Everything Went Wrong For Malaysia


Asian Tribune

By Habib Siddiqui

Malaysia’s Shameful Scandal

KITA_LAWAN_protest-Najib_banner-sogo-280215-TMI-SETH

What’s happening in Malaysia? Are we witnessing some conspiracy to break the head of this emerging economic power, or something else?

As readers may recall, the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, crashed after being hit by a Russian-made Buk missile when it was travelling over the conflict-hit region over eastern Ukraine on 17 July 2014. Three months earlier Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (MH370/MAS370) disappeared on 8 March 2014 while flying from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. The aircraft, a Boeing 777-200ER, was carrying 12 Malaysian crew members and 227 passengers from 15 nations. Its cause of disappearance still remains a mystery.

Before those unfortunate disasters, Malaysian Airlines had one of the best safety records — just two fatal accidents in 68 years of operation, including the hijacking in 1977 of Flight 653 that resulted in 100 deaths. Those accidents exacerbated the airline’s financial troubles and led to the renationalization of the airline.

Well, Malaysia is now hit by another major disaster whose impact internally may dwarf those two disasters in the sky. It involves scandals surrounding 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) – Malaysian government investment fund – founded in 2009 (and closely overseen) by Prime Minister Najib Razak. According to civil lawsuits filed by the US Justice Department, more than $US 3.5 billion was allegedly misappropriated from 1MDB. According to the Justice Department, the money followed a circuitous path among private banks, offshore companies and funds that originally sent it to Mr. Najib’s accounts, and from there it was used to fuel other investments and spending by a Malaysian financier Low Taek Jho, popularly referred to as Jho Low.

A portion of the money from 1MDB passed through Saudi Arabia on its way to Mr. Najib’s accounts and $80 million appears to have been transferred by the Ministry of Finance in Saudi Arabia. The origin of the rest of the Saudi money is still under investigation. According to a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) report, roughly $1 billion landed in the private bank accounts of Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, which the civil suits also seek to seize – the largest case to date in the US Justice Department’s Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative.

Mr. Razak has previously ¬acknowledged a similar amount went into his accounts before the 2013 general election. He said the money was a private donation from the Saudi royal family and most of it was later returned. Among those identified in the US suit was Najib’s stepson Riza Aziz and his associates. The US did not name any individuals as ¬defendants.

The money was raised on three separate occasions and took three separate paths, sometimes flowing directly, while in other cases it split and took different routes, only to be reunited in the AmBank accounts according to the Justice Department complaint. The cash flowed through Singapore, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, the Seychelles, the British Virgin Islands and Curaçao. Other funds disappear, often into accounts controlled by other players in the scandal, the complaint said.

Here below are some useful information from the WSJ on how the money got transferred.

Transaction 1: 1MDB borrowed about $1.8 billion for a joint venture with Saudi oil company PetroSaudi International Ltd. About $1 billion of the cash went to a Seychelles company called Good Star Ltd. A co-founder of PetroSaudi, Prince Turki bin Abdullah, received $24.5 million from Good Star before transferring $20 million to Mr. Najib via an intermediary, according to the Justice Department and a person familiar with the U.S. investigation into 1MDB. The same intermediary sent other funds into Mr. Najib’s accounts, bank transfer documents show, but the origin of the funds is still under investigation. PetroSaudi, Prince Turki and Prince Faisal did not respond to requests for comment.

Transaction 2: Two bonds worth a total of $3.5 billion were sold for 1MDB by Goldman Sachs to fund the purchase of power plants. After paying a substantial fee to Goldman, 1MDB was supposed to pay money for a guarantee on the bonds to a unit of Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Company called Aabar Investments PJS. Instead, the funds went to the similarly named Aabar Investments PJS Ltd., a British Virgin Islands registered company that IPIC says isn’t part of its corporate structure, which received billions of dollars from 1MDB entities over the years. The money was then distributed to beneficiaries of the alleged fraud, according to the Justice Department. From Aabar BVI, about $637 million went to a company called Blackstone Asia Real Estate Partners in the British Virgin Islands, where it was pooled with other funds. Blackstone has no connection to the Blackstone Group, the New York private-equity firm. Another $463 million went from Aabar BVI to two mutual funds in the Caribbean island of Curaçao and then onto Blackstone Asia Real Estate Partners, which transferred a total of $170 million to Mr. Najib’s bank accounts in multiple transactions during 2012, bank transfer documents show.

Transaction 3: 1MDB sold $3 billion in bonds via Goldman Sachs to fund a real-estate joint venture with Abu Dhabi. Immediately after paying Goldman Sachs its substantial fees, 1MDB transferred nearly half of the cash to a series of funds, shell companies and other intermediaries located in the British Virgin Islands and Curaçao. Eventually $1.27 billion ended up in a British Virgin Islands company called Tanore Finance Corp. Tanore transferred $680 million to Mr. Najib’s accounts. A few months later, $620 million was returned to Tanore before disappearing back into a maze of offshore companies, according to the Justice Department and investigative documents reviewed by the Journal.

The Last Step involved the four paths into the prime minister’s bank accounts. Of the $1.05 billion Mr. Najib received in his accounts, only $80 million appears to clearly originate with Saudi Arabia, via its Finance Ministry, though the details of that transfer are still unknown.

Another $120 million that came via an intermediary based in Saudi Arabia are still under investigation, according to a person familiar with the U.S. investigation. At least $20 million of that $120 million has been traced clearly back to 1MDB by investigators. The remaining $850 million came via Tanore Finance and Blackstone Asia, and has been traced back to 1MDB by investigators, according to people familiar with the probe. Mr. Najib used the money in his AmBank accounts for personal and political spending, according to investigative documents reviewed by the WSJ that detail more than 500 transactions. He wrote checks to politicians in his political party and also paid millions of dollars for personal expenses, including $130,625 at a Chanel store in Hawaii and €750,000 at a jewelry store in Switzerland.

