“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.â€
― Leo Tolstoy,
This was on TV here just recently, but I didn't see it. It's an excellent doco imo and provides good evidence of what really happened. The smoking gun for me is the change of operating height on wiki (and elsewhere) of the SU-25 to 7,500 metres from a previous height of 14,000 metres - which clearly was done to rule out the use of this aircraft that Ukraine is equipped with.
Even today, Wiki cites the service ceiling of this aircraft as 7,000 metres and and takes that figure from Sukhoi itself. But miltary aircraft sites like military today, show the ceiling as 10 kilometres. A book on the aircraft published in 2007, well before the event and reviewed in 2011 (ditto) also shows the ceiling as 10 kilometres, with another reviewer stating that ceiling as 13,700 metres (see HERE). We can repeat this exercise many more times. See the cited service ceiling at EnemyForces.net, and HERE, HERE and HERE. Personally, I'll always take the word on non-affiliated aircraft buffs over so called media experts. However, we do need to note that a service ceiling simply defines the optimal height of an aircraft carrying a full load of weapons and able to maintain a best rate of climb airspeed. The difference in the various figures seem to be to do with the service (constant) ceiling where an aircraft can sustain flight - whereas the absolute (dynamic) ceiling is the heigh where an aircraft can reach and operate for a very limited period of time. The SU 25 can do the latter. Simples.
But apart from all that technical stuff, do we know for sure that it was a SU 25 that was responsible? Who said it was an SU 25 in the first place? I have no idea personally? The Ukrainian AF have over 40 SU 27's which are far superior anyway that even Wiki state has a service ceiling of 19 kilometres?
Other than that, the media response to the RT doco is the usual focused propaganda. Facts aren't really disputed, but heavy emphasis is put on the fact that it's a Russia Today production, with some saying it was Putin's response blah, blah, blah. Kill the messenger not the message.
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
24-10-2014, 01:40 PM (This post was last modified: 24-10-2014, 02:31 PM by David Guyatt.)
For accuracy sake, I am pasting extracts from wiki edits that relate to this service ceiling issue and which happened shortly after the shoot down of MH17 on 17th July 2014.
The following is from today's Wiki entry on the SU25:
Quote:2014 Ukrainian unrest
Main articles: 2014 pro-Russian conflict in Ukraine and List of Ukrainian aircraft losses during the 2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine Ukrainian armed forces deployed fixed wing aircraft over insurgent Eastern regions starting in spring 2014, mostly on a reconnaissance and show of force role.[SUP][45][/SUP]On 26 May 2014, Ukrainian Su-25s supported Mi-24s helicopters during a military operation to regain control over the airport in Donetsk, during which the Su-25s fired air to ground rockets. The airport was recaptured with 30-40 casualties on the separatists' side and no losses on the Ukrainian forces.[SUP][46][/SUP] On 2 July 2014, one Ukrainian Su-25 crashed due to a technical fault.[SUP][47][/SUP][SUP][48][/SUP][SUP][49][/SUP] On 16 July 2014, an Su-25 was shot down, with Ukrainian officials stating that a Russian MiG-29 shot it down using a R-27T missile.[SUP][50][/SUP] Russia denied these allegations.[SUP][51][/SUP] On 23 July 2014, two Su-25s were shot down in the Donetsk region of Ukraine. A spokesperson for the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine said the planes were shot down by missiles fired from Russia.[SUP][52][/SUP] On 29 August 2014, a Ukrainian Su-25 was shot down by pro Russian rebels. The Ukrainian authorities said the downing was due to a Russian missile without clarifying if they mean Russian made or fired by Russian forces. The pilot managed to eject safely. On the same day, pro Russian rebels claimed the downing of up to four Su-25s.[SUP][53][/SUP][SUP][54][/SUP]
Main article: 2014 Ukrainian civil war Ukrainian armed forces deployed fixed wing aircraft over insurgent Eastern regions starting in spring 2014, mostly on a reconnaissance and show of force role.[SUP][45][/SUP]On 26 May 2014, Ukrainian Su-25s supported Mi-24s helicopters during a military operation to regain control over the airport in Donetsk, during which the Su-25s fired air to ground rockets. The airport was recaptured with 30-40 casualties on the separatists' side and no losses on the Ukrainian forces.[SUP][46][/SUP] On 2 July 2014, one Ukrainian Su-25 crashed due to a technical fault.[SUP][47][/SUP][SUP][48][/SUP][SUP][49][/SUP] On 16 July 2014, an Su-25 was shot down, with Ukrainian officials stating that a Russian MiG-29 shot it down using a R-27T missile.[SUP][50][/SUP] Russia denied these allegations.[SUP][51][/SUP] On 21 July 2014, Head of the Main Operations Department of the Russian Army Lieutenant-General Andrey Kartapolov stated that there was no proof for Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 being shot down by a rebel BUK anti-air missile. Instead, the Russian General showed proof of a Ukrainian Su-25 flying as close as 3,000-5,000 meters to the Malaysia aircraft before it crashed; he asked the Ukrainian government for an official statement on this finding,[52]. The service ceiling of SU-25 is 24,000 ft (Sukhoi Company [JSC]). Besides, it can still reach 35,000 ft if only for a little while and attack it's airborne targets (check the term [absolute ceiling ]). SU-25 jet is fully capable of shooting down a Boeing 777 passenger airplane at 33000-35000 feet. And if you consider that one can arm it with just a few AA missiles specifically for this purpose, this capability increases greatly. The missile itself can hit the target up to 6.3 miles away.
