MH17 documentary ‘No one deserves to die that way’
MH17 documentary ‘No one deserves to die that way’
MH17 documentary ‘No one deserves to die that way’
The murder of 100 pro-West demonstrators in January launched the Revolution. Now many say it was a false flag.
Exhaustive analysis by reputable academic, Canadian Ukraine specialist
Challenges narrative of Western media, which alleges the exact opposite
Alleges subsequent government cover-up
Makes substantial contribution to multiple other media reports alleging the same thesis
This academic paper first appeared on the respected blog, Johnson’s Russia List.
We are publishing it here in full, despite its length, because it is by far the most detailed and thorough investigation of the Kiev Sniper Controversy, drawing on a mass of sources and materials, some of which were previously unpublished.
It is the work of a well-known Canadian political scientist at the University of Ottawa, who is a native of Ukraine. His specialization is Ukrainian politics and history.
The study concludes that, though there is some evidence that some of the protesters killed during the Maidan disturbances may have been accidentally shot by police snipers, the great majority were killed by snipers controlled by the pro-West demonstration leaders in a false flag operation.
The study suggests this was a pre-planned provocation to discredit the then government and that these same leaders both before and especially after they seized power have engaged in a systematic cover up of the facts to conceal their own guilt.
By Ivan Katchanovski, Ph.D. School of Political Studies & Department of Communication University of Ottawa
Paper presented at the Chair of Ukrainian Studies Seminar at the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, October 1, 2014
[With visuals and footnotes here academia.edu/8776021/The_Snipers_Massacre_on_the_Maidan_in_Ukraine]
The question is which side organized the snipers massacre. This paper is the first academic study of this crucial case of the mass killing. Analysis of a large amount of evidence in this study suggests that certain elements of the Maidan opposition, including its extremist far right wing, were involved in this massacre in order to seize power and that the government investigation was falsified for this reason.
Evidence used in this study includes publicly available but unreported, suppressed, or misrepresented videos and photos of suspected shooters, live statements by the Maidan announcers, radio intercepts of the Maidan snipers, and snipers and commanders from the special Alfa unit of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), ballistic trajectories, eyewitness reports by both Maidan protesters and government special unit commanders, public statements by both former and current government officials, bullets and weapons used, types of wounds among both protesters and the police, and the track record of politically motivated misrepresentations by the Maidan politicians of other cases of violence during and after the Euromaidan and historical conflicts.
In particular, this study examines about 30 gigabytes of intercepted radio exchanges of the Security Service of Ukraine Alfa unit, Berkut, the Internal Troops, Omega, and other government agencies during the entire Maidan protests. These files were posted by a pro-Maidan Ukrainian radio amateur on a radio scanners forum, but they never were reported by the media or acknowledged by the Ukrainian government.
The timeline of the massacre with precision to minutes and locations of both the shooters and the government snipers was established in this study with great certainty based on the synchronization of the sound on the main Maidan stage, images, and other sources of evidence that independently corroborate each other.
The study uses content analysis of all publicly available videos of the massacre, in particular, an unreported, time-stamped version of a previously widely seen, long video of the massacre on Instytutska Street, videos of suspected snipers and reports of snipers in live TV broadcasts and Internet video streams from the Maidan (Independence Square), time-stamped and unedited radio intercepts of SBU Alfa snipers and commanders, and radio intercepts of Internal Troops on the Maidan.
The analysis also uses live Internet broadcasts. Recordings of all live TV and Internet broadcasts of the massacre by Espresso TV, Hromadske TV, Spilno TV, Radio Liberty, and Ukrstream TV, were either removed from their websites immediately following the massacre or not made publicly available. These recordings were mostly made by Maidan supporters, but they got very scant attention or removed from public access.
Similarly, official results of ballistic, weapons, and medical examinations and other evidence collected during the investigations concerning this massacre have not been made public, while crucial evidence, including bullets and weapons disappeared under the post-Yanukovych government. This investigation relies on such evidence reported by the media and reliable information in the social media. An on-site research on the site of the massacre on the Maidan itself and on Instytutska Street was also conducted for this study by the author.
An Academic Investigation
A recently released time-stamped version of an over 40-minute-long video, which was filmed at a close distance on Instytutska Street starting at 9:06am, covers, with some unexplained omissions, the most intense parts of the killings. It confirms that the mass killing of Maidan protesters on February 20 began on the adjacent Instytutska Street around that time.
