Excellent RT documentary about MH17

Not a Buk-M1 missile - full report and analysis of fake evidence

Dear friends,

I have recently informed you that the Dutch blogger Max Vanderwerff had posted a very interesting analysis debunking the Buk-M1 "missile plume" theory.  Today I am posting his full research online which I encourage you to download from the following to locations:

http://www.mediafire.com/view/t5o16c6qz3nl8be/Not_A_Buk_-_final_copy.pdf

http://www.docdroid.net/oj8s/not-a-buk-final-copy.pdf.html 

Both of these services offers to read the PDF file online.

I think that it is absolutely crucial that we not allow the truth about MH17 to be buried under an avalanche of lies or be 'forgotten'.  By now, there is a lot of research which has been done, some of it excellent, some of it less so, but we absolutely must continue to keep this topic alive.

Please read this report and do your best to circulate it amongst your friends.

Kind regards and many thanks,

The Saker

Not BUK-M1: new video proof

Check out this excellent report by Dutch blogger Max Vanderwerff who debunks the reports allegedly showing a  video of a Buk-M1 launch:

http://7mei.nl/not-buk-m1-new-video-proof/

There is no doubt my mind that MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian SU-25, possibly one of several Su-25s patrolling the skies that day to intercept a civilian airliner the downing of which was to become the "surprise" Poroshenko promised and which Kolomoiskii probably organized.

The Saker

New testimony about the shooting down of MH17

Interesting news this morning: the Russian newspaper Komsomolskaia Pravda has interviewed a man who claims to have been a witness to the take-off of three aircraft one of which allegedly shot down MH17.  Thanks to the incredible work done by Kazzura the full video with English subtitles is already available today.  Check it out:


I will notice that there are several mutually contradictory versions circulating out there.  For example, one version spoke of a Polish pilot, this one speaks of a Ukrainian (with a very Russian last name), some versions speak of one aircraft, other of two and this one even three, some speak of a SU-25, others of a MiG-29 or even a SU-27 (such as the alleged satellite photo from the student at MIT).  There are several reasons for such discrepancies.

For one thing, coming up with a "testimony" is a surefire way to make money.  Second, some witnesses might have seen something but not paid attention at the time and then "reconstructed" what they saw.  Finally, witnesses are like the folks holding different parts of the elephant - they see only a part of the bigger picture.

I have to say that I still am basically sticking with the version I put forth on August 4th: MH-17 was shot down by a single SU-25, guided towards its target by the long-range "Kupol" radar of a BukM1 battery who engaged MH17 with a single R-60 infrared-guided air-to-air missile which it one of the engines and then who "finished off" MH17 with a volley of gunfire for its canon.  Still, I have to add two things:

a) it is possible that even though only one SU-25 engaged MH17 there were another two loitering nearby to make sure to intercept MH17 because the problem with flying an SU-25 at high altitude is not that it cannot get high enough, but that at high altitude the engines of the SU-25 (which are designed for close air support or "tree hugging") cannot provide much speed thus the flight envelope of a SU-25 at altitudes around 7'000m-10'000m is very narrow.

b) I am aware of the version that Kolomoisky had hired Ukrainians pilots to shoot down Putin's Presidential Aircraft, but I cannot imagine why they would not have been aware that the transponder of MH17 was signaling that this was a totally different aircraft regardless of the fact that the two aircraft externally appeared similar.  Unless that is explained to me I cannot endorse this version.

One thing I am 99% sure of is that MH17 was not downed by a surface-to-air missile like the BukM1 because of the highly visible column of smoke left by such a missile which lingers on for a long time (up to 30min depending one wind conditions).  The launch is also very noisy.  So while we have seen the recent testimony of a Ukrainian solider who confirmed that the Buk # 312 allegedly belonging to Russia was, in fact, Ukrainian, I do not believe that this Buk was actually used to shoot down MH17.

What is absolutely certain is that the US, the UK, Holland and pretty much all the parties involved are busy covering up what happened and trying to delay any possible relevant findings as much as possible.  The only country which is still demanding an independent investigation is Russia which, by itself, tells me all I need to know about "who done it".

The Saker

Obama in retreat on MH17

by Alexander Mercouris

Amidst all the hysteria about what western leaders said to Putin during the Brisbane G20 summit (answer: nothing new or important), the media has entirely ignored certain very interesting comments about MH17 that Obama made in his speech at the University of Queensland. His precise words (taken from the White House website) were as follows:

"We’re leading the international community in the fight to destroy the terrorist group ISIL. We're leading in dealing with Ebola in West Africa and in opposing Russia’s aggression against Ukraine -- which is a threat to the world, as we saw in the appalling shoot-down of MH17, a tragedy that took so many innocent lives, among them your fellow citizens. As your ally and friend, America shares the grief of these Australian families, and we share the determination of your nation for justice and accountability. So, yes, we have a range of responsibilities. That's the deal. It's a burden we gladly shoulder."

Obama played his usually sly trick of talking about the MH17 tragedy in conjunction with his condemnation of Russian policy ("Russia's aggression") towards the Ukraine. That way he continues to give the impression that Russia shot MH17 down.

This should not confuse. What is striking is that in this speech, delivered in Australia where the MH17 tragedy is a very hot issue, Obama did not say that Russia shot MH17 down and did not say that the NAF shot MH17 down. He did not even say (as he has said in the past) that MH17 was shot down by a surface to air missile launched from NAF controlled territory. Rather what Obama is now saying is that Russia is responsible for MH17 being shot down because by its supposed "aggression" against Ukraine it has supposedly created the conditions that led to MH17 being shot down.

