainian warzone“.

different routes indicated for MH17 - detail

Update 21 Sept 2014

German families of victims in the shot-downed Malaysian Airlines MH17 to  sue Ukraine AND Poroshenko over instructions on flying-route.

Click on images below for full ABC News article, and the report in Malaymailonline, respectively. Further, a video reporting that the MH17 was lead to a new route, different to that one used in ten flights before.
mh17 update 21 septReport in malaymailonline on MH17 21 Sept 2014mh17 routes

Update 18 Sept 2014

Report from the Russian Engineers Association confirm Malaysian Airlines MH17 was shot down by Ukraine fighter-jet.

rus report MH-17Russian experts’ analysis shows that Dutch MH17-report was rigged. Links to the report in English here. For the report in original  Rusian, go here. Links provided by The Oceania Saker. Here a news video on the Russian report, with English texts:


Update 10 Sept 2014

NYT Lies . . .See NYT article in this link
This was said by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts on deceiving Western media reports on Ukraine:
this was said by PCR

Update 9 Sept 2014

Comment by The Professors’ Blog on “Summary of Findings” published in the Preliminary Report [Comment and Link to the full report in Pdf., at section XI at the bottom of this page]. For instance:

fasciimile Preliminary ReportThe Report says: “The damage observed in the forward section of the aircraft appears to indicate that the aircraft was penetrated by a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft. It is likely that this damage resulted in a loss of structural integrity of the aircraft, leading to an in-flight break up.”

THAT, the last formulation in the transcript above, is the plausible explanation of the fragmentation of the aircraft (causing the rests were found scattered on the ground), and NOT that the “destruction of the aircraft already in the air” would have been “obviously” the result of a surface-to-air missile impact. I have to note that “Western” media have not reproduced that last sentence in the news reports. An illustration here below:

DW: “Damage observed on the forward fuselage and cockpit section of the aircraft appears to indicate that there were impacts from a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft.” Period.
MH17 news2Click to enlarge

Media sources of graphic above:

Meanwhile:

profetweet#MH17
source counter-punchGo to the Counter Punch article, “The Downing of Malaysia Flight 17 – Sinister Pretext for War with Russia” by Mike Whitney, 4 Sept 2014.
”Reader-comments to my July 31st article, First Examination of Malaysian MH-17 Cockpit Photo Shows Ukraine Government Shot that Plane Down,have provided links and leads to independent additional confirmatory evidence, to such an extent that I now feel confident enough to say that the evidence on this matter is, indeed, ’conclusive’.” / Eric Zuesse, in: “Evidence Is Now Conclusive: 2 Ukrainian Government SU-25 Fighter-Jets Did Shoot Down that Malaysian Airliner. No ‘Buk’ Missile Ground-Shot Was Involved.“ Washingtonblog.com, 2 August 2014.
Update 22 August 2014:
dnkiklturInterviewed by the Swedish TV, Foreign Minister Carl Bildt stated in absolute terms, “Of course Russian separatists were behind the shooting down of the Malaysian MH17″. “Of course” Bildt did not provide any evidence for his xenophobic statement.  A new posted comment on author Johan Croneman’s analysis in DN of 17 August, published atBildt: “Of course Russian separatists downed Malaysian MH-17″. No Swedish media asked him for his evidence.
Update 7 August 2014:

Breaking: A Malaysia main paper reports on US-experts’ findings which indicate the MH17 was downed by an air-to-air missile attack, finished by cannon fire. Malaysia asking, Did Ukraine Military Do It? Click on link  for the full article “US analysts conclude MH17 downed by aircraft“.

Buaeeo_IgAA5rhY
A followed story based in the cited experts findings, in link below:
MH17 Brought Down by Air-to-Air Missile, Finished Off by 30-mm Cannon, Experts Allege
title blogg2Please read these links successively, as they provide enhanced evidence built on analyses of previous and new emerging findings.

UPDATED LINKS 7 August 2014 (See Part IV):

1) John Kerry Says the Rebels Downed MH17 In Ukraine. How Can He Know? Questions For John Kerry. By  (Ian56789).
2) The evidence is building that the Kiev military shot down Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 in Ukraine (17 July 2017). By  (Ian56789).

I

II

Professorsblogg translation of SU-25 tech. performance referred in the German article cited by P. Heisenko above:
BuRFz81IMAApvmy.jpg_large

III

IV

Video

V

zuesse

VI

 zuesse

VII

Article by Prof. Anders Romesjö: Who shot down the Malaysian Airline MH17? [Swedish]
vrm shot - jinge

VIII

fresh takes

IX

Updated links, 7 August 2014:
Author:  By  (Ian56789).
Source for the two links above: http://ian56.blogspot.se
profetweet#MH17

X

Updated links, 4 September 2014:
Author:  By Mike Whitney, in Counter Punch.