The Berkut anti-riot police and Internal Troops units, which were besieging, storming, and blocking the Maidan for almost three months, hastily abandoned their positions and fled by 9:00am, while protesters then started to advance from their stronghold on the Maidan up Instytutska Street.
This and other videos show members of the special elite unit of the Berkut anti-riot police and “Omega” Internal Troops special unit, including two snipers, temporarily halting the advance of protesters near Zhovtnevyi Palace starting at 9:05am, shooting with both live ammunition from the Kalashnikov assault rifles (AKMS) and rubber bullets, and pointing sniper rifles in the direction of the protesters and then retreating along with Berkut and Internal Troops units, who were resting in Zhovtnevyi Palace.
After retreating to these barricades under fire, respectively, at 9:20am and 9:28am, Berkut and Omega were doing the same from two barricades on Instytutska Street and nearby buildings of the National Bank and the Club of the Cabinet of Ministers.
Directions of many bullet holes and their impact marks in the electric poles, trees, and walls of Zhovtnevyi Palace and the Hotel Ukraina also indicate that the police fired at the direction of the protesters and the protester-held buildings. SBU snipers were located in the Cabinet of Ministers, the Presidential Administration, and neighboring buildings.
The new Ukrainian government and the head of the parliamentary commission publicly stated that “snipers,” who massacred the unarmed protesters, were from these units. Specifically, the Prosecutor General Office announced on September 12, 2014 that its investigation found a Berkut commander and two members of his unit responsible for killing 39 Euromaidan protesters, or the absolute majority of some 50 protesters killed or mortally wounded on February 20, 2014.
A Malaysia Airways’ Boeing 777 like the one that crashed in eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014. (Photo credit: Aero Icarus from Zürich, Switzerland)
Exclusive: For months, Western governments and media have accused Russia of supplying the anti-aircraft missile that brought down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 killing 298 people. But now German intelligence has reportedly determined the missile came from a Ukrainian military base, writes Robert Parry.
The West’s case blaming Russia for the shoot-down of a Malaysia Airlines plane over Ukraine last July appears to be crumbling as the German foreign intelligence agency has concluded that the anti-aircraft missile battery involved came from a Ukrainian military base, according to a report by the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel.
The Obama administration and other Western governments have pointed the finger of blame at Russia for supposedly supplying a sophisticated BUK missile system to ethnic Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine who then allegedly used the weapon on July 17 to shoot down what they thought was a Ukrainian military plane but turned out to be Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, killing all 298 people onboard.
The Russians denied providing the rebels with the weapon and the rebels denied shooting down the plane. But the tragedy gave the U.S. State Department the emotional leverage to get the European Union to impose tougher economic sanctions on Russia, touching off a trade war that has edged Europe toward a new recession.
But now the narrative has shifted. The German intelligence agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst or BND, asserted that while it believes rebels were responsible for shooting down the plane, they supposedly did so with an anti-aircraft battery captured from a Ukrainian military base, according to Der Spiegel.
The BND also concluded that photos supplied by the Ukrainian government about the MH-17 tragedy “have been manipulated,” Der Spiegel reported. And, the BND disputed Russian government claims that a Ukrainian fighter jet had been flying close to MH-17 just before it crashed, the magazine said.
None of the BND’s evidence to support its conclusions has been made public — and I was subsequently told by a European official that the evidence was not as conclusive as the magazine article depicted.
Der Spiegel said the information given to members of a parliamentary committee on Oct. 8 included satellite images and other photography. What’s less clear, however, is how the BND could determine the precise command-and-control of the anti-aircraft missile system amid the chaotic military situation that existed in eastern Ukraine last July.
At the time, the Ukrainian army and allied militias were mounting an offensive against ethnic Russian rebels who were resisting a U.S.-backed coup regime that ousted elected President Viktor Yanukovych last February, touching off what quickly became a nasty civil war.
Spearheading Kiev’s summer offensive were pro-government militias, some of which were filled with neo-Nazi extremists and financed by Ukrainian billionaire oligarchs including Ihor Kolomoisky, who had been appointed governor of the southeastern Dnipropetrovsk Region. The ethnic Russian rebels also were a disorganized lot with poor command and control.