This actually leaves open the possibility (for the first time coming from Obama or from anyone in the US administration) that it might have been the Ukrainians who shot MH17 down.

With a character as slippery as Obama it is never possible to be completely sure but this looks to me frankly like a retreat to a fall back position. Certainly it is a long way from the categorical claims made by Obama and Kerry in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy.

All this makes me wonder what Obama is been told in private by his intelligence chiefs as more information about the shoot down comes trickling in.

New MH17 satellite photos - a warning

by Alexander Mercouris

I have deliberately helped back on the story about the satellite photos that supposedly show a Ukrainian fighter shooting down MH17 to see what the response would be, whether any more evidence would come to light and what the Russian government and military would say about them .

In the event the Russian government and military have ignored them as I notice to a great extent have Russian media organisations like Sputnik,TASS and RT.

The photos have been widely ridiculed as fakes and I am afraid I tend to agree. My reason for thinking that these photos are almost certainly fakes is not because of the specific criticisms that have been made of the photos (persuasive though some of these criticisms are) but that the photos are quite simply too good to be true. Until and unless we know the actual provenance of these photos (ie. whose satellite supposedly took them - we only know it was not the Russians') we should pay them no attention.

I would make two more points about these photos:

1. It seems that these photos were part of the evidence used by a body known as the Russian Institute of Engineers that published a report on MH17. I don't know much about this body but I was frankly unimpressed by the report. If the report did draw on these photos, then I am afraid that is another reason to treat that report with skepticism.

2. From literally the day MH17 was shot down it has been clear to me that an organised attempt is being made by someone to spread the story that MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian fighter. There was the story of the mysterious Spanish air traffic controller for instance that circulated within hours of the tragedy and which effectively got the theory going. Note that we have heard little or nothing from this person since then, which makes his evidence look even more like someone's fabrication.

It is possible that those behind this operation are the Russians, possibly because they know that that is what happened and they want to draw people's attention to the fact. However if that were the case then I would have expected them to say as much publicly and to make their evidence public since they have no conceivable reason to keep it secret.

I have to say (and I have been worrying about this for some time) that It seems to me frankly more likely that whoever is behind the campaign to circulate this theory is doing so deliberately in order to create a false trail in the full knowledge that the theory is false and that it will eventually be proved to be false, leaving those who believed it feeling foolish and appearing discredited.

Let me assure people that I know both from history and experience that these sort of provocation tactics really do happen in the world of intelligence and there most definitely are people working in intelligence agencies around the world who really are capable of concocting and carrying out operations of this sort. The fact that these photos appear to originate with a western source strengthen these concerns. .

Let me remind people of my previous comment: we should not let ourselves be hustled into a false binary where fighter=Ukrainians and BUK=NAF. As of today we know for a fact the Ukrainians had both and we do not know for a fact that the NAF had either. That is as far as the facts so far go.
-------
Commentary by the Saker: while I do not have the expertise to state so categorically, I continue to believe that this is a fake.  What I am sure of is that it shows a Su-27 and not a Su-25 (or even a MiG-29).  The difference between a Su-27 and Su-25 is immense, and if we accept the notion that a Su-278 might have attacked MH-17 then we need to completely revise our model of the flight envelopes of the two aircraft and of the engagement.  I am not saying categorically that this is impossible, but only that I am extremely dubious.

The Saker

MH17: more proof that the Ukies did it

The Russian newspaper MK has obtained a screenshot of the recording of a civilian Russian radar screen in Rostov - just east of the Russian-Ukrainian border.  This is what is shows:

What this image shows is 20 minutes of recording of the airspace before and after the shooting down of MH17.  The course of MH17 is shown in purple while the numerous little blue "T" shaped objects in the circle show the radar return of one or, possibly two, aircraft which either do not have a transponder or which have not switched it on.  Either way, since we know that the Novorussian Resistance did not have aircraft, and since we know that the Ukrainians have denied that they had any aircraft anywhere near this area at that time, and since we know that had this been a Russian aircraft the US/NATO AWACS and satellites would have picked it up and presented this damning proof a long time ago we can come to the only possible conclusion:  the Ukies and their US/EU patrons are lying, the aircraft seen on the radar are Ukrainian, no Buk missile was involved in the shooting (though I personally believe that one was used to cue the Ukrainian aircraft to MH17) and that MH17 was shot down by a combo of gun and missile fire from one or two Ukrainian aircraft.

The Saker

PS: by the way, if a civilian radar needs a return signal from a transponder to get the identity, altitude and speed of an aircraft, military radars do not.  Since I am quite sure that the Russians also had plenty of military radars in the region, I am equally sure that, just as the US and NATO, the Russian military also has the ironclad proof that the Ukies did it in the form of radar track recordings.  Whether they will ever present such proof or not (and I am sure that they would prefer not to) or whether they will only generate such "leaks" from civilian sources as the one today in MK instead is unclear to me.  I guess it depends on what the AngloZionist propaganda says.

German intelligence report on MH17

by Alexander Mercouris

It seems the German intelligence agency the BND has provided a Bundestag committee with a report that once again attributes the MH17 shoot down to the NAF.

The report has not been published but for me the single most interesting thing in it is that it apparently finally demolishes the theory that MH17 was shot down by a BUK system secretly transferred to the NAF by the Russians. We are back it seems to the theory that the NAF shot down MH17 with a BUK missile system it captured from the Ukrainians.

