Naast het beginsel dat de aanklager altijd gelijk heeft, lijkt nog een ander principe de politieke en journalistieke begeleiding van het JIT-onderzoek te beheersen, namelijk de gedachte dat veel zwak bewijs een sterke zaak zou maken.
Zie mijn commentaar op Ravage webzine
Some people say lying, promoting disinformation and publication of mystifying scenarios with all kinds of versions of the truth is a sign of guilt… especially when the Russians are concerned. But what did the Ukrainian regime or people close to them exactly do the first days after MH17 was downed?
Researching alleged evidence about a possible weapon and crime scene regarding the downing of flight MH17 as gathered from social media postings, it becomes clear the standing narrative – also pursued by the official investigators office – shows severe difficulties. Trying to verify the date of a video of a Buk missile launch system, allegedly driving from the rebel held Ukrainian city of Snizhne towards an alleged launch site southwards, sheds light on the way dots of information were suggestively interpreted and connected.
The official story of guilt for downing MH17 is founded on the so-called fatal mistake narrative, a story of separatists mistakenly mixing up a Ukrainian freighter plane for MH17. This narrative depends heavily on the misinterpretation of a message that was retracted from the news site Strelkov_info, a website that reported news about the fights and official quotes by the commander of the DNR forces, Igor – ¨Strelkov¨ – Girkin.
The deletion of this posting would be an act to conceal evidence after the commander found out the wrong plane had been downed, a story founded on a set of false assumptions. Nevertheless, many news outlets and others try to reanimate this story.
In this examination the most important social media evidence constructing a possible answer to the question who downed civilian airliner MH17 will be reviewed to list the (imho) most important problems. As a disclaimer I would like to start with giving my own opinion. This opinion holds the track-a-trail story of a stand-alone Buk missile system brought in from Russia and moving from Donetsk to a site south of Snizhne to shoot down a civilian plane, is fraudulent.
With this I don´t mean all evidence has been faked. I do support, however, the idea this story contains so much irregularities – including some forgeries – it raises almost every red flag possible. These red flags I try to write down here in kind of orderly manner, though from the aforementioned point of view. Of course, the development of this review is an ongoing process, also influenced by discussion and re-examinations.
Last update of the review 18.7.2016
Nu de achtergronden van de ramp met vlucht MH17 steeds meer vragen oproepen, neemt bij hoofdspeurneus Fred Westerbeke het optimisme toe, zo bleek uit een brief aan de nabestaanden. Ondertussen leek zijn pad naar opheldering door een steeds donker wordende tunnel te lopen.
Last april the information war hanging over the MH17 disaster took a surprising turn when NATO affiliated research collective Bellingcat and the Russian Ministery of Foreign Affairs (MFA) got into an open clash. Eliot Higgins, Bellingcat founder, used some crafty ¨trolling¨ techniques to provoke the Russians and this way he managed to squeeze some respons out of them. Assessing some of the arguments and alleged facts used in the dispute one might come to the conclusion both parties actually were not very convincing.
The crash of flight MH17 in July 2014 was of crucial importance in the series of events that ignited the tensions between the West and Russia even further, leading to Cold War 2.0. October the 13th the Dutch Safety Board, commissioned to investigate the cause of this crash, issued their report. Political guidance was attached too. At the same day Russian BUK manufacturer Almaz-Antei showed competitive findings. When these were used to review the DSB report, it followed the results of the official investigators were not as conclusive as was claimed they were. Biggest losers were Ukraine, US and the pro-NATO “citizen investigators” of Bellingcat
With some theoretical groundwork done it´s easy to detect deceptive messages. Its even possible to write your own detective or crime play for that matter. Doing this, and adding some research to it, one could arrive at an interesting conclusion about the first evidence the Ukrainian secret service issued publically after MH17 crashed, evidence that purported the now most cited opinion concerning the cause of the crash.
One of the detected irregularities. The enhanced versions of the two published photos of the alleged BUK launch trail, showing dark smoke curling up into a white plume. According to Bellingcat this feature showed the first stage exhaust of a BUK launch. When the second picture is moved to fit the trail of the first one, it is obvious the white smoke doesn´t change in shape, i.e. seems to be immune for wind shear effects.
A BUK launch contrail, 10 severe problems and ever changing testimonies. Reconstruction of the story of the only evidence supporting the narrative the Eastern Ukrainian rebels and their Russian helpers launched a BUK to take down flight MH17.
UPDATE JULY 2016
An update by Micha Kobs from July 2016 completes the story. After pressure the photographer gave in and handed over the metadata of photos he made of the smoke coming from the burning remains of the plane. With this the actual windspeed on site could be calculated, which was a condition for calculations to verify the distance the alleged launch plume travelled.
With this Kobs showed the launch plume could NOT have originated from the alleged field. Actually the launchspot must have been located right in the backyard of some people in Pervomais’ke village. See this PDF’s:
THE IMPOSSIBLE LAUNCH SPOT
THE IMPOSSIBLE LAUNCH SPOT pt2
For the entire story and its developments towards this final debunk, you can read the article and report attached.