Rushing to Anti-Russian Judgment
Yet, the Obama administration was quick to pin the blame for the MH-17 crash on Russia and the rebels. Just three days after the crash, Secretary of State John Kerry went on all five Sunday talk shows fingering Russia and the rebels and citing evidence provided by the Ukrainian government through social media.
On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” David Gregory asked, “Are you bottom-lining here that Russia provided the weapon?”
Kerry: “There’s a story today confirming that, but we have not within the Administration made a determination. But it’s pretty clear when – there’s a build-up of extraordinary circumstantial evidence. I’m a former prosecutor. I’ve tried cases on circumstantial evidence; it’s powerful here.” [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Kerry’s Latest Reckless Rush to Judgment.”]
But some U.S. intelligence analysts offered conflicting assessments. After Kerry’s TV round-robin, the Los Angeles Times reported on a U.S. intelligence briefing given to several mainstream U.S. news outlets. The story said, “U.S. intelligence agencies have so far been unable to determine the nationalities or identities of the crew that launched the missile. U.S. officials said it was possible the SA-11 [anti-aircraft missile] was launched by a defector from the Ukrainian military who was trained to use similar missile systems.” [See Consortiumnews.com’s “The Mystery of a Ukrainian ‘Defector,’”]
A source who was briefed by U.S. intelligence analysts told me that some analysts had concluded that the rebels and Russia were likely not at fault and that it appeared Ukrainian government forces were to blame, although possibly a unit operating outside the direct command of Ukraine’s top officials.
Monsieur le Président,
Mesdames et Messieurs,
Aujourd’hui apparaît de plus en plus clairement la contradiction entre d’une part, la nécessité d’actions collectives de partenariat dans l’intérêt de l’élaboration de réponses appropriées aux défis communs et, d’autre part, le désir pour un certain nombre de pays de dominer, de restaurer la mentalité archaïque de la confrontation des blocs s’appuyant sur une discipline de caserne et sur une logique préjudiciable : « nous — les autres ». L’alliance occidentale avec, en tête, les États-Unis, qui se posent comme défenseurs de la démocratie, de la primauté de la loi et des droits de l’homme dans des pays tiers, agit directement à l’inverse sur la scène internationale, en rejetant le principe démocratique de l’égalité souveraine des États, tel que fixé par la Charte des Nations Unies, et en essayant de décider pour tout le monde ce qui est bien et ce qui est mal.
Washington a proclamé ouvertement son droit d’utiliser la force militaire de façon unilatérale et n’importe où pour la défense de ses propres intérêts. L’intervention militaire est devenue la norme, même en dépit du fait que toutes les opérations de force menées par les États-Unis au cours de ces dernières années se sont terminées de façon piteuse.
De rudes coups ont été portés à la stabilité internationale : bombardement de la Yougoslavie par l’OTAN, intervention en Irak, attaque de la Libye, échec en Afghanistan. Ce n’est que grâce à des efforts diplomatiques intenses que l’agression contre la Syrie en 2013 n’a pas eu lieu. On ne peut s’empêcher de penser que les diverses « révolutions de couleur » et autres projets visant le remplacement des régimes indésirables n’ont pour but que de provoquer le chaos et l’instabilité.
Aujourd’hui, l’Ukraine est devenue la victime de cette politique. La situation révèle la persistance de défauts profonds, systémiques dans l’architecture existante de la zone euro-atlantique. L’Occident a mis le cap vers une « structuration verticale de l’Humanité » en fonction de ses propres standards, qui sont loin d’être inoffensifs. En proclamant leur victoire dans la « guerre froide » et l’avènement de la prétendue « fin de l’Histoire », les États-Unis et l’Union européenne ont entrepris d’élargir leur espace géopolitique sans prendre en compte l’équilibre des intérêts légitimes de tous les peuples d’Europe. Nos partenaires occidentaux n’ont pas entendu nos avertissements répétés sur l’inacceptabilité de la violation des principes de la Charte des Nations Unies et de l’Acte final d’Helsinki, ils se sont dérobés à chaque occasion de faire en commun un travail sérieux en vue de créer un espace unique de sécurité égal et indivisible et de coopération de l’Atlantique au Pacifique. La proposition russe d’étudier un traité de sécurité européenne a été rejetée. On nous a carrément déclaré que des garanties juridiquement contraignantes en matière de sécurité ne peuvent être obtenues que par les membres de l’Alliance atlantique, qui entre-temps a continué à se déplacer vers l’Est malgré les promesses du contraire données précédemment. Le passage instantané de l’OTAN à une rhétorique hostile, à la réduction de la coopération avec la Russie même au détriment des intérêts propres des pays occidentaux, à l’intensification supplémentaire de l’infrastructure militaire aux frontières russes a mis en évidence l’incapacité de l’alliance à changer son code génétique mis en place à l’époque de la « guerre froide ». Continue reading
Pour ERTV, Roman Halauniov revient sur les conséquences des sanctions prises entre l’Union européenne et la Russie à cause de la situation en Ukraine.