There are a number of points to make here:

1. At the time when MH17 was shot down the western media were in full flood that the Russians were responsible. All sorts of stories circulated about how a BUK missile system was supposedly secretly smuggled by Russia across the border and supplied to the NAF, which the NAF then used to shoot MH17 down. These stories played a key role in influencing western public opinion against Russia. The Germans forced other EU states to impose sectoral sanctions on Russia on the grounds it was responsible for the tragedy because it was arming the NAF. The stories of a BUK missile system being secretly smuggled back and forth across the border (and films supposedly culled from social media supposedly showing it doing just that) undoubtedly played a part in giving credence to these claims. The BND has now admitted that the Russians were not involved in the shooting down of MH17 and that MH17 was not shot down by a BUK missile system smuggled by the Russians across the border. It turns out therefore that all those stores that gained so much attention and which did Russia's image so much harm were untrue. I wonder whether sectoral sanctions would have been imposed on Russia if it had been known then that those stories were untrue.

2. By saying that MH17 was shot down by the NAF using a captured BUK missile system, the BND is contradicting what the junta said at the time and is still saying. The junta still denies that any of its BUK systems have been captured by the NAF. By contrast the BND now admits that what the Russians were saying in July - that they did not transfer a BUK system to the NAF and that they were not involved in the shooting down of MH17 - was true.

3. The BND has also apparently admitted that the "evidence" the junta produced supposedly culled from social media was fabricated or falsified. This is important because it is the first western admission of the fact that the junta has lied. Up to now no western government or agency has ever called into question anything the junta has ever said. Of course if the junta falsified or fabricated evidence about MH17 it might have done so about other matters (eg. the Kiev snipers or the Odessa fire).

4. There were some reports before the MH17 tragedy that the NAF had indeed captured a BUK missile system. It is difficult to say how credible those reports were. As I have previously said, given that the capture of such a system would have been a considerable coup, one might have expected the NAF to make more of the fact by publishing photographs of the BUK system they had captured. That however never happened. Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence but I would still like to see some convincing evidence that the NAF really did have a BUK missile system in its possession (and a crew able to operate it) before I accepted the fact. Uncorroborated claims denied then and since by the Ukrainians and made in the midst of an armed conflict when all sorts of exaggerated claims are made are not sufficient evidence and do not prove anything. In the absence of such evidence all I can do is note (1) that the NAF continues to deny that it had or was operating a BUK system when MH17 was shot down and (2) that no evidence exists or has been made public which refutes that denial. .

5. The media reports about the BND report say that the BND has shown such evidence to the Bundestag committee and that supposedly it includes satellite imagery. The evidence has not however been made public and again one has to ask why? It is scarcely believable that there is something so secret about the way this evidence was collected that prevents it from being made public. The Russians and the Chinese certainly know everything there is to know about how the western powers collect imagery and other intelligence from their satellites. It is not as if publishing this evidence is therefore going to compromise any intelligence source or capability. Why then the secrecy especially over an issue of such importance? Whether the western powers want to admit to the fact or not, their refusal to make their evidence public casts doubt on how much weight this evidence really has.

6. In the absence of publication of this evidence (which would allow it to be properly examined and tested) it remains impossible to accept any claims based on it. There have just been too many cases of western intelligence agencies assuring us on the basis of "evidence" kept secret of the truth of things that turned out to be false. Recent examples include the false claims made by all western intelligence agencies including the BND about Saddam Hussein's non-existent weapons of mass destruction, the wrong claims of massive Russian slush funds hidden away in Cyprus, which actually originated with the BND, and the denials last year made by all western intelligence agencies including the BND that the Syrian rebels have used sarin gas, which a UN report has since admitted they almost certainly have.

7. There is one point about MH17 I do however wish to make.

On balance and despite the fact that the body of one of the passengers was found wearing an oxygen mask, I still think the most likely explanation for the tragedy is that MH17 was shot down by a BUK missile. I realise others (eg, Petri Kohn) disagree. I am not technically qualified to decide the question.

I am however concerned that some people are trying to reduce this issue to a false binary of SU25=junta versus BUK=NAF. That is precisely what the BBC for example sought to do in a recent Panorama programme.

The attraction of insisting that MH17 was shot down by a SU25 is that in that case only the junta could have done it since no one says the NAF had an operational SU25 capable of shooting MH17 down. The danger of insisting that MH17 was shot down by an SU25 is that if it does turn out that MH17 was in fact actually shot down by a BUK missile, then some in the west will treat that as proof that it was the NAF that shot it down.

It is nothing of the sort. It cannot be said too strongly that as of now there is no proof that at the time when MH17 was shot down the NAF was in possession of either an operational SU25 aircraft or an operational BUK system, whereas there is conclusive proof that the junta was in possession of both. Until the BND or some other western intelligence makes evidence public that proves the contrary that remains the position.

Malaysian Flight MH17 crash analysis, by The Russian Union of Engineers

The original version of this post was published on the Oceania Saker Blog who spearheaded the effort to translate this most important document proving, if needed, that one can be down under and yet at the very top at the same time!

The Saker
------- 
Malaysian Flight MH17 crash analysis, by The Russian Union of Engineers

This is an excellent detailed analysis of the MH17 tragedy by the Russian Union of Engineers which quite frankly illustrates how heavily censored the Dutch “report” is.

We will let you digest this report and come to your own conclusion, which in all likelihood will explain the infamous high velocity projectiles whitewash pumped out by the western “press”.

This review was undertaken by experts who not only know the subject matter but have objectively presented evidence that must be considered with the legitimacy that is inherent to it. Here is the overall description of the “Analytical Group” from the report:

A group of experts from the Russian Union of engineers was convened to analyze the situation, including reserve officers with experience in the use of anti-aircraft missile systems, as well as pilots having experience with aircraft weapons.This problem was also discussed at a meeting of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, where many variants were tested and discussed again. In the course of their analysis the experts used materials derived from public sources, found in the media. The situation was also analyzed using a computer simulation of the Su-25.