XI

Updated links, 9 September 2014:

preliminary report MH17

Commenting summary of findings of the Preliminary report (link above, go to page 29 for Summary).

By M. Ferrada de Noli
“The last radio transmissions made by Dnipropetrovs’k air traffic control centre to flight
MH17 began at 13.20:00 hrs and ended at 13.22:02 hrs. The crew did not respond to
these transmissions.” |  “The last radio transmission made by the crew began at 13.19:56 hrs and ended at13.19:59 hrs.”
Why Control called MH 17 by the same moment, or immediately after it was hit (communications interrupted) and not before?. And most importtant, why the conversations are not transcribed? Ten days before the Report was published, the Russian Deputy Minister of Defence, Anatoly Antonov,demanded anew the transcripts to be published by the authoriies with acces to the materials. Why they have neglected this relevant request, while it is absolutely (technically) feasible to do it?
“According to radar data three commercial aircraft were in the same Control Area as flight MH17 at the time of the occurrence. All were under control of Dnipro Radar. At 13.20 hrs the distance between the closest aircraft and MH17 was approximately 30 km.”
 If there were other commercial aircraft in the radio of 30 kilometers fro MH17,  it is preposterous to assume that the Rebels wished to down just MH17 and no the others. Or phrasing it in another way, why would not the Rebels downed the others aircraft too?
And why is not any mention of the Russia Minister of Defence reports on that they had established that one Ukraine jet-fighter was in the vicinity of MH17?
Damage observed on the forward fuselage and cockpit section of the aircraft appears to indicate that there were impacts from a large number of high-energy objects from outside the aircraft.
That rather correspond to powerful machine gun of the type used by the S-25 cannons.
The pattern of damage observed in the forward fuselage and cockpit section of the aircraft was not consistent with the damage that would be expected from any known failure mode of the aircraft, its engines or systems.
That clearly indicate that the fire was directed at the cockpit, and that the communications interrupted with the killing of the crew.
Finally:
The damage observed in the forward section of the aircraft appears to indicate that
the aircraft was penetrated by a large number of high-energy objects from outside
the aircraft. It is likely that this damage resulted in a loss of structural integrity of the
aircraft, leading to an in-flight break up.
THIS, the last formulation in the transcript above, is the explanation of the fragmentation of the aircraft, and NOT that it would have been the result of a land-to-air missile.






16 thoughts on “New findings confirm Malaysian Airlines MH17 was shot down by Ukraine fighter-jet.”