You will note that the last para referencing the absolute ceiling of 35,000 ft (actually over 1o kilometres) has been removed and the reason cited for this is:
Quote:
(cur | prev) 18:19, 21 July 2014‎ BilCat (talk | contribs)‎ . . (73,768 bytes) (-590)‎ . . (→‎2014 Ukrainian unrest: Removed ridiculous propoganda/fringe theory about an attack plane intercepting an airliner)
The SU25 Wiki entry was edited 41 times on 21st July 2014. It was edited 7 times on 20 July 2014, once on 18th July and once on 17th July 2014. The entry at 1700 on 21st July 2014 shows the service ceiling as:
Quote:Performance
Maximum speed: Mach 0.8 (975 km/h, 526 knots, 606 mph) at sea level
Combat range: 750 km (405 nmi, 466 mi) at sea level, 4,400 kg (9,700 lb) weapons and two external tanks
Service ceiling: 10,000 m (32,808 ft) clean, 5,000 m (16,000 ft) with max weapons
What we have today is a sanitised version of the aircraft's performance that is in line with the media story.
PS, earlier version of this Wiki page showed the service ceiling as 7,000 metres dating back a long time. The dispute - or should we call it an edit war? - only started as a consequence of the SU25 being fingered as the culprit and then pooh-poohed in the press as a conspiracy theory. But the volume of editing activity on 21 July raises a question, for me anyway.
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
(…and pretty soon you are talking about real money)
As the military situation in Ukraine grinds to a stalemate, the still more desperate economic plight comes to the fore, laying bare the culpable folly of European diplomacy.In an earlier posting we had suggested that the unification of Germany could serve as a benchmark for the potential cost of any attempt to keep the implicit promise to Ukraine of EU accession, tossing out a guesstimate of one-half trillion Euros an obviously impossible sum in the context of a European continent sliding into renewed recession.In a recent paper, Carnegie's always incisive Dmitri Trenin has suggested that the actual cost of the reunification of Germany was closer to E1.5 trillion, albeit over a period of 23 years. While this latter number is almost certainly closer to the mark, given the realities it is no more than a substantial rounding error; Mr Poroshenko's trip to Washington from which he returned with a generous $52 million suggests that the likelihood of Ukraine receiving anything like either number is identical precisely nil.
That's $50 mmm…million, with an "M"
Since independence modern Ukraine has been at best a semi-functional state, stumbling along on legacy assets while no government, whether nominally pro-Russian (Yanukovich) or pro-western (Timoshenko/Yushchenko) made any meaningful attempt at real reform.This is hardly surprising the various governments represented nothing more than the coalesced interests of one or the other oligarchic faction, themselves the ultimate beneficiaries of systematised corruption and inefficiency, which they have no conceivable interest in combatting.Neither Russia nor the West chose to (or were able to) impose reform from without. Western spin management certainly prepared the ground for the policy blunders which followed the former darling of the Western media (now thankfully largely forgotten) Yulia Timoshenko built her multi-billion dollar fortune by stealing gas, consolidating control with the same brutal tactics employed in Russia by Mikhail Khodorkovsky in the mid-90s.