You can download the English version of the report here.

The original Russian version of the report is here.

[note: the links above point to documents in the proprietary M$ DOCX format.  For those who, like myself might prefer the free ODT or PDF format, I have made them available here. The Saker]

Official statement by the Russian Union of Engineers:
(please press on the 'cc' button to see the English subtitles)

Special mention, thanks and much gratitude goes to Alice, Gideon & Katya for their wonderful effort at such short notice.
 
Disclaimer:

We have translated the text to the best of our abilities and where unsure have included the original Russian. Additionally, the original Russian report is available for download for your reference. Please distribute freely with acknowledgement.

AE

MH17 - the silence of the liars

 

Comment: to those of you who wonder where I get this fantastic art from, it is my honor and pleasure to announce that the Basque artist Josetxo Ezcurra has agreed to become a collaborator to the Saker Blog.  Check out his gallery here: http://www.tlaxcala-int.org/

Yes, I am one lucky dude :-)

Cheers,

The Saker

The significance of the Russian decision to move the humanitarian convoy into Novorussia

It appears that the Russians got tired of waiting.  I suggest that you all carefully parse the Statement of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs I posted earlier today.  This is an interesting document because besides an explanation of the Russian decision to move it, it is also, potentially, a legal defense or an unprecedented Russian decision: to overtly violate the Ukrainian sovereignty.  Let me explain.

First, the case of Crimea was also a "special case".  The Russian were legally present there and, in the Russian rationale, all the "Polite Armed Men in Green" did was to protect the local population to make it possible for the latter to freely express its will.  Only after that will was expressed did Russia agree to formally re-incorporate Crimea into Russia.  So from the legal Russian point of view, none of the Russian actions in Crimea included any form of  violation of Ukrainian sovereignty.  I know, most western analyst will not agree, but that is the official Russian stance.  And official stances are important because they form the basis for a legal argument.

Second, the aid which Russia has been sending to Novorussia has been exclusively covert.  Covert operations, no matter their magnitude, do not form the basis for a legal position.  The official position of Moscow has been that not only was there absolutely no military aid to Novorussia, but even when Ukie artillery shells landed inside Russia did the Kremlin authorize any retaliation, again in (official) deference to the Ukrainian national sovereignty.

This time, however, there is no doubt at all that the Russians did deliberately and officially chose to ignore Kiev and move in.  Now, in fact, in reality, this is clearly the logically, politically and morally right thing to do.  But in legal terms, this clearly a violation of Ukrainian sovereignty.  From a legal point of view, the Ukies had the right to keep the Russian convoy at the border for another 10'000 years if they wanted and Russia had no legal right to simply move in.  What apparently happened this morning is that the Ukie officials did not even bother showing up, so the Kremlin just said "forget it!" and ordered the trucks in.

Not only did the Russians move in, but they did that without the ICRC whose personnel refused to go because of the lack of security guarantees from Kiev. The Russian response to that lack of security guarantees was a) to order this unarmed convoy in and b) to clearly state in the official statement:

We are warning against any attempts to thwart this purely humanitarian mission which took a long time to prepare in conditions of complete transparency and cooperation with the Ukrainian side and the ICRC. Those who are ready to continue sacrificing human lives to their own ambitions and geopolitical designs and who are rudely trampling on the norms and principles of international humanitarian law will assume complete responsibility for the possible consequences of provocations against the humanitarian relief convoy.

Again, from a logical, political or moral point of view, this is rather self-obvious, but from a legal point of view this is a threat to use force ("complete responsibility for the possible consequences") inside the putatively sovereign territory of the Ukraine.

The US and their main agent in Kiev, Nalivaichenko, immediately and correctly understood the threat: not only did this convoy bring much needed humanitarian aid to Lugansk, it also provided a fantastic political and legal "cover" for future Russian actions inside Novorussia.  And by "actions" I don't necessarily mean military actions, although that is now clearly and officially possible.  I also mean legal actions such as recognizing Novorussia.  From their point of view, Obama, Poroshenko, Nalivaichenko are absolutely correct to be enraged, because I bet you that the timing, context and manner in which Russia moved into Novorussia will not result in further sanctions or political consequences.   Russia has now officially declared the Ukie national sovereignty as "over" and the EU will probably not do anything meaningful about it.

That, by itself, is a nightmare for Uncle Sam.

Furthermore, I expect the Russian to act with a great deal of restraint.  It would be stupid for them to say "okay, now that we violated the territorial integrity of the Ukraine and ignored its sovereignty we might as well bomb the junta forces and move our troops in".  I am quite confident that they will not do that.  Yet.  For the Russian side, the best thing to do now is to wait.  First, the convoy will really help.  Second, it will become a headache for the Ukies (bombing this convey would not look very good).  Third, this convoy will buy enough time for the situation to become far clearer.  What am I referring to here?

The Ukie plan has been to present some major "victory" for the Sunday the 24, when they plan a victory parade in Kiev to celebrate independence day (yup, the US-controlled and Nazi-administered "Banderastan" will celebrate its "independence"... this is both sad and hilarious).  Instead, what they have a long streak of *very* nasty defeats during the past 5-6 days or so.  By all accounts, the Ukies are getting butchered and, for the first time, even pushed back (if only on a tactical level).  That convoy in Luganks will add a stinging symbolical "f**k you!" to the junta in Kiev.  It will also exacerbate the tensions between the ruling clique in power, the Right Sector and Dmitri Iarosh and the growing protest movement in western Ukraine.

Bottom line: this is a risky move no doubt, probably brought about by the realization that with water running out in Luganks Putin had to act.  Still it is also an absolutely brilliant move which will create a massive headache for the US and its Nazi puppets in Kiev.