  1. Please see http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/270700 “A lorry owner claimed that his white Volvo heavy vehicle was used by Russian separatists to smuggle the alleged BUK missile that shot down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 into Ukraine.
    The owner identified by Lithuanian website alfa.it as Vasilijus, has said the video taken by Ukrainian intelligence officials show pro-Russian militants used his lorry to transport the BUK missile.
    “Yes, this is my vehicle. It is easy to recognise. We know our vehicles. Yes it is ours,” Vasilijus confirmed with the Lithuanian website as reported by Australiannews.com.au.
    “It is the only Volvo with such a cabin,” he added.
    Vasilijus claimed that his base in Donetsk was taken over on July 8 – nine days before the gunning down of the jetliner, and the lorry was used to transport the missile that was parked there.
    The Ukrainian intelligence video showed a convoy transporting the missile launcher across Donetsk, and this is seen as evidence of it being used by Russian separatists who allegedly shot down the MH17 Boeing 777 aircraft that killed 298 passengers and flight crew on board.
    The footage showed the vehicle heading towards Russia.
    Vasilijus confirmed that his base is still in rebel hands and he is expected to be a key witness in the investigation in identifying who was responsible in the downing of the airliner.”
    Reply
  2. Wasn’t MH 17 ordered to alter it’s flight path and altitude by the Ukranian authorities – down to approx. 7000 feet? ( A comfortable operational altitude for the Ukranian SU 25 fighter jets ?)
    Why haven’t we seen the results of the flight recorders as yet? There has been a loong time since they were recovered for analysis! Are the results contrary to what the WW3 war mongering USA and some EU nations want us to believe?
    Has anyone summarized and can name the nations that still do not officially report on unbiased facts around the downing of MH 17?
    These nations will go down in history (will anyone be left alive to read ?) as the direct and indirect contributors towards World War 3 – the global and total nuclear war?
    Olofm
    Reply
  3. Again another *** story and easy to refute.
    1) Operational (service) ceiling of the US-25 is 7.000m (MH17 was flying at 10.000) which would make a bit hard to successfully target and hit a fast (900km/h vs ) moving plane with a board cannon.
    2) Effective Air-to-Air range of the Su-25 (GSch-302 /AO-17A) cannon is between 500m-800m, while its Air-to-Ground range is between 1.200m-1.800m (which it is its intended use as Ground support fighter)
    3) Compare the damage done (much larger and uniform shaped holes) to this (target practice) APC (armored vehicle) by a 30mm Air-to-Ground cannon [http://tinyurl.com/ly5mcmn] [http://tinyurl.com/olqzujx], to the irregular and sharp edged holes in the MH17 fuselage [http://tinyurl.com/luyk59k].
    You may also read this Russian article quoting Vladimir Babak (chief designer of the SU-25 fighter plane), that in his opinion, it is very unlikely that a SU-25 could have shot down MH17.. (http://www.aex.ru/news/2014/7/28/122697/)
    Russian fighter pilot doctrine (as All Ukraine are Russian trained) does NOT dictate a cross fire (2 pronged) attack on a single target in flight.It is not only very hard to time and execute (remember max firing distance of 30mm canon is 800m and all 3 planes would be flying around 900km/h) but it is also very very dangerous. One of the pilots may miss the MH17 and hit his wingman..
    This is just a stupid theory.
    Reply
  4. Dear Professor,
    I think your track record is too good that you should stain it with loosely based conspiracy theories.
    Please check on the track record of the pilot you mention. He has a previous history of peddling anglo-saxon conspiracies.
    The machine gun bullets story is based on an interview with a non-specialist who states his first impression. One would need to consider the kind of damage a BUK would cause.
    Also, your should consider not only the weak spot in the dominating story but also the strongest indicators and the variation of types of coherent evidence.
    Furthermore, you seem to be confusing an argument contra-pro with an argument contra. This is like arguing that because one of the eyewitness is nearsighted, the perpetrator identified did not do it.
    Best regards
    BR
    Reply
  5. Dear Professor, the Dutch report is a summary of Jokes. Remember the West published the Voice records of the plane of Polish president which crashed four years ago immediately and completely in order to blame Russia. Another fact. An expert told me referring to the bodies of the Dutch victims brought to Netherlands: For sure a sufficient number of bodies or bodie parts contains after shot residues enough to analyse the kind and chemical combination of propellant and explosive charge. Every forensic lab can classify the weapon on this basis. That’s a matter of hours only. In lieu of obvious existing facts the alleged investigators published well known puzzle pieces only whereas they have much bigger pictures already. It’s obviously how they try to play for time. Next year Ppl called down and in a small Message we’ll read “Sorry we were wrong. But Russia is evtl in any case….”
    Reply
  7. Certain upgrades of Su-25 might be able to operate and bring down a jetliner at that altitude, but it’s more likely the Russians misidentified the non-civilian aircraft dogging MH-17: Kiev has Mig-29s any one of which could easily have shot the jetliner down.
    There are multiple calibers, at least two, of wound on the cockpit fuselage photo you show, completely inconsistent with BUK, as is the pattern of wounds in general.
    The absence of very easy residue analysis from swabs taken off the wreckage for propellant and explosive is very well taken.
    We are seeing a Kiev/NATO/EU/UK/US stonewall following the failed initial frame of Donetsk/Russia for the murder.
    Reply
