Examining MH-17

Let MH-17 never be forgotten!

'How MH17 was shot down in Ukraine

Film by Andrey Karaulov

The MH17 tragedy

A really excellent documentary on the MH-17 shoot-down

Reflections on MH17

The tragedy of MH17 in which 298 people lost their lives, made the conflict in Ukraine real for many other countries. While the international community awaits the outcome of the crash investigation, speculation in the media continues to fuel the blame game. RTD travels far and wide to interview international experts on what has hindered the investigation, what procedures were needed to collect vital evidence and what might have brought down the ill-fated Boeing 777

MH-17

Interview with the Ukrainian Operator of Buk 312, Which Ukraine Claims Was Used to Shot Down Malaysian Boeing MH-17

Fort Russ,

25 December, 2014

Shariy: Gentlemen, do you remember the Buk Surface-to Air Missile vehicle, tactical number 312, the same Buk, no way you could have forgotten it, whose photograph was published by Ukrainian security services, which I then analyzed, and then was told that I was lying, and this was a Russian Buk.

But anyway, right now meet someone who served on that very Buk vehicle.

Shariy: Hello, good morning!

Guest: Good morning! Very pleasant to talk with you.

Shariy: Seriously?

Guest: Yes, yes, I have been watching your videos and, what can I say, you’ve been telling the truth. I’m 23 years old, and I served in the Ukrainian Army as a contract soldier. The contract expired during the summer and I was discharged, you already know why. While in the military, I served on the TEL (transporter-erector-launcher) for the Buk air defense missile system, and, it turns out, it was my TEL that I keep seeing on the internet. The TEL has a crew of 4, crew chief (with the rank of sergeant), deputy crew chief, driver, and operator.

This TEL, on which you made a video earlier, it was being driven to Kramatorsk from Lugansk. It belonged to a regiment that was based in Donetsk and which was armed with the Buk system. The regiment has three battalions. So let me decipher for you what the number “312” means. 3 stands for Third Battalion, based in Lugansk. There is also a battalion in Mariupol, the Second, and the First Battalion is in Avdeyevka. “1” stands for First Battery, to which I was assigned. Finally, the “2” refers to the firing unit, of which each battery has two. Each firing unit consists of a TEL, a reloading vehicle. I couldn’t tell you whether the 312 actually shot down the Boeing [MH17], because when the fighting started, we were based in Lugansk. When Ukrainian military bases in the Crimea started being overrun, we were deployed to the field. At first we were sent to Kramatorsk. That photograph showing the 312 on a flatbed trailer was from our second redeployment.

Shariy: But the catch here is that they were saying this is supposedly a Russian Buk, it was being presented as a Russian Buk.

Guest: No, this is a Ukrainian Buk, I personally know that vehicle. The photograph that I sent you [which is shown on the video and above] shows the 312 in Lugansk, you can see the Yubileynaya coal mine in the background. The unit garrison is in the town of Metallist, which is why you see the Yubileynaya from the hill. It’s even funny, because everyone who has served in the Lugansk Battalion knows this vehicle, yet the Ukrainian Security Service is claiming this is a militia-owned Buk, or a Russian Buk, there were various stories.

Shariy: OK, and what is your opinion concerning who shot down the Boeing?

Guest: This one I don’t know. I know that the Ukrainian Security Service has been claiming that it was that very Buk 312 that shot down the Boeing, but it could not have done that. I don’t know what exactly happened, because by that time they sent me to the Avdeyevka Battalion, lots of soldiers and sergeants were being reshuffled, so much so that at one point I was the only member of the crew. I have talked to some of my former comrades and they had nothing to say about it, apparently they didn’t shoot down anything. So I can’t tell you anything about the Boeing.

But here’s the situation. Once we arrived at Kramatorsk, we were stationed at a military airport with another unit. After we spent a month at Kramatorsk, we were sent to the field. The poor-quality photograph [shown on the video] was made during that time. Our crew chief, I won’t mention his name, was driving the 312 on a hand break when its electrical system caught fire, nearly destroying the vehicle. There was even a danger of the missiles being launched. The firefighters were able to put out the fire, but that is the reason why the 312 was being towed on a trailer. It was being transferred from Kramatorsk to the Dnepropetrovsk Oblast.

Shariy: So it was in the Dnepropetrovsk Oblast?