The Saker

PS: I heard yesterday evening that Holland has officially announced that it will not release the full info of the flight data and voice recorders of MH17.  Thus Holland has now become an official accomplice to the cover-up of this US false-flag operation and to the murder of the passengers of MH17. This is absolutely outrageous and disgusting I and sure hope that the Malaysian government will not allow this.  As for Kiev, it is also sitting on the recording of the communications between the Kiev ATC and MH17.  Finally, the USA has it all through its own signals intelligence capabilities.  So they all know and they are all covering up.  Under the circumstances, can anybody still seriously doubt "who done it"?

We cannot let MH17 be forgotten - Please help us!

Dear friends,

Those who organized the MH17 false flag have now clearly given the instruction to their propaganda machine (aka MSM) to forget about this tragedy and to pretend like it never happened.  Sure, there are a few courageous sources, such as the World Socialist Web Site, which do ask the right question "Why have the media and Obama administration gone silent on MH17?", but even most of the "alternative" media has really turned the page and forgotten about MH17.

We cannot allow this.

The Russian Team and the website Polismi in Russia have jointly translated the full detailed expert analysis of the MH17 downing into Russian and they are now asking for our - *your* - help in disseminating it in the Russian media worldwide and with all our - *your* - Russian-speaking friends, relatives and colleagues.   Here is their appeal:

Дорогие друзья,

Мы предлагаем вашему вниманию экспертный анализ крушения рейса МН17 Малазийской авиакомпании, который был впервые опубликован на сайте "The Vineyard of the Saker". Команда переводчиков русской версии этого сайта в сотрудничестве с командой сайта http://polismi.ru/o-proekte.html сделали перевод этого важного документа.

Любые упоминания о расследовании сбитого авиалайнера исчезли со страниц и эфиров Западных СМИ. Он выполнил свою трагическую роль. Как сказал Шиллер в свой знаменитой пьесе: «Мавр сделал свое дело, мавр должен уйти». 298 человек одним росчерком пера были принесены в жертву хладнокровному и расчётливому плану по провокации России. Этот план не удался, но его организаторы продолжают, как ни в чём не бывало, оркестрировать свой гнусный и подлый террор. И не зря своим орудием они выбрали тех, у кого нет никаких зачатков морали, совести, человечности. Эти нелюди сегодня правят Украиной. Они - вампиры, высасывающие не только её живую кровь, но и её душу, чувства и сознание. Что для них какой-то самолёт? У их заморских хозяев в заложниках весь мир. И только родные, близкие и друзья погибших будут до конца дней оплакивать боль своих потерь.

Но те из нас, кто не согласен жить в информационной матрице, делают всё возможное, чтобы прорвать эту блокаду ненависти и лжи. Сегодня мы хотим распространить этот анализ, написанный экспертом по расследованию аварий, как можно большему количеству русскоговорящих людей, особенно на Украине. Возможно, мы никогда не узнаем всей правды об этой трагедии. К сожалению, это уже было не раз. Но тем не менее, этот документ приводит веские и взвешенные аргументы думающим и критически мыслящим людям. Как капля воды точит камень, так и каждая крупинка правды помогает пробивать толстую броню Зла.

Русская команда "Bиноградника Балобана"

The full document in Russian is available here:

http://www.vineyardsaker.ru/?p=749

I ask you to do everything you can to share this document as widely as possible.   One of the most disgusting and outrageous things about this false flag massacre is that most of our elites know what truly happened, but that they apparently have all agreed to cover it up, each one for their own reasons.  We cannot allow that to happen and we have to continue to demand answers and full access to all the data, including the recordings of the conversations between MH17 and the Kiev ATC, all the flight data recorders, and all the signal and radar data held by Russia, the USA, NATO, and the junta in Kiev.

Please join us in demanding that the full truth be told about the murder of the people of MH17.

Send the link above, along with this appeal, to all your Russian speaking friends, post it on your blogs, websites, Twitter and Facebook pages, share it on mailing lists, send it to your local Russian newspaper or radio station, etc.   We need maximal exposure and visibility to force those in power to react.

Many thanks,

The Saker

PS: a new, updated, version of the video analysis made by John Martin about MH17 which I had posted here is now available here: http://youtu.be/czqmeMhWyFo make sure to also check it out!

MH17 - We know with 99% certainty who shot down MH17

Though we don't have all the answers (yet), there is already a great deal of evidence out there about what happened (and did not happen) to MH17.  Martin John sent me this very well-made summary of what is known at this time and I hope that you will find this synthesis interesting.

A big thank you to Martin John for this very well-made video!

The Saker
-------

Detailed expert analysis of the MH17 downing

Dear friends,

It is a huge pleasure for me to submit to you a detailed analysis made by "CDN" of the circumstances of the downing of MH17.

You will notice that CDN's analysis does not agree with my own hypothesis.  The difference being that CDN does have the professional expertise (accident investigation) to write such a report while I do not.  Still, CDN has specifically asked me to "please encourage readers to be critical of my analysis" which I indeed encourage you to do: his analysis does not pretend to be The One And Only Truth but instead a basis for discussion.

You can download his full report by clicking on either one of the following links:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByibNV3SiUoobnpCVDduaHVORHM/edit?usp=sharing

http://www.mediafire.com/view/61qa99yt6v3dq64/MH17Analysis_Parts_1_and_2.pdf

I am getting increasingly frustrated and angry at the fact that clearly the Dutch and the British, obviously under the orders of Uncle Sam, are sitting on the data of the flight data recorders and not releasing them.  At the very least, the following countries have the recordings of the radio contacts between MH17 and the Kiev ATC:

1) The junta's SBU
2) The USA
3) Russia

and then two more countries - France and Switzerland - which probably have them too.  Even if these recordings are destroyed, there are enough people out there who by now who know what happened.  The truth will come out sooner or later.  In the meantime, the main task is not to discover The One And Only Truth, but first to disprove the complex of lies of the Empire and, then, to gradually get close and closer to the truth.

