Vladimir Kornilov: Where Did the Main “Evidence” in the Case of MH-17 Come From?

Translated by Ollie Richardson & Angelina Siard

20:10:29
28/05/2018

riafan.ru


It would be strange if in the run-up to the FIFA World Cup the West didn’t remember the catastrophe of the Boeing of the Malaysian flight MH17 in Donbass. The noisy press conference that took place last week of the Joint Investigation Teams (JIT), which is engaged in the investigation of this tragedy, generated a new wave of pretensions to Russia and new calls to impose new sanctions.

At the same time even the chief prosecutor of the Netherlands Fred Westerbeke who represented the investigation in this event recognised that his team didn’t report practically anything new. Everything that was sounded concerning the “guilt” of the military personnel of the Russian 53rd anti-aircraft missile brigade, we already repeatedly read in the reports of notorious Bellingcat group, which has been caught on, to put it mildly, “inaccuracies” more than once. The conclusions of this group were already sucked dry from all directions, and I don’t see the sense in discussing them again.

But I would like to pay attention to one new piece of “material evidence” that unexpectedly arose at this press conference. In fact, judging by the opening speech of Westerbeke, it is precisely because of it that journalists were gathered (it’s as if it magically coincides with the World Cup). The prosecutor had barely just arrived before he stated that the press conference’s purpose is to appeal to the public to find witnesses. A video was shown that says that the investigators, first of all, are interested in the details connected those “material evidences”, namely — the parts of the “Buk” missile presented at this show.

I will offer a reminder, the public was shown two fragments: the deformed venturi of the missile and the engine casing, which was miraculously preserved in a beautiful State. So well-preserved that the serial number of the casing is clearly visible on it. I.e., is it possible to imagine that a missile that exploded at a height of more than 10km and wrecked a Boeing was so well-preserved?

Already the next day practically all western newspapers reported that at a press conference in the Netherlands, the parts of the missile that downed this same Boeing were presented. These fragments were even put on the front pages of newspapers. Here is the “proof”!

And now watch the hands! The fact is that among the material evidence collected by an investigation team at the site of the catastrophe there was no missile casing! During all these years the JIT scrupulously reported about the collected fragments of the plane and the missile, constructed a model of it from the remains of the Boeing, and showed the smallest parts of the “Buk” that were found at the site of the catatrasophe over Donbass.

READ:  Poroshenko Visits Gorlovka, Calls UAF "The Strongest Army in Europe"

Up to now it was considered that the largest element of the missile that was found there is this same venturi. The JIT reported about this find in June of 2016, i.e., two years later after the tragedy. And there wasn’t any words about the casing!

At the time too, on the official website of the State prosecutor’s office of the Netherlands this venturi was also shown as the largest part of the missile found among the plane wreckage. At the same time, the public was told that the investigation received a real “Buk” missile from outside and that various manipulations with its full dismantling are being carried out on this missile. And once again, nothing was said about the miraculously intact casing of “that” same missile that considerably exceeds the size of the venturi.

In the full report of the Security Council of the Netherlands the objects found at the site of the catastrophe were listed in detail and even shown – both the parts of the Boeing and the parts of the exploded missile. For comparison, in the same report photos of the real “Buk” missile (the column on the left) and the preserved parts of “that” same missile (the column on the right) were given.

As you can see, here too the largest fragment is the venturi. But the Security Council for some reason “forgot” about the well-preserved casing. It is curious that now the Council has closed access to this report that earlier was available to the general public. It is because they don’t want to explain such “forgetfulness”?

Where did the casing that is nowadays presented to the public as the main piece of “material evidence” come from? The commander of the federal police of Australia Jennifer Hurst, showing “material evidence” at the press conference, somehow unconvincingly stated:

“The JIT already showed you the venturi in September 2016,” she said.

It is a pity that she didn’t explain in what reports. I, of course, could’ve missed some of the documents, although I have tried to follow the course of investigation into this case since 2014, but in the fullest report of the Security Council that I spoke about above, it is the casing of the “Buk” system transferred to investigators from outside that was shown, and not “that” same missile. And if the casing was at the disposal of the investigation earlier, then why is it only now that an appeal to witnesses with a request to help with the interpretation of an inscription was published? Why wasn’t this done earlier? They were waiting for the World Cup?

READ:  Former Rada Deputy Will Appeal to the Venice Commission on the Case of a Coup D'etat

In the presentation of Hurst and the fresh report of the JIT, the question of where this mysterious object came from is avoided. There this evasive phrase sounds:

“We found a nozzle and a casing in the east of Ukraine,” it is said in the information.

I.e., it’s not a fact that it is from the site of the catastrophe of this same Boeing? Moreover, the report contains the very imperceptible phrase that very few people paid attention to:

“To what extent both parts belong to the missile that was launched by the BUK TELAR of the 53rd brigade can, as yet, not be said with certainty,” it is said in the document.

I.e., investigators aren’t even sure whether these elements are the parts of this same missile! Not to mention that it is precisely this missile that downed the ill-fated “Boeing”.

But after all, the next day practically all the newspapers of the world, having ignored this important phrase, published the photo of these details with captions saying that these are the parts of the missile that downed the Malaysian Boeing! Isn’t this direct manipulation by the investigation? If it doesn’t even know what this missile casing is and where it in general came from, so why appeal to witnesses with a desperate request to help to decipher the inscriptions on it?

Taking into account that at the press conference the head of the Security Service of Ukraine Vasily Gritsak – who was more than once caught on a frank lie – was present, I can guess who brought this casing to the Netherlands, allegedly “found in the east of Ukraine”. Thus, maybe it is the casing of a Ukrainian “Buk”?

The Moscow correspondent of the British “The Daily Telegraph” newspaper Alec Luhn affirms:

Many western journalists speak about it. And, of course, they “lose sight” of the fact that all “Buk” missiles are made at the same plant — in Dolgoprudny situated near Moscow. Yes, including the missiles that are in the arsenal of the Ukrainian army. And all Ukrainian missiles, of course, were made before 1991. But why point this out to the western public, confusing them with an unnecessary deviation from the single, “only correct” narrative?

READ:  Maidan Organiser Mustafa Nayyem Claims the Ukrainian Air Force Did Not Bomb Donetsk and Lugansk

Unlike many of my western and, by the way, Russian colleagues, I don’t adhere to one narrative. And in reality I allow various scenarios of this tragedy. At the moment we know only one thing for sure: regardless of who downed flight MH17, the main responsible side for the event is Ukraine, which was obliged to close its air space over the zone of military operations for civil airliners. I’ve written about this too many times in the past.

But the emergence in the case of parts of allegedly “that” same missile that appeared from goodness knows where testifies that the investigation team doesn’t even try to give the illusion that it is carrying out an investigation honestly and tries to get to the bottom of the truth. And the fact that the western media spreads frank fakes about the origin of “material evidence” says that nobody is interested in searching for the truth.

Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.