Guest: Yes, yes. In the village of Novogrigoryevka. The Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, and Donetsk oblasts all meet there. At that point I, even though I was serving on a contract, did not think they would ever release me, so I started to screw up on purpose. Let me tell you a thing or two about the Ukrainian Army. We lived in the field, while the officers were getting drunk on the side. Yet the soldiers, even contract sergeants, were prohibited from going to shops themselves. And, being a “fighter for justice”, I started to speak up, why is it that some can go to grocery stores while others cannot, so I was put in my place. But the situation in the field was such that everyone was fed up with it. Every day people were leaving, soldiers were deserting, joining the militia…

Shariy: They were joining the Novorossiya militia?

Guest: Yes, we had a few cases of soldiers joining the militia.

Shariy: When and where was this?

Guest: It was when we were in the field, parents would come, take their sons, who would never come back. One went to a hospital in Kharkov and never returned. After all, the border is right there.

Shariy: OK, so let me ask you this: what was the sense of sending the Buk to the combat zone?

Guest: As far as I know (and the officers know more, the battery commanders, the chiefs of staff), when the military bases were overrun we were sent to the field and away from the border. They were afraid the missile systems would be captured. And later it may be it was sent to the combat zone because they were in general short on people. The Buk system is made to shoot at aircraft, it cannot be used against ground targets, so there was no use from us in the combat zone.

Shariy: That’s what I can’t understand, why were they keeping you there? What was the purpose?

Guest: Maybe they sent us because they were short on people in the combat zone. After we were sent to Dnepropetrovsk we were scattered among the units, they were preparing a major march, I was sent to the First Battalion because I did not want to go to the combat zone, a Major General came to us to talk, and I told him that I served out my time and don’t want to go to the combat zone, what for? Nobody ever explained to us what was going on. Then I was in Novogrigoryevka, then Vasilkovka, also in Dnepropetrovsk Oblast, about 80km, then I lived with the First, Avdeyevka, Battalion. The commander of the Avdeyevka Battalion actually had an arrest warrant put out for him in Russia—he remained in Avdeyevka base, with a few soldiers. However, the commander has some mental issues, he is known for assaulting his soldiers, known for physical violence, he has his oddities. So he remained in Avdeyevka with about 10 soldiers, average age of 20, and they were defending the garrison, where Buk systems were also based. Incidentally, a few TELs were left behind in Lugansk, not all were operational, and when we tried to deploy, half of our vehicles promptly broke down as soon as we left. Some of them managed to reach their destination on their own, others were put on trucks. There are videos on the internet, one shows a Buk being driven through Gorlovka. But three TELs were left behind because they could not be moved and some of their subsystems were missing, and whatever was left behind was taken over by the militia.

Shariy: But they would have to know how to use them.

Guest: No, as far as I understand, they have no shortage of specialists, as far as I can tell. But people who have been walking past the garrison could see through the fence that someone is busy there, always fixing and repairing.

Shariy: OK, your personal opinion, as a specialist, who shot down the Boeing?

Guest: It seems to me it was the Ukrainian Army. I don’t know the specifics, but looking at the zone of fire, it would have to be the Ukrainian Army.

Shariy: But why?

Guest: I don’t know. The specialists could have gotten confused. I can tell you from personal experience that the Ukrainian Army drinks in the evening, after the work day is over, so anything could have happened.

Shariy: But one has to first receive target information, concerning altitude, coordinates, it’s not simply a matter of pushing a button.

Guest: Yes, yes. There is a button for identification "friend or foe" (IFF). You press the button and are supposed to receive a response—friend or foe. And something might have not worked out.

Shariy: But what is the sense of firing? If they made a mistake, did they think they were shooting at a militia fighter? They could not have been thinking that.

Guest: I don’t understand the situation myself. Lots of people have left the Ukrainian Army. In my unit only 3-4 sergeants still remained, everyone else had left. Half of my friends are now in Russia: Moscow, or in Novosibirsk, or in Rostov. But now the situation is different. No matter what you do, short of deserting or shooting someone, they will not fire you. A law has been adopted not to release anyone from the army. They will release you only if you have close relatives for whom you must care, otherwise they will not. There was a soldier, 33 years of age, sitting with us out there in the field, who had a stomach ulcer, but they would not dismiss him. He went four times to the hospital.

Shariy: So how did he leave the military.

Guest: Well, he simply left the hospital. They probably put him on the Missing in Action list.

Shariy: So if there is large-scale desertion, are they simply being classified as missing?