Of course Ukraine can join the EU, right after Turkey and Albania!
In recent weeks, the Western media have finally begun to deviate from the party line. The New York Times carried a piece on the Kiev Regime's use of illegal cluster munitions to depopulate its former Eastern provinces. Bloomberg has started to run pieces on the total failure of the government in Kiev to carry out meaningful reform or anti-corruption campaigns. Are they preparing a retreat?The only thing we find surprising is that anyone should be remotely surprised a government of oligarchs kept in power in part thanks to small, heavily armed fascist factions is certainly a most unlikely candidate to carry out sweeping reforms.Waiter check please!As Winter draws nigh, the European Union finds itself embarrassed. It is dependent upon Russia for 30% of its gas half of which still transits through Ukraine. Were Ukraine to resume stealing gas intended for the EU and were Russia to cut supplies in response, Europe most certainly would not freeze, but a substantial part of its industrial plant would shut down, sending the EU sliding from its current slow grind towards recession into outright economic collapse. As a result, the recent discussions in Milan were centred about a single pertinent question: how, precisely, is Europe going to pay Ukraine's gas bills? A bridge loan is being cobbled together, with the likelihood of repayment in fine vanishingly slim.Needless to say this is only the beginning. As Mr Trenin correctly notes, to keep Ukraine going as a functional, unitary state is going to require massive capital outlays; we need add only that such outlays will not encumber Washington which will typically wash its hands of the entire matter and blame "the Russians" but rather the EU.Brussels/Berlin shall be left to support the rump Ukraine 40 million people, with some good agricultural assets (which alas, Europe is not short of) while Russia is compelled to support Novorossia 2 million people in a largely devastated province, although with some operable industry and mines.Regardless of Mr Putin's stated preference for the preservation of a unitary Ukraine, it seems most unlikely that, given the appalling violence visited upon them, the Eastern provinces will again accept any sovereignty of Kiev, instead coalescing into a mini-state under Russian protection similar to South Ossetia or Abkhazia.Tacit a sudden and unforeseen outbreak of enlightened self-interest and skilled diplomacy in Germany, this de facto secession will remain an open ulcer, poisoning relations between Europe and Russia for years to come and yes, greatly advancing the geostrategic interests of China.Blindfolded at nightWhat is most extraordinary is that this outcome was not only predictable, but indeed, that there was no other scenario imaginable. Led by Germany, European diplomacy stumbled into the Ukrainian imbroglio with nary a hint of a viable exit strategy. By allowing the Kiev regime a free hand to attempt ethnic cleansing of Lugansk/Donetsk something which Russia would obviously never allow they stood by as the Ukrainian State was damaged beyond repair, while the industrial economy collapsed.Reminiscent of the US invasion of Iraq based upon little more than a profound faith that matters would somehow "work themselves out" (they have…though not quite as intended: enter ISIS) Europe has contributed to a geopolitical catastrophe for which it will most likely be paying for generations to come.As regards Russia, anyone wishing to spin this as a great geopolitical victory is delusional; Russia has been forced to respond to a crisis of other people's making. President Putin was dealt a poor hand, though he has played it remarkably well. The political split with the West was not intended, but was forced upon him by aggressive Western diplomacy which allowed only the stark choice between submission and resistance; it shall have a profound impact upon Russia's future geopolitical orientation one which, whether or not it is ideal for Russia, shall certainly not prove remotely beneficial to the interests of the West.As regards Ukraine, at least in retrospect, his plan was obvious play for time while the economic realities made themselves felt. Not just the arrival of General Winter rendering the situation suddenly acute, but also, the inability of the Poroshenko regime to satisfy an increasingly restive and angry populace and its radical right-wing nationalist factions.It was always a matter of time before the Kiev regime faced economic collapse and/or violent overthrow. The war in the East bought Poroshenko time by distracting from the looming economic collapse, while providing a convenient fig-leaf for the inability to reform. That time is now running out.Neither Europe nor the US have either the means or the willingness to step in to support Ukraine to the extent required. Loans (which will certainly never be repaid) shall be provided ad hoc by the EU, as required to stave off imminent catastrophe while the usual suspects continue to divert whatever is available of their accustomed cashflows.At some point, as their personal situations become stressed, the Ukrainian oligarchy may well solicit a new offer from Russia similar to Yanukovich' ill-fated appeal to the Kremlin; given the amount of bad blood and violence seen, an Eastward turn by the rump Ukraine seems most unlikely. Instead, Ukraine is doomed to remain a perpetual accession candidate, peering longingly through the European shop window more Albania than the Czech Republic.None of the options are palatable, and the present author is hard-pressed to imagine a blue-sky scenario. But the sheer incompetence of European diplomacy has been startling In a world not remotely starved for crises, the present crisis appears as a unique failure, as Europe has allowed its vital CIS policy to be hijacked for the furtherance of the geopolitical agenda of militant Washington factions.