We all owe a huge debt of gratitude to CDN who produced a professional-grade report and made it available for us for the sole reward of advancing the cause of truth and justice.  I am personally deeply grateful to CDN for choosing this blog to release his report.

I ask you all to share with us your comments, especially your critical ones, to make it possible for CDN to refine his analysis.  This would be the best way to thank him for his truly excellent work.

The Saker

Just the baseless hypothesis of an uninformed amateur, nothing more

First, a disclaimer: I am not a pilot nor an air traffic controller, and I never served with air defense units.  I did spend some time with an airforce, but my role was one of electronic intercept analysis.  So what follows are just the musings of an uninformed amateur.  Caveat emptor.

What I will try to do here is present a possible scenario which takes into account the basic facts established so far.  Here goes:

The plan was for the Ukies to shoot down the MH17 using a totally inappropriate aircraft: the Su-25, which is a "tree hugging" close air support aircraft.  Why?  After all, the Ukies do have some Mig-29s and even some Su-27, but these are much fewer in number and much easier to track.  A few of them have been seen in the skies over Novorussia, but only rarely.  In contrast, the Su-25 has been a ever-present presence in the skies ever since the conflict began.  Some say that the Su-25 cannot fly over 7'000m.  That is not true.  The problem is that it's cockpit is not pressurized, but the airframe itself has powerful engines which can bring the aircraft well over 10'000m.  All the pilot would need is some good warm clothing and an oxygen mask.  No, the big drawback of sending the Su-25 so high is that it's engines are not designed to be used at that altitude and that it will not be able to fly fast enough to catch-up with a cruising Boeing.  But what if the Su-25 carried a missile?

Turns out that the Su-25 can carry the R-60 air-to-air missile which can fly at over 3'000km per hour and thus easily catch up with a cruising airliner.  So the Su-25+R-60 combination has a flight envelope which is sufficient to attack a Boeing.

There is something else that the Su-25 lacks to function has an interceptor: a radar.  Well, this is not quite true, the Su-25 has a radar, but it is designed for navigation, not air-to-air combat.  However, the R-60 missile does not need a radar, it has its own infrared homing warhead. So if the pilot of the Su-25 can point his aircraft in the general direction of a heat emitting target, and if that target is not too fast or too far away, the R-60 will be able to lock on to it and close in.  The R-60 is a pretty small missile with a short range, under 8'000m, but it so happens that that Russian radar operators reported the Su-25 at about 3-5'000m from MH17.

Still, it is not easy to visually acquire the correct aircraft from the cockpit of a Su-25, then get within the correct range and then fire.  There are clouds, sunlight, other aircraft.  And the Su-25 has no air-to-air radar with a search and track mode.  So what could the Ukies have done?  Provided another radar?

In comes the 3 BukM1 transporter erector launcher and radar (TELAR) and the at least one early warning (long range) radar which all had just been moved in the day before MH17 was shot down, and then immediately withdrawn.  The radars  of each Buk TELAR and the long range early warning radar whose signal have been detected by the Russians could have easily guided the Su-25 to its target, either by a encrypted datalink or even by radio commands.

Combining all of the above, here is my totally primitive and possibly completely mistaken hypothesis:

The Ukies guided the Su-25 to MH17 by using the Buk radar capabilities.  As soon as he was in reach, the SU-25 fire a R-60 missile which hit one of the two engines.  At this point, the MH17 sharply turned to one side and lost altitude (the hit engine would lose power and its drag would sharply pull the Boeing to one side).  The Su-25 then easily closed in and opened fire with his cannon, which has a range of 4'000m, shredding the cockpit and cabin with 30mm rounds.  Had the pilot of the Su-25 failed to catch with MH17 or if the R-60 missile had failed, the Buks on the ground were ready to shoot, but they probably did not have to.  Once MH17 was clearly destroyed, the pilot of the Su-25 could have easily landed anywhere in the Ukraine without drawing any attention.

This was a good plan, but it failed to take into account the sharp turn made by MH17 which instead of continuing on its path towards Russia turned around and fell into a contested by Resistance-controlled field.

One more thing: if my hypothesis is correct and the first impact on MH17 was from a rather small R-60 missile (3kg warhead) into an engine, the flight deck did probably not suffer an immediate and catastrophic depressurization.  If so, the pilots would have had the time to report an explosion.  This is why the recordings of the Kiev ATC were seized by the SBU and why the result of the analysis of the flight recorders takes so much time: the Empire needs to wipe away the recording of the pilots' last words.  Conversely, if  MH17 had been destroyed by a BukM1 missile (70kg warhead) the depressurization would have been immediate and catastrophic.  The problem with wiping the flight recorders is that if the pilots had the time to send a mayday then it would have been recorded not only by the USA and Russia, but by at least two more West European countries.  Even if the latter would comply with the US orders, the Americans are probably terrified that the Russians have the recordings of the MH17's mayday and they are probably trying to negotiate a deal with Russia.  If not, they need to carefully prepare the public opinion by, for example, organizing careful leaks through the Dutch and Malaysian press to say that nothing was recorded in order to denounce any recording presented by Russia as a "fake".  All of this is, again, pure speculation on my part.

Ok, now please feel free to tear this hypothesis into shreds.  These are just the musings of an amateur and most definitely not an expert opinion.  I submit it only as a basis for discussion.

