Australia and the Netherlands Accused Russia of Downing MH-17 by Showing an “Expired” Rocket

Translated by Ollie Richardson & Angelina Siard


The Defense Ministry convincingly explained why the demonstrated part of the casing of the “Buk” system that allegedly shot down a Boeing in Donbass cannot be Russian…

Tattered “manuals”

The Netherlands and Australia officially accused Russia of being involved in the crash of the Malaysian Boeing in the Donbass in the summer of 2014. The day prior the Joint Investigation Team demonstrated “evidence” that the plane was shot down by a “Buk” anti-aircraft missile system belonging to the Russian Defense Ministry. And as evidence they presented old photos from social networks and even a piece of a missile “with fingerprints that belong to the Russian military personnel”. The question is what database did these experts take the fingerprint from. And it’s also not clear where this piece of missile came from. And why, for example, can’t the fingerprints be found of local residents, militiamen, OSCE experts, and God knows who else who could come into contact with this piece of evidence, if it was found at the crash site.

In any case, it’s as if this investigation was led according to old good methodology, which prescribes how to act when there are problems with the evidence base, and that there is a need to push forward with a prosecution. According to this methodology, Iraq was accused of producing weapons of mass destruction, Syria – of using chemical weapons against civilians, and Russia – poisoning the Skripals… The presumption of innocence? It’s non-existent. Convincing arguments? Why bother? The phrase “the Russians did it” has already become an Internet meme.

READ:  Turchynov Declared That Ukraine Is Ready to Capture Donbass

Of course, Moscow refutes any accusations. As Vladimir Putin said, Russia was not included in this investigation group, unlike Ukraine. How can we trust its results?

And the judges are who?

Meanwhile, the composition of this group of experts raises many questions. How, for example, could Dr. Millicent Black, an expert on violence against women, a specialist in family therapy, could help the investigation? Or the specialist in uncovering corruption Karen Melton? Or the writer and poet Ramola Dharmaraj?

Of course, it is unlikely that they will have the idea to ask Russia to decipher the markings on the wreckage of the missile, its combat history and life span. And instead, they ask for the “help of the hall”, maybe someone recognises the handwriting… Family therapists know nothing about stencils. It is much more promising to chomp a hundred times in two years on the edited photos of “Buk” from social networks than to verify the same Ukrainian “Buk” with the same number, which (what a coincidence!) at this same time was in this same place.

Finally, why almost four years after the catastrophe hasn’t the decoding of the “black boxes” of the Boeing been published. For what purpose were they classified? There’s something that can jeopardise the not very well-constructed, but main narrative of the group of “investigators”?

“Addled” evidence

The Russian Defense Ministry did not wait for requests from poets and fighters against corruption, having immediately convincingly explained to “experts” why this missile can’t be Russian. Judging by the marking, it was made in 1986. But there’s a discrepancy. The service life of such missiles is 15 years. The manufacturer may renew it twice more for five years, but 25 years after its commissioning the munition must be written off and disposed of. It’s simply dangerous to use. Thus, the service life of such “evidence” expired in 2011. If we were talking about Russia, of course.

READ:  UAF Non-Combat Losses Exceeded Combat Losses for 2016

“Since the termination of the existence of the USSR in 1991 and the subsequent division of military property, where Ukraine received in its ownership about 20 divisions of “Buk” air defense, no new anti-aircraft missiles were delivered to Ukraine,” emphasised the Russian Defense Ministry. “Thus, the only reason for the deliberate concealment of the source of the shown missile engine from 1986 is that it more than likely belongs to the Ukrainian Armed Forces”.

It turns out that the investigation team, trying to catch Russia committing a terrible crime, threw their “independent Ukraine” partners under the bus. And, among other things, we learned that Ukraine is still using anti-aircraft missile systems with expired, and thus unpredictable ammunition. Thanks for this too.

Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.