Guest: Yes, it’s a puzzle for me too. At the time we had 15 sergeants in the unit. After a while there were only three left, right now they are still in the combat zone. And they have sent, maybe two months ago, even the Avdeyevka Battalion to the combat zone. Even though I don’t see the sense of Buk systems being there, what are they afraid of, fighter aircraft? So maybe it is simply the personnel shortage.

Shariy: Maybe.

Guest: Right now the draftees are in their eighth month, and they are constantly promising to discharge them soon, and you have seen the video…

Shariy: Yes, yes, they were all accused of being Kremlin spies. Because a true Ukrainian should want to serve 3, 4, 5 years.

Guest: For 150 hryvnia a month.

Shariy: Yes, yes [laughing]

Guest: I’m not afraid of anything, I have nothing to hide. Looking forward to new videos and revelations!

Translated by Mike for FortRuss.blogspot.com

Donetsk Leader Says Witnessed Downing of MH17 Plane in Eastern Ukraine

There are several dozen witnesses who saw two Ukrainian jets downing the MH17 plane, the leader of eastern Ukrainian's self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic said Thursday

Sputnik News,

25 December, 2014

DONETSK, December 25 (Sputnik) – The downing of the Malaysian Airlines passenger plane by Ukrainian jets in July was seen by dozens eyewitnesses, the leader of the eastern Ukrainian self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic said Thursday.

“I saw it all happen. There were two planes and the Boeing. Then two planes flew off and the Boeing fell. The DPR didn’t shoot down the plane for two reasons. First, we are people and not beasts, and second, we don’t have the technical means [to do this],” Alexander Zakharchenko said during a press conference in the republic’s capital.

“I saw this with my own eyes. I was driving by the city of Shaktersk. And if necessary, there are several dozens of witnesses who saw the same thing…I knew immediately that the plane was shot down by Ukrainian planes. We don’t have any aviation,” Zakharchenko added.

On July 17, Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, crashed in eastern Ukraine, killing all 298 people on board. In September, the Dutch Safety Board released a preliminary report on the incident saying that the plane had been hit by numerous high-energy objects and broke up in mid-air.

The Kiev government accused the independence supporters of Ukraine's eastern regions of shooting down the aircraft. The latter denies the allegation saying they were not in possession of weapons capable of downing a plane flying at the altitude of some 30,000 feet.

On December 23, Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper published an interview with Ukrainian airbase employee, who said he knew how the Malaysian Boeing crashed.

The employee, who claims to be an eyewitness, said a Ukrainian air force Su-25 combat jet took off from an airbase in eastern Dnipropetrovsk carrying air-to-air missiles and returned without them on the day a Malaysia Airlines plane crashed in eastern Ukraine.

The airbase worker said he remembered the pilot saying "the wrong plane" and "the plane was in the wrong place at the wrong time" after he returned from the flight.

He did not exclude the possibility that the Su-25 pilot could confuse a Boeing passenger airliner with a military jet.

On December 24, the Russian Investigative Committee said that a polygraph test had verified claims by a former Ukrainian airbase employee who suggested earlier this week that flight MH17 was possibly downed by a Ukrainian air-to-air missile carried by a Su-25 aircraft.

The witness identified the Su-25 pilot as Capt. Vladislav Voloshin. The committee called on the Ukrainian Su-25 pilot to take a lie-detector test.

The Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) confirmed the same day that Voloshin served in the Ukrainian Air Force, but said was not on flight duty on the day when the Malaysia Airlines plane crashed in eastern Ukraine.

New evidence on MH17

New testimony about the shooting down of MH17

the Vineyard of the Saker,

23 December, 2014

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

Russia to probe media reports that Ukraine military shot down MH17

RT,

23 December, 2014

Russia’s Investigative Committee is investigating a Russian newspaper report alleging that a Ukrainian military jet shot down Malaysian Airlines passenger plane MH17 over the rebel-held eastern part of the country last summer.

“Investigators have talked to the editor-in-chief and journalists of the ‘Komsomolskaya Pravda’ newspaper and have taken the contact details of the Ukrainian citizen [cited in the report],” spokesman for the committee Vladimir Markin said.

He added that the witness would be interviewed as part of the Russian investigation into the use of banned weapons and methods of warfare in Ukraine. The information he shares will be cross-checked, he added.

The witness, who chose to remain anonymous, told Komsomolskaya Pravda (KP) daily that a pilot of a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was behind the MH17 flight downing on July 17. He claimed that the pilot used air-to-air missiles to shoot down the Malaysian Boeing, which he concludes was probably mistaken for a military plane.