Kind regards,

The Saker

Analysis of satellite imagery released on the Internet by the Security Service of Ukraine on July 30, 2014

The Russian Ministry of Defense has released the following document:

Analysis of satellite imagery released on the Internet by the Security Service of Ukraine on July 30, 2014

The Russian Defence Ministry has analyzed the satellite imagery released by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) on July 30, 2014, which allegedly disproves the authenticity of the Russian satellite imagery showing the Buk-1 batteries in the Boeing 777 (MH17) crash site area on July 17 and confirms that Russian Armed Forces opened fire on Ukrainian territory.

First of all, one needs facts to level grave accusations or make conclusions. It is widely acknowledged that geo-reference and astronomical time are necessary for satellite images to count as factual evidence in order to pinpoint specific satellites in a constellation that was flying over the area at the time and take into consideration their technical characteristics and capacities. All satellites orbiting the Earth move in accordance with predetermined trajectories.

In connection to this, we can state that according to the Russian space surveillance system, Ukrainian satellites Sich-1 and Sich-2 were not flying over this territory from 10am to 1pm Moscow time (GMT+4; 9am-12pm GMT+3) on July 12, 16, 17 and 18, 2014.

At the time specified in the images, the American electro-optical reconnaissance satellite of the Key Hole series was flying over the crash site area, so the source of the images for Ukrainian Security Service is obvious.

As for the images, the analysis goes as follows.

The first two slides show almost identical images from the Ukrainian and Russian sides. The important detail is that the SBU’s image is dated several days later.

Slide 1

Slide 2

The images on Slides 3 and 4 require a more detailed review.

Slide 3

Here the specified time does not correlate with the image.

In the images released by SBU, the shadows point north-east. Thus, these images were not only made on a different day, but also in the afternoon, which means the specified time has been deliberately falsified.

That is an indisputable fact. The images released by the Russian Defense Ministry on July 21 are absolutely accurate in terms of the location and time.

Moreover, it is clearly visible that in the SBU’s image the circled tree belt has been deliberately distorted. The Russian satellite image does not have these distortions.

Additionally, according to all weather reports for Avdeyevka on July 17, the area had 70 to 80% cloud coverage and cloud base height of 2,500m. The information can be easily verified through a number of independent sources. Russian satellite image shows exactly that.

Please note that the SBU’s Slide 4 shows clear skies and sunny weather on the same day. No comments are necessary.

Slide 4

The resolution of the Russian satellite image on Slide 5 has been deliberately lowered, which resulted in the outlines the terrain (i.e. field) looking smeared.

Slide 5

The Russian Defense Ministry presented a high-quality satellite image of this area (as follows), which has no alleged inconsistencies pointed out by the SBU.

High-quality image of area as presented by the Russian Defence Ministry

The Ukrainian image on Slide 7 is identical to the Russian one, except it was made 5 days (!) later. It is unclear what the SBU was trying to prove with it.

Slide 7

Now let us look at the images presented by the SBU as evidence of Russia delivering arms and military equipment to Ukrainian territory, as well as sending mysterious sabotage groups and shelling populated areas.

In the 14 satellite images presented by the SBU one can make out some vehicles and their tracks with no latitude or longitude, or references to time and date.

Half of the images (Images 2 through 7) show some field roads that, according to the SBU, are located partly in Russia and partly in Ukraine.

Image 2

Image 3

Image 4

Image 5

Image 6

Image 7

However, none of the images show a road that crosses the border. The SBU’s unsubstantiated statements that the tracks in the fields were made by Russian military vehicles do not hold up to scrutiny.

Considering the quality of the images, it remains unclear how the vehicles were identified as tanks, armored vehicles or trucks, let alone as property of the Russian Federation and not of the Ukrainian military or border patrol.

The same goes for the two images (images 4 and 14) which allegedly show evidence of fieldworks.

Image 4

Image 14

It is a similar case with Images 11-13, which the SBU claims to show Russian military equipment on Ukrainian territory.

Image 11

Image 12

Image 13

Again, it remains unclear exactly why the head of the SBU believes this equipment belongs to the Russian army. The area around Marinovka, Kozhevnya and Grigoryevka has long been controlled by the Ukrainian military.

As for the alleged shelling with Grad rocket launchers from the Ukrainian (!) village of Grigoryevka controlled by the Ukrainian military (Images 8-10), this is clearly an exercise in conspiracy theories and an attempt to lay the blame on someone else’s shoulders, which is clearly reminiscent of Kiev’s earlier allegations of Russia’s involvement in the Maidan and the tragedy in Odessa.

Image 8

Image 9

Image 10

Instead of presenting hastily doctored evidence to the international community, the SBU could do with better control over all the mercenary units in the areas around Donetsk and Lugansk organized by Kolomoisky, Lyashko, Yarosh and others, who shell Ukrainian territory without any control from those in charge of the anti-terrorist operation.

***

In conclusion, based on the data provided by the Russian space surveillance, one may deduce that Ukraine does not own the disclosed information.

However, its quality, as well as the SBU’s arguments allegedly proving Russia’s involvement, are absolutely implausible.

Apparently, the reason why the true owners of these images have not put their names to these publications is to make sure the myth of their mighty space intelligence keeps going.

Flight MH17 - What You're Not Being Told

Who Benefits from the downing of #MH17?

(Please click on 'cc' for English subtitles)

Propaganda in Malaysia

A friend from Malaysia just sent me these: (no comments needed I suppose)

The most pathetic case of backpedaling I have seen in my life

Check out this story by AP and compare the lame, pathetic and self-evident nonsense of these so-called "intelligence officials" offer with the hard fact based presentation of the Russian Air Force Chief of Staff.