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Russian report lays out step by step action of the shoot-down
From VoltaireNet:
Quote:
Justice for the MH17 victims is what we all need
VOLTAIRE NETWORK | MOSCOW (RUSSIA) | 3 NOVEMBER 2014
After keeping a meaningful two-month pause in covering the course of investigation of the MH17 tragedy, the international press has suddenly broke into another wave of baseless accusations against "pro-Russia separatists", triggered by a "secret report" made by the BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst, German foreign intelligence) for the Bundestag Control Committee on October 8, 2014. Ten days later the Spiegelalleged that at the meeting the BND president Gerhard Schindler had provided "satellite images and diverse photo evidence" to back up his case "proving that pro-Russian separatists captured a BUK air defense missile system at a Ukrainian military base and fired a missile on July 17 that exploded in direct proximity to the Malaysian aircraft". The allegation was immediately caught up by a number of other top international media [1].On October 20 Alexander Nerad'ko, the director of Russia's Federal Air Transport Agency, invited the German intelligence to publish documentation demonstrating the involvement of the insurgents or the Ukrainian army in the disaster. Unfortunately, his request is not met till now.Ironically, one day before BND presented its report to Bundestag, the former Dutch Foreign Affairs Minister Frans Timmermans has casually let out that "the body of one passenger was found wearing an oxygen mask" [2].This piece of information trashes the theory (which we used to hold too) of a shoot down by a surface-to-air missile as in this case the instantaneous depressurization of the MH17 passenger cabin would cause immediate death of all passengers.Both Western and Russian experts understand that serious conclusions on the causes of MH17 tragedy should be based on professional forensic study of the wreckage and damaging elements. All available technical data from Ukrainian dispatch lines, surveillance by Russia and USA, information of the Ukrainian Air Defense and Boeing Corporation should be made available for the International MH17 investigation commission. All other "leakages" are pointless talks and deceitful manipulation of the public opinion. E.g. the British barrister Alexander Mercouris has provided a detailed analysis depicting numerous controversies in the German report (as least in its clauses leaked to the press).The Russian experts has already gathered all available data and released the Incident Report on MH17 tragedy back in mid-August this year. Its full text in English was already published by Voltaire Network [3]. Its concluding points are as follows (abstracts):
"9.1. In relation to the circumstances of the crash of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 jet.At 17.17-17.20, the Boeing 777 was in Ukrainian airspace near the city of Donetsk at the height of 10100 m. An unidentified combat aircraft (presumably a Su-25 or MiG -29), which was a tier below, on a collision course, in the cloud layer, sharply gained altitude and suddenly appeared out of the clouds in front of the civilian aircraft and opened fire on the cockpit, firing from a 30 mm caliber cannon or smaller.As a result of multiple hits from shells there was damage to the cockpit, which suddenly depressurized, resulting in instant death for the crew due to mechanical influences and decompression. The attack was sudden and lasted a fraction of a second; in such circumstances the crew could not sound any alarm as the flight had been proceeding in regular mode and no attack was expected.Since neither the engines or hydraulic system, nor other devices required for the continuation of the flight were out of commission, the Boeing 777, running on autopilot (as is standard), continued on its horizontal flight path, perhaps gradually losing altitude.The pilot of the unidentified combat aircraft maneuvered to the rear of the Boeing 777. After that, the unidentified plane remained on the combat course, the pilot provided a target tracking aircraft equipment, took aim and launched his R-60 or R-73 missiles.The result was a loss of cabin pressure, the aircraft control system was destroyed, the autopilot failed, the aircraft lost the ability to maintain its level flight path, and went into a tailspin. The resulting overload led to mechanical failure of the airframe at high altitudes.The aircraft, according to the information available from the flight recorders, broke up in the air, but this is possible only in the case of a vertical fall from a height of ten thousand meters, which can only happen when the maximum permissible overload is exceeded. One reason for stalling and going into a tailspin is the inability of the crew to control the aircraft as a result an emergency in the cockpit and the subsequent instantaneous depressurization of the cockpit and the passenger cabin. The aircraft broke up at a high altitude, which explains the fact that the wreckage was scattered over the territory of more than 15 square kilometers.9.2. In relation to the party responsible for the death of 283 passengers and 15 crew members.On 17.07.2014, the armed forces of the self-proclaimed Donetsk National Republic had no relevant combat aircraft capable of destroying an aerial target similar to the Boeing 777, nor the necessary airfield network, nor the means of radar detection, targeting and tracking.No combat aircraft of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation violated the airspace of Ukraine, which the Ukrainian side confirms as well as third parties who conduct space surveillance over the situation in Ukraine and in its airspace.To establish the truth, it is necessary to objectively and impartially investigate all the circumstances of the destruction of the Malaysian Boeing 777, to interview the thousands of citizens who may have seen something."