Source: Égalité & Réconciliation
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says that the West still does not want to recognize that a coup in Ukraine was organized with the support of the United States and the European Union.
MOSCOW, September 13 (RIA Novosti) – The West still does not want to recognize that a coup in Ukraine was organized with the support of the United States and the European Union, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said.
“Speaking about our Western partners, everything has gone if not out of control, then at least by a very confrontational scenario. The reason is simple: they do not want to admit what is obvious to us – that the coup [in Ukraine] was organized with the direct support, if not encouragement, of the United States and Brussels,” Lavrov said in an interview with the TVC channel.
“After these people, who had been actively supported, came to power and formed a new government, everything became possible for them,” the Russian foreign minister said. “They are forgiven [everything] and are allowed [to do] whatever they wish. We hear nobody criticizing their unacceptable statements in regards to nationalism, Russia, minorities and neo-Nazi tendencies,” Lavrov said.
The Russian foreign minister said that he had not heard “any judgments that could mean that the positions of the West are unanimous” from his colleagues from Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Moscow is aware that not only “the US, but also the European envoys travel to every capital around the world, with no exception, to demand from the leaders of states, to strongly request not to support Russia, to join the Western sanctions and to refrain from any steps that will further the ties between a particular country and the Russian Federation,” Lavrov said. “For me this is an unprecedented situation. Such campaigns are, in fact, subversive for Russia’s relations with its partners.”
Moving NATO infrastructure closer to Russian borders by pulling more countries into the alliance is unacceptable, Sergei Lavrov said.
“Expecting to pull as many countries as possible into NATO, continuing with the logic of inclusive lines, moving the infrastructure closer to our borders – that’s unacceptable,” Lavrov told the Russian TVC channel.
“We are interested in the compliance with the agreements on ensuring whole, indivisible and universal security in the Euro-Atlantic area. In this context the assurances we were given that NATO would not be expanding eastward play a decisive role,” the minister said.
Lavrov noted that Russia’s proposal to turn the commitments given within the framework of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) not to strengthen the security of the alliance “at the expense of the security of others” into a legally binding agreement “was rejected multiple times”.
The nonaligned status of Ukraine, enshrined in the Constitution, is in the best interest of the Ukrainian people, as well as its neighbors and partners in the Euro-Atlantic area, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Saturday on a primetime political talk show.
Combines or cannons? From 100 miles up, Washington’s ‘clear evidence’ of Russian heavy artillery in the Ukraine starts looking a little ‘corny’. Are these mobile heavy artillery pieces or harvesting combines in a field of maize
In the ongoing propaganda campaign mounted by the Obama administration to claim that Russia has “invaded” Ukraine from the east, it offered up some grainy black-and-white satellite images purporting to show heavy Russian military equipment inside the Ukraine.
I earlier noted how unlikely it was that heavy mobile artillery pieces would be set up in a perfect line in what appeared to be a field of crops, with, as the government claimed, cannons aimed towards Ukrainian positions in toward the west. As I pointed out, there was no sign of piles of ammunition alongside these “units” as we routinely see in closeups of heavy mobile artillery — for example in photos of IDF pieces positioned outside of Gaza. I also noted the unlikelihood that such equipment would have been set up in an open field, unprotected by trees or other cover, and lined up to make for easy targeting by enemy artillery or air attack.
Now an alert reader from the agricultural state of Texas (Laredo, TX to be precise), has sent a note suggesting out that what the supposedly incriminating images most likely show are combines in a field of grain or some other crop planted in rows. He sent along photos showing harvesters, which of course feature a long, straight “cannon-like” tube which is used to shoot the harvested grain up and into an accompanying truck to be hauled off to market or to a storage silo.
