MH17 Shot Down by Rrebels Using Buk System Brought from Russia – Int’l Investigators

Donate

MH17 Shot Down by Rrebels Using Buk System Brought from Russia – Int’l Investigators

© AP Photo/ Peter Dejong

Originally appeared at RT

A Dutch-led team of international investigators has released its findings in the criminal probe on the MH17 crash, concluding the plane was shot down by rebels in eastern Ukraine by a Buk missile system brought from Russia. Moscow has repeatedly denied supplying weapons to the rebels.

The Joint Investigation Team (JIT) consists of investigators and experts from the Netherlands, Belgium, Australia, Malaysia and Ukraine. The team was tasked with determining who was responsible for the incident in which Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 came down over eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014.

“Based on the results of the criminal investigation, it may be concluded that flight MH17 was shot down on July 17, 2014, by a 9M38-series missile from a Buk missile launcher and [it] was brought from the territory of the Russian Federation and after launch subsequently returned to the Russian Federation territory,” said Wilbert Paulissen, the director of the National Criminal Investigation Division of National Police of the Netherlands.

The Dutch-led Joint Investigative Team says that a technical problem and an “attack within the aircraft,” such as a terrorist assault, can be ruled out.

No other aircraft could have shot down the plane either, the JIT says, citing various radar data, including that provided by Russia.

The JIT presented an audio recording that allegedly proves that rebel forces voiced a need for a Buk missile system, and subsequently received one.

According to the JIT, the team investigated the claims by Russia that the plane was shot down from Zaroschenske, held by Ukrainian forces. Citing an alleged audio interception of the rebels, the JIT concluded that the missile did not come from that territory.

International investigators instead say that flight MH17 was shot down from the village of Pervomayskoye, held by rebel forces at the time of the incident.

About 100 people could be linked to the alleged transportation of the Buk missile system to eastern Ukraine and the missile launch, the JIT announced. There should however be a further investigation, the team added.

According to the JIT, it is not clear how long it will take for investigators to establish the exact roles of the people allegedly linked to the incident.

Investigators added that it is not clear whether the downing might have been a mistake. However, according to some audio recordings, “people were surprised” after it was revealed which plane had been brought down, the JIT said.

The Dutch-led investigators said they did not have an opportunity to analyze new Russian radar data on the incident. Almaz-Antey, which produces the Buk missile system, said that last week it handed over raw radar data from the airspace around the crash site of MH17 on the very day of the tragedy.

The radar, located in Russia, had not spotted any objects that came from the rebel-held territories towards the crashed jet, the radar producer said.

The JIT says that the radar images provided by Russia will be reviewed by the investigation team.

Ukraine and its foreign sponsors repeatedly accused Russia of arming and supporting the rebels, an accusation that Moscow denies. Almost immediately after MH17 was downed, Western media and some governments blamed Russia, claiming Moscow had either provided the Buk system to the rebels or sent its regular troops to take down Ukrainian warplanes on their behalf.

Russia denied the accusations on numerous occasions. It also challenged Kiev’s claims that Ukraine had neither warplanes nor Buk systems in the area by producing public satellite and radar images showing evidence to the contrary.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Suyanto Ng

    Netherland, Belgium, Ukraine, what’s next ? Pentagon? Big armored vehicles with big missiles come across from Russia to shot down just one plane and come back RTB, and Ukrops just sittin’ back see all those? Bunch of crap!

    • Robert Ferrin

      Of course it is these are NATO countries and the want-a-be’s for that would be the last thing the Russians would want to happen,reminds me of the false flag affair where we wanted to take down an airliner and blame it on Cuba as a pretex for an invasion..

  • hvaiallverden

    Once again, I wounder why some few “things” are overlooked and do correct me if I am wrong.
    What I am advocating is to find those images of the front of that plain, the cockpit area to be specific.

    30 mm cannon holes.
    I remembered them clearly and dont again try ti insult the people with this kind od stupid nonsense about wandering BUKs, Christ this is lame.

    peace

  • howisitso

    these people are pathetic. Not buying it you slacko’s – and hey… what took you so long? Oh and has it got anything to do with the fact that Russia has just released MORE PROOF that the missiles came from Ukraine forces area? You are full of lies – cowards.

  • chris chuba

    What evidence do they have that a Buk system was transported into and out of rebel territory, is their report publicly available?

    Why did they rule out Zaroschenske.

    • Gary Sellars

      Dodgy photos provided by the Ukrops and purported to be “proof” of the alleged BUK “returning to Russia”.

      Geo-location has however shown that the photos were taken in REGIME territory, and the hull number of the TELAR was a REGIME vehicle that waqs subsequently filmed as part of a REGIME column.

      Ukropistani fabrications happily accepted as “proof” by NATO apparatchiks in the DSB.

      • chris chuba

        And conspicuously missing U.S. satellite data after Kerry shouted that we saw the firing of the missile.

  • Gary Sellars

    1) We know that MH17 was downed by a BUK.
    2) The rebels had no BUK systems or the knowledge to use them.
    3) The DSB is compelled to blame Russia for geo-political reasons.
    4) The only way reconcile 1) and 2) is for a BUK to be supplied to the rebels by a 3rd party, ie Russia

    VOILA!! The narrative is born, and now the DSB dutifully performs an “investigation” where they ignore all data from Russia, overlook the refusal of the Ukies to submit FTC data, overlook the refusal of the US to provide its “proof” of Russian involvement, ignore the input from the BUK manufacturer, and accept at face value all of the fabricated “evidence” from Ukraine (who did have BUKs in the area and have a huge interest in LYING to pin the blame on Russia).

    Only a 1st class clown could accept this “finding”.