Here is the full article with my comments in blue.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senior U.S. intelligence officials said Tuesday that Russia was responsible for "creating the conditions" that led to the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, but they offered no evidence of direct Russian government involvement.

The intelligence officials were cautious in their assessment, noting that while the Russians have been arming separatists in eastern Ukraine, the U.S. had no direct evidence that the missile used to shoot down the passenger jet came from Russia.

The officials briefed reporters Tuesday under ground rules that their names not be used in discussing intelligence related to last week's air disaster, which killed 298 people.

The plane was likely shot down by an SA-11 surface-to-air missile fired by Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine, the intelligence officials said, citing intercepts, satellite photos and social media postings by separatists, some of which have been authenticated by U.S. experts.

But the officials said they did not know who fired the missile or whether any Russian operatives were present at the missile launch. They were not certain that the missile crew was trained in Russia, although they described a stepped-up campaign in recent weeks by Russia to arm and train the rebels, which they say has continued even after the downing of the commercial jetliner.

In terms of who fired the missile, "we don't know a name, we don't know a rank and we're not even 100 percent sure of a nationality," one official said, adding at another point, "There is not going to be a Perry Mason moment here."

White House deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes said the U.S. was still working to determine whether the missile launch had a "direct link" to Russia, including whether there were Russians on the ground during the attack and the degree to which Russians may have trained the separatists to launch such a strike.

"We do think President Putin and the Russian government bears responsibility for the support they provided to these separatists, the arms they provided to these separatists, the training they provided as well and the general unstable environment in eastern Ukraine," Rhodes said in an interview with CNN.

He added that heavy weaponry continues to flow into Ukraine from Russia following the downing of the plane.

The intelligence officials said the most likely explanation for the downing was that the rebels made a mistake. Separatists previously had shot down 12 Ukrainian military airplanes, the officials said.

The officials made clear they were relying in part on social media postings and videos made public in recent days by the Ukrainian government, even though they have not been able to authenticate all of it. For example, they cited a video of a missile launcher said to have been crossing the Russian border after the launch, appearing to be missing a missile.

But later, under questioning, the officials acknowledged they had not yet verified that the video was exactly what it purported to be.

Despite the fuzziness of some details, however, the intelligence officials said the case that the separatists were responsible for shooting down the plane was solid. Other scenarios — such as that the Ukrainian military shot down the plane — are implausible, they said. No Ukrainian surface-to-air missile system was in range. (That is a lie as proven by the Russian satellite imagery and signal intercepts which prove that they Ukies had plenty of batteries freshly brought right next to the combat zone even though the Novorissians had just one Su-25 close air support aircraft in their entire inventory)

From satellites, sensors and other intelligence gathering, officials said, they know where the missile originated — in separatist-held territory — and what its flight path was. But if they possess satellite or other imagery of the missile being fired, they did not release it Tuesday. A graphic they made public depicts their estimation of the missile's flight path with a green line. The jet's flight path was available from air traffic control data.

In the weeks before the plane was shot down, Russia had stepped up its arming and training of the separatists after the Ukrainian government won a string of battlefield victories. The working theory is that the SA-11 missile came from Russia, although the U.S. doesn't have proof of that, the officials said.

U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power said last week that "because of the technical complexity of the SA-11, it is unlikely that the separatists could effectively operate the system without assistance from knowledgeable personnel. Thus, we cannot rule out technical assistance from Russian personnel in operating the systems," she said.

Asked about evidence, one of the senior U.S. intelligence officials said it was conceivable that Russian paramilitary troops are operating in eastern Ukraine, but that there was no direct link from them to the missile launch.

Asked why civilian airline companies were not warned about a possible threat, the officials said they did not know the rebels possessed SA-11 missiles until after the Malaysian airliner was shot down. (WHAT?  Even I new this, just by reading the reports about the seized Buks, reports which even included photos.  They are really insulting our collective intelligence again!) 

Have you counted the "caveat words"?  I counted fifteen (depending on what you want to include).  Notice that they consider the Ukie missile as "implausible" but that they never explain why this would be implausible.  And they admit relying in part on social media and Ukie government info?  How absolutely utterly pathetic.  I mean - I feel sorry for them.  For any self-respecting intelligence official to admit such things is to commit a seppuku of your professional pride.  It's admitting that you are an amateur and a drooling moron.  And here is the deal - I very much doubt that these men are amateurs or morons.  So, yet again, they were back-stabbed by imbecile politicians like Obama and Power who just are not used to consulting with their own specialist before flapping their lips and nevermind if they make an entire intelligence community look like cretins.

I can barely imaging how much the US intelligence community must *hate* this administration.  Can you imagine what it must be to be a highly experienced US State Department or DIA career officer and listen to how the Russians constantly berate the US government for being "un-professional" and "amateurish" only to then hear that kind of absolute utter nonsense spoken in your name.

Look, in this game I am 100% on Russia's side, but part of me, on a (ex-) professional level if you want,  feels the pain that I am sure many career intelligence officers feel today in the USA and they have my sincere sympathy.  I met enough of them to know that they are not the idiots that this Administration makes them out to be.

But of course the big news here is this: the US fairy tale about Putin the terrorist is falling down in flames.  Yet again the Neocons by their sheer arrogance, hubris and boundless stupidity manged to lie their way into a corner from which there is no exit.  Not that the US had much street-cred anyway, not after Colin Powell's dishwasher powder in a vial at the UNSC.  But, of course, there is bad, very bad, even worse and outright terrible.  But now the US has reached the "terminal" stage.

The AngloZionists sure had this one coming.

The Saker 

PS: in the meantime, check the zoo that the freaks in Kiev made of their "Parliament":