The report triggered a number of journalistic investigations in Russia and was widely referenced in the documentaries released afterwards. The most detailed is certainly one recently released by the RT Documentary Channel:It provides a lot of evidence from the local witnesses, pictures of the debris, data of the Russian radar stations, expert interviews and even a forensic experiment involving air-to-air shooting test.Below we are presenting some more exclusive evidence which was never aired in the English-language media regarding the presence of a Ukrainian combat aircraft in the vicinity of Boeing at the moment of the catastrophe:Of course, there are plenty of parties interested in concealing the real facts about flight MH17. Symptomatically, on August 8, 2014 the Ukraine, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia signed a non-disclosure agreement on the crash investigation.Procrastination and delaying of an objective investigation by these sides and international organizations raises doubts whether the concerned parties will make public the findings and true circumstances of the crash of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777. Are the relatives of those who died in the flight MH17 the only interested people in bringing the real perpetrators of this horrible criminal act to justice? Who will listen to Malaysian PM Dato' Sri Najib Razak's call? Source Oriental Review
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Update: Colonel Cassad reports that the still photograph first appeared on the Web on Oct 15, here (allow time for the autotranslator to work through the page). I've inserted the high-resolution copy of the photo (7406×5000) direct from that post. You can see Donetsk airport, to the west. The commentary says: "The image was obtained by mail from enthusiasts Russian Wikileaks, the source is not named. The time on the image corresponds to the time indicated in the data of objective control presented by the Ministry of Defense of Russia. According to the inscription, the international designations of time, the picture would be from the US satellite intelligence apparatus."- RB
Quote:Hello from "Odnako"! At the disposal of Channel One was sensational picture, presumably made by a foreign satellite spy in the last seconds of flight Malaysian Boeing over Ukraine. On the eve of the most important meetings of world leaders at the summit of G20 in Australia, the story of the death of the passengers of this flight is more than relevant. The frame speaks in favor of the version, which in the West is almost never heard. It is known that at the summit in Brisbane, Australian Prime Minister Abbott is threatening to ask our President in the rigid form a question about Malaysian Boeing. We will try to facilitate his task. Back in August, the Russian Union of Engineers issued its report on the possible causes of the crash, which received fairly widespread in the media and the Internet. Experts conducted a detailed analysis of all available information from all sources, produced technical calculations and elaborated version of causes of death "Boeing". The conclusion of the experts was that the only technically possible version was the destruction of the Malaysian airliner with a missile and gun armament another plane. Pay attention to one point in the report is the absence of any credible evidence of the start of the missiles "ground-to-air". Start "Buk" is accompanied by a fiery cloud, a deafening roar that can be heard within a radius of up to 10 km, and inversion followed which is clearly observed in the sky for up to 10 minutes. In short, there was most likely no "Buk", no start from the ground. In the presence of district disaster dozens of professional observers from all sides and thousands unprofessional, no one has seen or recorded. While the aircraft was seen and recorded. And it was definitely not Russian planes. The arguments of the experts were heard on the Internet, the report was translated into English and German. First Vice-President of the Russian Union of Engineers Ivan Andrievsky said:
When we began to receive a large amount of information, among which was a different material, engineering calculations, and ultimately on Nov 12, we received this. "I fully agree with the results of your analysis of the causes of the crash of the Boeing," says the man who presented himself as a graduate of MIT, Aviaexport with twenty years of experience, George Bilt. "The Boeing was hit by a pursuing fighter jet. First, the crew fired from a cannon, then the cab was struck by an air-to-air missile, then the right engine and right wing were struck by a missile with thermal homing system." The photo which is clearly evident in the launch of the rocket from under the left wing fighter exactly at the cockpit, was attached to the email. On the terrain, weather conditions, the dimensions of the aircraft shot fully consistent with the circumstances of the accident. We saw a satellite image taken with not a very high orbit. And such images are usually made for general intelligence air and ground space. In accordance with the coordinates specified in the picture, we can assume that the picture was taken by a UKUSA satellite. We undertook a detailed analysis of this picture and no signs of tampering were found.