    • BMWA1

      Note capture of base A 1402, Donetsk, also noted in RU sources, here also, from 29 July 2014, from so-called “ATO”.

      https://informnapalm.org/en/anti-terrorist-operation-summary-for-june-29-2014/

      RU sources state that the base contained many men from Odessa. They might have been in a mood to cooperate after events in May of that year. This is a possible rebel souurce.

      • Gary Sellars

        The Ukie military admitted that the captured BUK was rendered unusable prior to its abandonment. ie they wrecked it.

  • Mahmoud Larfi

    Russia should have thought twice before sending advanced SAM system(s) to rebels in Ukraine, it should have stuck to MANPADS… I mean that the downing of Kievan fighter jets and troop transport aircraft has anyway had no positive impact on the political outcome and was no game changer at all. Now whoever did it, the simple fact that a Russian supplied BUK was in the hands of rebels is now playing against Russia. That been said, the responsibility has already been put on Kiev who haven’t closed its airspace above the Donbass… because the big picture is that a passenger plane was shot down above a war zone and innocent people totally unrelated to the conflict died ; the rest are details. It is just regrettable that Russia has once again put itself in a situation where it is forced to lie.

    • Gary Sellars

      Russia is NOT lying…. FFS open your eyes.

      Anyone who really belivies this contrived BS about Russia sending one lone BUK into Donbass, firing one rocket, then scooting back to Russia is a fucking clown. In any event, Russia doesn’t use the 9M38 missile anymore but the Ukies do, and they had BUK launchers in the area and operating.

  • Carol Davidek-Waller

    Poppycock. The Dutch refused any data the Russians submitted because it disagreed with their made in USA cover story. It was a false flag attack by the Kiev government who were the only ones who could have misdirected the plane to fly over a combat area where they could shoot it down and try to blame ‘ the Russians’. It has CIA (false flag specialists) fingerprints all over it

    • Brad Isherwood

      USS Maine in Havana harbor. ….Pearl Harbor….Gulf of Tonkin
      911**….Iraq WMD….A Stan/ Osama swim with Fishes.
      Assad used Sarina on his people…. .. MH 17

      http://art-for-a-change.com/blog/category/mexican-muralism

      John Foster Dulles and Central America….
      Just not enough to ratline in Nazis. …..why not murder Center Am for Corp America.

      War is a Racket* – Gen Smedley Butler

  • chris chuba

    Do the Ukrainians even have any high level bombers or just strike fighters like the Su-24 in their arsenal?

    The reason I ask is that I don’t even know if there would be any motive for the Russian Federation to provide the rebels with anything other than MANPADS. If the Ukrainians don’t have anything like a Tupolev bomber then a Buk system would be unneeded.

    • Mahmoud Larfi
    • BMWA1

      AN24 transport planes were used (capable over 40K, Beech range), but no high altitude bombers as such. Incidentally, most of UA airpower grounded due to cumulative neglect of maintenance. Some 2014 captured Krim fields were found to contain less than 10%, and in one case, 5% flyable planes..

      • chris chuba

        Thanks. It doesn’t look like the rebels needed a Buk.
        The Ukrainians didn’t have any high altitude bombers and the transport planes have to land somewhere close to rebel territory which puts them at low altitude.

  • paul

    I don’t want to get involved with the pros and cons of this situation.
    What I will say is that the plane was overflying a war zone, a zone
    where bombing had been happening. This plane could have been a high
    altitude bomber. The lost of civilian life is a tragedy, but in a war
    zone perceived threats have to be eliminated. That’s what I would
    have done.

    The americans shot down an Iranian passenger airliner. Their excuse was
    that they mistook it for an attack aircraft. So if this is to be
    believed then it shows that these mistakes can be made.

  • Oh, and this varies by what they said within 10 minutes after the accident..HOW?
    the investigation is a sham and a shame upon the whole human race.

    • Gary Sellars

      Exactly. Two years and the story is still the same… blame Russia, exonerate the Ukrop coup regime.

  • Monte George Jr

    A BUK launch is a highly visible event, for many miles an any direction. Thick white trail of exhaust. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of people in areas surrounding the launch point would have to have seen the launch. No one did. No exhaust trail, no missile. Therefore: No BUK missile was launched by anyone in that area that day. MH-17 was brought down by other means.

  • Tom

    The first OSCE monitor that was allowed access to the MH-17 crash site took photos of the pilot’s section of the cockpit fuselage which showed the unmistakable entry holes of close-range heavy machinegun fire.To date, this crucial material evidence of an air-to-air attack against the Malaysian Boeing 777 by a hostile jetfighter has been completely overlooked by the official investigation and the photos showing the pilots section have not been published by mainstream media sources. Globalresearch did reproduce the photos .
    All participating member states involved in the official investigation have had the power to veto publication of any of the findings from public knowledge, including the Ukraine that has still not provided the missing air-traffic control recordings or explained why flight MH-17 was directed by the Ukrainian air-traffic controllers over a combat zone where numerous aircraft had been downed in the previous few months.Not a single satellite photo or radar recording has been provided by the official investigation to prove that a surface-to-air missile was used against the Boeing ,it is absolutely inconceivable that a ballistic missile such as the Buk could possibly have been fired without it being spotted by radar or geo-stationary satellites over the region.
    The timing of the publication of the report coincides with an escalation of anti-Russian rhetoric and false accusations about Russia’s actions in Syria.In effect, the team are nothing more than a bunch of actors reading their scripts to the cameras of the media that is controlled by Washington, the same power that organized the Maiden coup in Feb 2014 and has supported Poroshenko’s campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Russian-speaking Slavs of the Donbass.