“About an hour before the catastrophe, three fighter jets took off [from Dnepropetrovsk]. One of the planes was an Su-25, which was equipped with these kind of [air-to-air] missiles,” the witness told KP in an interview, adding that he was on the airport grounds at the time.

Once the surviving pilot got out of the plane, he looked “very frightened.”

The Ukrainian pilot’s first words as he got out of the jet were: “Wrong plane,” the alleged witness claimed. Later in the evening that same pilot also reportedly stated: “The plane happened to be in the wrong place at a wrong time.”

While the daily could not immediately verify the interviewee’s claims, its readers soon discovered the allegedly involved pilot – Vladislav Voloshin – is real, and has been awarded for his role in Kiev’s so-called “anti-terrorist operation” in eastern Ukraine.

Back in July, the Russian military said that it detected a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet gaining height towards the MH17 Boeing on the day of the catastrophe.

READ MORE: Ukrainian Su-25 fighter detected in close approach to MH17 before crash - Moscow

“A Ukraine Air Force military jet was detected gaining height, its distance from the Malaysian Boeing was 3 to 5km,” said the head of the Main Operations Directorate of the HQ of Russia’s military forces, Lieutenant-General Andrey Kartopolov.

Kartopolov added that the presence of the Ukrainian military jet could be confirmed by video shots made by the Rostov monitoring center.

MH17 flight crashed in eastern Ukraine on July 17. All 298 passengers and crewmembers on board the Boeing 777 were killed. The victims were from 10 nations, while most of the passengers – 193 in total – were from the Netherlands. The second-largest number of casualties, 43, was from Malaysia.

Not surprisingly the Dutch have their own version to go long with the official narrative

Dutch Broadcaster Claims to Have Proof Showing Real Reasons of MH17 Crash

The Dutch broadcaster RTL Nieuws claims that it possesses photos proving that the MH17 crash was caused by an anti-aircraft missile fired from the ground, the Dutch NL Times reported Tuesday.

\

Sputnik News,

22 December, 2014

The Dutch broadcaster RTL Nieuws has said that it possesses photos that prove that the MH17 crash was caused by an anti-aircraft missile fired from the ground, the Dutch NL Times reported Tuesday.

According to the newspaper, the Dutch TV channel has obtained three photos taken near the crash site. The first two show "a vertical plume," coming, supposedly from the place where the missile was launched. The third depicts "a large black plume of smoke" from where the aircraft fell.

"I photographed that white line. At the time I did not know what it meant. For me it was just a white stripe: from the horizon up to the clouds where it disbanded. Only later it became clear what it was," the photographer who took the pictures told RTL, as quoted by the NL Times. The camera was handed to the international crash investigation commission. RTL did not publish the pictures to protect the photographer's identity.

On July 17, a Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur crashed in Ukraine's eastern region of Donetsk killing all 298 people on board. In September, the Dutch Safety Board, heading the investigation into the crash, issued a preliminary report suggesting that the passenger plane had been hit by "a large number of high-energy objects." Kiev accused local pro-independent forces of the attack, who, in turn, claimed they do not have the weapons capable of shooting down a plane flying at 30,000 feet.

Late on Monday, Russia's Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper published an interview with a Ukrainian airbase employee, who claims to be an eyewitness of the crash. He said that on the day of the crash a Ukrainian Air Force Su-25 (Frogfoot) attack aircraft took off from an airbase in the eastern city of Dnipropetrovsk carrying air-to-air missiles and returned without them. The Russian Investigative Committee has already established contact with the man and plans to question him in the nearest future.

Earlier in December, the Security Service of Ukraine said the Netherlands would release the progress report on the crash before the end of 2014 and that the inquiry would be continued throughout 2015.

MH17 - confirmation of Ukrainian responsibility

Ukrainian Soldier Confirms: Ukraine’s Military Shot Down Malaysian MH17 Plane

By Eric Zuesse

Fort Russ,

17 December, 2014

A Ukrainian soldier who was part of the crew that operated the supposed missile-battery that the Ukrainian Government claims shot down the Malaysian MH17 airliner on July 17th has testified publicly for the first time, saying that the missile-battery was operated by the Ukrainian military, not by the rebels as asserted, and that he and his former crew-mates who operated it laughed when they heard their Government say that this missile-battery was operated by rebels and had shot the airliner down.

An English-translated transcript of the December 15th Russian-language interview with this soldier was posted at UkraineWar.Info on December 17th by Michael Collins, an investigative journalist with UkraineWar.Info who has been following very closely the multiple investigations that are proceeding into the cause of the downing.