As he points out, these harvesters are typically run in groups which often work in parallel, an explanation that does a much better job of explaining the precision alignment of the machines visible in the US government’s image than do mobile artillery units.
Now maybe the released satellite images do show Russian artillery, but given Washington’s extensive history of abject lying in the interest of promoting its war agenda (think Gulf of Tonkin, Iraq WMDs and mobil poison gas factories, Assad gas attacks in Damascus, etc.), it’s worth taking the claim with a “grain” of…well, in this case actual grain.
Warning Merkel on Russian ‘Invasion’ Intel
Alarmed at the anti-Russian hysteria sweeping Official Washington – and the specter of a new Cold War – U.S. intelligence veterans took the unusual step of sending this Aug. 30 memo to German Chancellor Merkel challenging the reliability of Ukrainian and U.S. media claims about a Russian “invasion.” (RIP François HOLLANDE)
MEMORANDUM FOR: Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Ukraine and NATO
We the undersigned are long-time veterans of U.S. intelligence. We take the unusual step of writing this open letter to you to ensure that you have an opportunity to be briefed on our views prior to the NATO summit on Sept. 4-5.
You need to know, for example, that accusations of a major Russian “invasion” of Ukraine appear not to be supported by reliable intelligence. Rather, the “intelligence” seems to be of the same dubious, politically “fixed” kind used 12 years ago to “justify” the U.S.-led attack on Iraq.
We saw no credible evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq then; we see no credible evidence of a Russian invasion now. Twelve years ago, former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, mindful of the flimsiness of the evidence on Iraqi WMD, refused to join in the attack on Iraq. In our view, you should be appropriately suspicious of charges made by the U.S. State Department and NATO officials alleging a Russian invasion of Ukraine.
President Barack Obama tried on Aug. 29 to cool the rhetoric of his own senior diplomats and the corporate media, when he publicly described recent activity in the Ukraine, as “a continuation of what’s been taking place for months now … it’s not really a shift.”
Obama, however, has only tenuous control over the policymakers in his administration – who, sadly, lack much sense of history, know little of war, and substitute anti-Russian invective for a policy. One year ago, hawkish State Department officials and their friends in the media very nearly got Mr. Obama to launch a major attack on Syria based, once again, on “intelligence” that was dubious, at best.
Largely because of the growing prominence of, and apparent reliance on, intelligence we believe to be spurious, we think the possibility of hostilities escalating beyond the borders of Ukraine has increased significantly over the past several days. More important, we believe that this likelihood can be avoided, depending on the degree of judicious skepticism you and other European leaders bring to the NATO summit next week.
Experience With Untruth
Hopefully, your advisers have reminded you of NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s checkered record for credibility. It appears to us that Rasmussen’s speeches continue to be drafted by Washington. This was abundantly clear on the day before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq when, as Danish Prime Minister, he told his Parliament: “Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. This is not something we just believe. We know.”
September 06, 2014 “ICH” – “Asia Times” – First thing we do, let’s kill all the myths. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is nothing but the Security Council of the Empire of Chaos.
You don’t need to be a neo-Foucault hooked on Orwellian/Panopticon practices to admire the hyper-democratic “ring of steel” crossing average roads, parks and even ringing castle walls to “protect” dozens of NATO heads of state and ministers, 10,000 supporting characters and 2,000 journalists from the real world in Newport, Wales – and beyond.
NATO’s summit in Wales also provides outgoing secretary-general Anders “Fogh of War” Rasmussen the chance to display his full attack dog repertoire. It’s as if he’s auditioning for a starring role in a remake of Tim Burton’s Mars Attacks !
Fogh of War is all over the place, talking “pre-positioning of supplies, equipment” – euphemism for weapons; boosting bases and headquarters in host countries; and touting a 10,000-strong, rapid reaction “spearhead” force to respond to Russian “aggression” and deployable in a maximum of five days.
Meanwhile, in a bad cop-bad cop routine, outgoing president of the European Commission, outstanding mediocrity Jose Manuel Barroso, leaked that Russian President Vladimir Putin told him over the phone later last week he could take Kiev in a fortnight if he wanted.
Well, Putin could. If he wanted. But he doesn’t want it. What matters is what he told Rossiya state TV; that Kiev should promote inclusive talks about the future statute of Eastern Ukraine. Once again, the Western spin was that he was advocating the birth of a Novorossiya state. Here, The Saker analyzes in detail the implications of what Russia really wants, and what the Novorossiya forces really want.