  8. seriously ,i mean that.Do not waste any more energy and time on this,it really did not catch as they d liked (the nazi supporting EE and the USA).Not many people ,even those who are against Putin can not believe this lies…I is clear to every independent observer what the secret services and the western allies are tryngto do.but we are not going to be convince to go to war on their behalf.
    we ,the people of europe will not die so that the vultures that rule csan grab the russian resources and the ukranian territory.We will not fight for the rich.Thery can go and attack Putin themselves if they want ,with their mercenaries.But they will never convince us that there is any kind of morality behind what they are trying to do.It is just a war of rich against rich .Putin and russian cleptocrats against the bankers and the politicians/servants of the rich .
    Again.Do not waste your time.We all know this was a made up thing.And a badly made one at that
    Instead you should concentrate into expopsing the murdering of Ukranian russian speaking people by shelling from the nazi government of kiev .and the silence about it in the west.
    Reply
  9. 5 Years ago Peter Haisenko tried to sell his version of Air France Flight 447 crash, as a terrorist attack. Saying he had proof that AF447 crash due to a bomb exploding in the forward cargohold.
    To bad for him, when they were able to retrieve the black boxes after 4 years of searching, which proved that AF447 crashed due to a frozen pito tube and pilot error..
    And now he tries to sell us another story.
    Reply
    • Fortunately for Haisenko, he has some quite ugly photos of cockpit fuselage cannon-wounds to play with this time, completely negating the original Donetsk/Russia/Buk frame.
      Which attempted frame was probably the motive for the murder of MH-17.
      And the Russian Union of Engineers report on MH-17 released yesterday makes the Netherlands “report” look like the disgusting Kiev/NATO stonewall it is.
      Reply
    • In reply to TheSysX:
      In Logic, your argument is referred as to Fallacia argumentum ad hominem. If I remember well, Irving Copi – in his book ‘Science of Logic’ – provides an illustration that makes your error evident. Copi recalls the case of a certain critic of Sir Francis Bacon (who was an eminent mathematician and also a scholar of logic science), referring that an upcoming book on logic announced by Bacon “has to be very bad because he was a reputed bad mathematician.” My point being that independent of who is Mr Haisenko, or in which other theme he would have been right or wrong, it is NOT relevant in the discussion of this case. For he might have been wrong there (I have no idea) and yet right here in this issue, on the possible cause of the MH17 crash. What you should do instead of attacking ad hominem an expert that do no share you views, is to discuss the facts or line of reasoning in his thesis.
      P.S. I have deleted your last sentence containing derogatory terms towards Mr Haisenko, personally. If you wouldn’t agree, please remove the comment as a whole.
      Reply
      • I apologize for my disrespectful remarks regarding what I think mr. Haisenko is (freedom of speech).
        Unlike mr. Haisenko, I am personally effected by the MH17 crash and lost somebody.
        The way mr. Haisenko is advocating his version of what happened in either print, blog or RussiaToday interview is infuriating. And when others adopt his version, without checking facts, or using their own faculties, I sometimes “loose it”.
        For instance the “fact” (Russian weather service and weather satellite pictures confirms it) that the area of the crash was covered in dense (thunder)cloud overcast, would make any (unaided) visual observation of Any! plane during that period IMPOSSIBLE. Yet the so called eyewitness reports are being used as “confirmed evidence” .. Tell me sir. Are you or were you ever able to distinguish the make, model, operator of a airline passenger plane flying at a 10km-11km altitude. I would think not.
        Imagine than a SU-25/SU-29/SU-whatever, being about 4-5x smaller, trailing below/behind MH17.. Really ?? do you think that those eyewitnesses did see anything they claim to have seen .. Again I would think not.
    • @ TheSysX:
      Why? 1) Because it is a too long text; 2) which is basically not adding any information to the readers; 3) for the reason that the text you have sent as “reply”, is a transcription of a full document linked in-full in this very post; 3) and because I do not moderate unsolicited comments at request, but only when I find the time – and which regretfully is not that often.
      Reply
      • 1) Because it is a too long text : Oke .. I can understand that when free time is in short supply to review it.
        2) which is basically not adding any information to the readers : Oke .. Please feel free to remove it.
        3) .. “unsolicited comments” .. Now I am confused. If comments are not welcome, why can I leave a reply in the first place?
        Anyway .. I hope you will find the time to review my “Netherlands “report” look like the disgusting Kiev/NATO stonewall it is” reply of September 20, 2014 at 8:13 am, as I find it disturbing that some people are still spreading the misleading message, that the Russian Federation is not part of the Aviation Accident and Incident Investigation Team.
        The official website of the Russian Federation Aviation Accident and Incident Investigation Agency (http://www.mak.ru/english/info/boeing-777_malaysia_airlines.html) reports of their involvement in the Investigation.
    • --------------------------
    • Reblogged from: http://professorsblogg.com/2014/08/05/analysing-the-evidence-concluding-that-the-malaysian-airlines-mh17-was-shot-by-ukraine-su-25-fighter-jets/
  11. --
  12. ALSO SEE: 

1) Experts Claim: MH17 Brought Down by Air-to-Air Missile, Finished Off by 30-mm Cannon
http://dekusada.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/mh17-brought-down-by-air-to-air-missile.html

2) Deleted BBC Russia Video: MH17 Witnesses Tell BBC They Saw Ukrainian Jet http://yournewswire.com/deleted-bbc-russia-video-mh17-witnesses-tell-bbc-they-saw-ukrainian-jet/

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


Tags:

Post a Comment

0 Comments