This testimony confirms the accumulating prior, already overwhelming and even-more-convincing evidence, which is linked to in my latest article on the topic, here, all of which evidence indicates that either one or else two Ukrainian fighter-jets intentionally shot this airliner down — that it was not an error by rebels who had misidentified this airliner as being a bomber from the Ukrainian Government, such as the Ukrainian Government and its sponsor the U.S. Government claim.

Regarding the reason why the Ukrainian Government did this, it, too, is clear: U.S. President Obama needed a startling incident in order to obtain from the EU and other U.S.-allied nations their participation in heavily increased economic sanctions to weaken Russia. As soon as this plane was downed, both the Ukrainian Government and the Obama Administration claimed that they possessed convincing proof that it had been downed by pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine’s former southeast. All U.S. allies got on board with that and agreed to hiked sanctions against Russia.

This “false flag” event (as such government fakeries are called in the intelligence communities) succeeded, just as did Hitler’s burning down the Reichstag and blaming it on leftists, which was the event that enabled him to seize total power in Germany.

THIS JUST IN (3:21PM Eastern time in U.S.) from Michael Collins: 

“George [Eliason, a third member of our team at UkraineWar.Info, and a resident inside the conflict-zone] says that due to the pub from the article, the Ukraine govt took down their ‘damning’ pic of BUK 312 today and that the reporter who did the interview is underground and fleeing the country.”

So, the reason why Ukrainians are reluctant to go public about their lying Government is obvious. And, all of the ‘news’ media there are owned by Ukrainian, or, in some cases, by American, oligarchs. (The American ones do it through ‘nonprofit’ foundations they create, which are co-funded by the American Government. The U.S. oligarch then gets tax-write-offs, plus co-funding by U.S. taxpayers, to save him still more money on his scheme.)

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010,  and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

BUK 312 – In Ukraine government territory (Anatoly Sharij)

Shooting Down MH 17 – BUK 312 Story False Says Ukraine Crew Member

MH17 a foiled attempt to assasinate Putin

There were, I remember, rumours of this at the time.

Malaysia Airlines MH17 Shot Down by Ukrainian Jet Fighter to Assassinate Russian Leader Vladimir Putin – Reports

The ill-fated Malaysia Airlines MH17 was accidentally shot down July this year by the Ukrainian air force and the tragedy according to new reports was the direct result of Kiev's failed bid to assassinate Russian president Vladimir Putin

IB Times

7 December, 2014

Flight MH17 exploded mid-air and crashed July 17 in a region controlled by pro-Moscow Ukrainian separatist rebels. All 298 passengers and crews, including 38 Australians, perished.

The aviation disaster was suspected caused by a surface-to-air missile fired from the rebels' side that mistook the commercial aircraft for a Ukrainian military plane, which the separatists have vehemently denied.

Also, Kremlin has long maintained that Kiev is to be blamed for the attack.

Ukraine plotted to kill Putin

And in what appears as fresh claims that Kiev has blood on its hands for the numerous civilian deaths, reports from Russia are saying that the Ukraine attacked MH17 by mistake trying to eliminate Putin.

The information came from Russia's television program Moment of Truth and the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper, which the UK-based Daily Mail noted are known as Kremlin-friendly media outlets.

The reports have stated that the Ukrainian air force Su-25 jet fighter was tasked to shot down Putin's official aircraft Plane Number One. Unfortunately, Plane Number One's Ilyushin build, which was reportedly scheduled to fly over the rebel-controlled area on the day of the attack, had an identical silhouette with the Boeing plane that was used in Flight MH17.

The military jet ended up downing the Malaysia Airlines flight instead. Evidences presented by the Russian media reports suggested too that combination of 30mm canon shots from the Su-25 and an anti-aircraft missile that was launched from the ground as the weapons used on the doomed plane.

"Pieces of 30mm rounds were found in the bodies of the (MH17) pilots," said the Daily Mail on its report, somehow indicating that the Su-25 pilot first targeted the commercial plane's cockpit area that was then followed by the missile that blew the aircraft into pieces.

Elaborate conspiracy

The reports identified as well a prominent figure involved in the failed assassination try on Putin. Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi was pinpointed as the brain behind the attack. Kolomoyskyi is widely regarded as a vocal critic and enemy of Putin.

The Ukrainian billionaire is said to have been tipped off that Putin's Plane Number One flight plan on July 17 2014 included a pass over on the same route that was taken by MH17.