All versions should be considered, including the proverbial "Buk". The person who sent the picture, showing how the MiG-29 kills passenger "Boeing", whoever he was, of course, professional. In order to forge this requires even more professionalism than to access such information. Lord, you have these pictures! Or others! Show them, finally! Hands on the table! Because at the moment there is every reason to believe that the committed state crimes by those who destroyed the plane deliberately and cynically. And those who consciously and cynically hides it with exhaustive information. Goodbye from "Odnako"!
"There are three sorts of conspiracy: by the people who complain, by the people who write, by the people who take action. There is nothing to fear from the first group, the two others are more dangerous; but the police have to be part of all three,"
Update: Colonel Cassad reports that the still photograph first appeared on the Web on Oct 15, here (allow time for the autotranslator to work through the page). I've inserted the high-resolution copy of the photo (7406×5000) direct from that post. You can see Donetsk airport, to the west. The commentary says: "The image was obtained by mail from enthusiasts Russian Wikileaks, the source is not named. The time on the image corresponds to the time indicated in the data of objective control presented by the Ministry of Defense of Russia. According to the inscription, the international designations of time, the picture would be from the US satellite intelligence apparatus."- RB
"There are three sorts of conspiracy: by the people who complain, by the people who write, by the people who take action. There is nothing to fear from the first group, the two others are more dangerous; but the police have to be part of all three,"
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
POSTED BY VINEYARDSAKER: AT 21:35
For a very interesting case in defence of the photos, see here:
Attack of the "Boeing-777" fighter: true or fake? (Investigation)
Use Google Translate or Yandex to get the gist of these counter-arguments
"There are three sorts of conspiracy: by the people who complain, by the people who write, by the people who take action. There is nothing to fear from the first group, the two others are more dangerous; but the police have to be part of all three,"
Malaysian plane crashes on Ukraine-Russia border - live
![[Image: German-Chancellor-Merkel-008-1728x800_c.jpg]](http://en.reseauinternational.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/10/German-Chancellor-Merkel-008-1728x800_c.jpg)
![[Image: AP584022376424-obama-poroshenko-625.jpg]](http://en.reseauinternational.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/10/AP584022376424-obama-poroshenko-625.jpg)
![[Image: 31.si_.jpg]](http://en.reseauinternational.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/10/31.si_.jpg)
![[Image: ligne-rouge.gif]](http://www.voltairenet.org/squelettes/elements/images/ligne-rouge.gif)
![[Image: zoom-32.png]](http://www.voltairenet.org/squelettes/elements/images/zoom-32.png)
![[Image: 1-4919-fa3dc.jpg]](http://www.voltairenet.org/local/cache-vignettes/L400xH300/1-4919-fa3dc.jpg)
After keeping a meaningful two-month pause in covering the course of investigation of the MH17 tragedy, the international press has suddenly broke into another wave of baseless accusations against "pro-Russia separatists", triggered by a "secret report" made by the BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst, German foreign intelligence) for the Bundestag Control Committee on October 8, 2014. Ten days later the Spiegelalleged that at the meeting the BND president Gerhard Schindler had provided "satellite images and diverse photo evidence" to back up his case "proving that pro-Russian separatists captured a BUK air defense missile system at a Ukrainian military base and fired a missile on July 17 that exploded in direct proximity to the Malaysian aircraft". The allegation was immediately caught up by a number of other top international media [