With Lithuanian president Dalia Grybauskaite predictably spinning that Russia is “at war with Europe”, and British Prime Minister David Cameron evoking – what else – Munich 1938 (Chamberlain appeasing Hitler), Fogh of War has had all the ammo he needs to sell his Einsatzgruppen. Cynics are excused to believe NATO’s spearhead force is actually The Caliph’s IS goons raising hell in “Syraq”.
Warmongering, though, is not an easy sell in a crisis-hit EU these days. Not only Germany, but also France, Italy, Spain, Romania, Hungary and even Poland have expressed “reluctance” one way or another to back NATO’s strategy of a more “robust” presence in Eastern Europe and the Baltic. Moreover, the Empire of Chaos and its Brit junior partner in the “special relationship” want everyone to shell out more cash (a minimum of 2% of GDP). Even as the EU is facing no less than its third recession in five years.
The bottom line is there will be no more rotation on NATO’s Eastern front. Legally, the set up cannot be defined as “permanent”, because it will go against a 1997 NATO-Russia pact. But it will be permanent. That applies to Szczecin, in Poland, near the Baltic, and the so-called multinational Corps Northeast – land, air and sea. Estonia and Latvia for all practical purposes are being touted as “Putin’s next targets”. And defending them from “Russian aggression” is NATO’s new red line.
Additionally, Finland and Sweden may sign NATO Host Nation agreements. This implies NATO forces may use Swedish and Finnish territory in the future on the way to what’s hazily referred to as “operations”. At least deployment of foreign troops still needs parliamentary approval – and Swedes and Finns are bound to raise eyebrows.
No R2P for you, buddy
Even with all this Mars Attacks! hysteria, NATO in thesis won’t discuss Ukraine in depth in Wales – or an imminent R2P (“responsibility to protect”) Ukraine from the remixed “Evil Empire” (copyright Ronnie Reagan). But there will be “military consultations” and a bit of cash shelled out to the Kiev military – who are having their (bankrupt) collective behind solemnly kicked by the federalist/separatist forces in Eastern Ukraine as much as NATO had theirs kicked by a bunch of Pashtuns with Kalashnikovs in Afghanistan.
By the way, the latest US$1.4 billion the International Monetary Fund shelled out to Ukraine – the Mobster-style interest will hit much later – will be used by an already bankrupt Kiev mostly to pay for a bunch of T-72 tanks it bought from Hungary. Money for nothing, tanks for free.
Parts of wreckage are seen at the site where the downed Malaysian Boeing 777 flight MH17 crashed
MOSCOW, August 23 (RIA Novosti) – Moscow wants the investigation into the crash of a Malaysian Boeing 777 to be as most transparent as possible, and insists on regular provision if prove reports in accordance with the UN Security Council resolution, a diplomatic source told RIA Novosti.
“Investigation into the reasons of the catastrophe should be carried out under international control, should be all-encompassing and transparent for the wide international audience and mass media,” the source said. “We will keep pressing for it, demanding the implementation of the UNSC resolution 2166 which stipulates monthly reports about the course of the investigation.”
Resolution 2166 adopted by the UN Security Council in July calls for a thorough and impartial investigation into the MH17 tragedy and requires the secretary-general to provide the Security Council with investigation progress reports.
The source stressed that the majority of Western media “seem to have been ordered to avoid the investigation issue for about two weeks.”
“US official representatives who rushed to accuse Russia and Donetsk self-defense forces in the first hours following the tragedy, also maintain silence. America’s allies, particularly the British and the Australian, who were also among the first accusers, stick to the same policy. The international community has not yet seen the promised “incontestable evidence.” The explanation is that the truth could be inconvenient to Washington, London and Canberra,” the source told RIA Novosti.
The source added that Kiev’s official position is also telling.
“As the curtain of allegations is clearing, the specialists have more and more questions over the actions of the Ukrainian authorities and military toward the Boeing. Kiev still has not made public the recordings of the talks between air traffic control and the crew, which would allow to understand why the plane was in the combat area,” the diplomatic source said.
Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down over eastern Ukraine on July 17 en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, killing all 298 people on board, including 193 Dutch nationals, 43 Malaysians and 27 Australians.