Two more names surfaced as part of the plot - Ukrainian top-gun pilot Lt Col Dmitro Yakatsuts and air traffic controller Anna Petrenko. Yakatsuts piloted the Su-25 linked to MH17 shooting down while Petrenko, described by Daily Mail as "glamorous," was said to be in-charge of MH17 when it was flying over Ukraine.

The two have since disappeared and the last sighting of the couple was in Dubai, according to Russian media reports.

Following Putin's annexation of Crimea, tension between Russia and Ukraine remain over the former's reported incursions on the Ukrainian border and explicit support of rebels fighting for independence from Kiev.

To report problems or to leave feedback about this article, email:r.pineda@ibtimes..com.au

To contact the editor, e-mail: editor@ibtimes.com

More info on the source, IB Times,  HERE

MH17

Families of MH17 victims 

demand UN takes over Dutch 

investigation’

:

RT,

5 December 2014

Relatives of MH17 crash victims have addressed the Netherlands requesting the UN takes over the investigation into the downing of the passenger plane over Ukraine, blaming the Dutch of mishandling the inquiries into the disaster, media report.

In a letter directed to the Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte the relatives of the MH17 crash victims asked for “the UN to appoint a special envoy to take over” the inquiries by the Safety Board and prosecution service.

The copy of the letter written by Van der Goen Attorneys representing the families was cited by Reuters on Friday.

Twenty relatives from Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and the US accused the Netherlands of “completely botching" the fact-finding investigation and the legal framework of the case, according to the letter.

The victims’ families based their accusations on the fact that the Dutch investigators have been unable to access the crash site, located in eastern Ukraine, torn by internal conflict between Kiev and self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.

The letter also blamed the investigators for failing to meet international requirements to secure evidence.

READ MORE: Mother of German MH17 crash victim sues Ukraine in EU court

Irritated by the prolonged investigation, the letter said that an international inquiry led by the UN is the only way to identify what brought down the plane and ensure they are taken to court.

"Nobody knows who is doing what," said Bob van der Goen, a spokesman for the law firm which took the case, as quoted by Reuters. "There is no coordination, there is no leadership whatsoever (by) Holland."

According to Reuters, Van der Goen represented relatives of victims of the 1992 El Al jetliner crash in Amsterdam, the 2010 Afriqiyah Airways crash in the Libyan capital Tripoli and the 1977 Pan Am-KLM crash in the Canary Islands that left 583 people dead. The relatives of the victims in the latter case received more than $100,000 each.

The Malaysia Airlines MH17 flight crashed in East Ukraine on July 17. All 298 passengers and crew members on board the Boeing 777 were killed. The victims came 10 nations, while most of the passengers – 193 in total – were from the Netherlands, the second largest number of casualties, 43, was from Malaysia.

Netherland's Prime Minister Mark Rutte (AFP Photo/Frank Van Beke)

"We have done everything we could. In view of the safety situation and the weather, we cannot do anything more right now," Rutte said on Friday as the investigators returned to the Netherlands from the crash site.

Two parallel ongoing investigations into the disaster are led by the Dutch with the first looking into the cause of the crash, and a second - a criminal inquiry.

In September the Security Council of the Netherlands (Dutch Safety Board) released a preliminary report into the disaster which said that the MH17 crash was a result of structural damage caused by a large number of high-energy objects striking the Boeing from the outside.

The criminal investigation by the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) is being led by the Public Prosecution Service of the Dutch Ministry of Justice and also includes Belgium, Ukraine, Australia. Malaysia was left out of the team in November due to its political neutrality, the nation's media reported. The police chief Khalid Abu Bakar said he would head to Amsterdam in December to discuss Malaysia’s participation in the process with JIT members, joined by attorney general Abdul Gani Patail.

READ MORE: Malaysia excluded from MH17 probe – for 'not pointing fingers at Russia'?

"When the crash happened, we did not blame any parties, neither Russia nor Ukraine, as we would like to take a look at the concrete evidence," head associate professor in research and aviation at Kuala Lumpur University, Dr. Mohamed Harridon, told RT.

He added that unlike "western counterparts," Malaysia has taken a “neutral role," and not "pointed fingers at Russia," suggesting that that was the reason for the JIT neglecting the nation’s participation in the investigation.

A number of Western officials blamed Russia for the catastrophe, claiming that it was caused by a surface-to-air missile launched by local militia forces in eastern Ukraine with help from Moscow.

Russia refuted the allegations expressing irritation with the lack of evidence to support the claims. Moscow suggested the UN should appoint a special representative to monitor the investigation.