Mr. Najib hasn’t acknowledged all of the transfers into his accounts, but he said that $681 million was a legal donation from the royal family of Saudi Arabia. Mr. Najib said he returned most of the funds to the Saudi Arabian donor. 1MDB has denied wrongdoing and said it would cooperate with any lawful international investigation.

Prime Minister Najib has weathered persistent calls for him to step down over his handling of the 1MDB scandal, which is also being investigated by at least five other countries. Mr. Najib has denied any wrongdoing and has said the US Department of Justice lawsuit does not involve him.

Malaysia’s Minister of Urban Well-Being, Housing and Local Government Abdul Rahman Dahlan, however, admitted in a BBC interview that Prime Minister Najib Razak was the mysterious unnamed official who the US Justice Department claimed took part in rampant looting of state funds. The admission confirmed widespread suspicions that Mr. Najib was “Malaysian Official 1” mentioned in a Justice Department lawsuit filed in July.

Allegations of a vast international scheme of embezzlement and money-laundering involving billions of dollars of 1MDB money began to emerge two years ago. A Four Corners investigation in March revealed that Malaysia’s former attorney-general had planned to lay charges of misappropriation against Mr. Najib shortly before he was sacked. The story made headlines when the Four Corners crew was detained by police for trying to question the Prime Minister over the corruption scandal.

In its scathing lawsuit, the US Justice Department detailed how “Malaysian Official 1”, family members, and close associates diverted billions from the now-stricken fund. The Justice Department has moved to seize assets including real estate in Beverly Hills, New York and London, artworks by Monet and Van Gogh, and a Bombardier jet that it alleges were purchased with money stolen from 1MDB.

The Malaysian opposition and its supporters were already certain that Najib had a hand in money laundering from 1MDB. Within the ruling party – UMNO, Najib has forced out all those who thought the same, so all that is left are loyalists who are either convinced that he is innocent or don’t care one way or another.

Other Malaysian government officials said the US suit was part of a wider plot by Najib’s -detractors to topple a democratically-elected government, with one warning foreign meddling may lead Malaysia to become like Syria or Iraq.

Investors meanwhile are focused on the need for stability. The currency has seesawed this year amid an uncertain economic outlook, turning Asia’s best performance in the first three months of 2016 to one of the region’s worst since then. The economy is projected to expand at the slowest pace in seven years amid falling oil revenue and weaker exports. For Najib, economic stability is crucial as he seeks the votes of rural and semi-urban areas in the next election due by 2018.

At stake for UMNO is the un¬broken rule of its National Front coalition since independence in 1957. He’s had recent wins in local polls in Malaysia’s biggest state of Sarawak on Borneo Island and two federal by-elections.

While the 1MDB drama has raised doubts about governance and accountability in Malaysia, the structure of domestic politics is likely to protect Najib. His mentor-turned-nemesis Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, who was premier for over two decades, has repeatedly said UMNO will lose the next election if Najib remains the party leader. It is worth noting here that Dr. Mahathir Mohammad has repeatedly called for Najib’s resignation. Half a year ago, he also sued Najib for abuse of power and corruption.

As long as Najib retains the backing of UMNO’s powerful div¬ision heads fresh protests will carry little weight to unseat him. The views of those chiefs will become increasingly important closer to an election, depending on whether they feel Najib can carry the party to another win. Some economists have said Najib may consider an early election for 2017 to take advantage of the ¬opposition infighting.

My earlier trips to Kuala Lumpur years ago had left an indelible memory about the country and its energetic people. I felt proud of the achievement this south-east Asian nation has made in spite of all those airline disasters. It is sad to see now the level of corruption in Malaysia at the highest level. This scandal once again shows that the greatest threat to an emerging economy is often corruption and incompetence in administration.

Malaysian civil society must now take firm and immediate action to put the country back on track. If not, the country will tragically end up as the perfect case study into how the problems stem primarily from domestic crime and corruption.

– Asian Tribune –

..

Busted! #MH17 Was in Fact the ‘Lost’ Flight #MH370 – Updates


Humans Are Free

Clarifications, after new information emerged

Alternative media websites and myself have suggested that the plane wreckage presented to us as MH-17, actually belongs to the ‘lost’ flight MH-370. In this article I will bring new evidence to support this theory.

Clarification and updates:

1. A missing window on the wreckage, which appeared in some pictures over the internet.

– Malaysia Airlines renovated their jets a couple of years ago, modifying the interior and blocking the window in question. The presented pictures of MH17 with a window next to the door and below the flag is, apparently, an older image of the jet.

Unfortunately for the secret agencies involved in this false flag, the internet buzz created around this information made them panic and the official REUTERS images showing that piece of the wreckage have been Photoshopped.

Miraculously, a window appeared in at least two of their pictures, where previously there was none: example one / example two.

The pictures belong to Reuters, there’s no question about it (one of them is hosted on Reuters’ website, while the second one is hosted on one of the most respected media websites in Russia and in the world — the 26th most read website in Russia and 505th most read in the world).

Expect broken links and missing pictures soon, but remember what you saw!

Why would they counterfeit evidence if they have nothing to hide? Because they are guilty of this false flag, and by trying to cover their presumed mistake, they have in fact proven their guilt.

This is a huge smoking gun!

2. The flag does not properly align to the window, as compared to recent pictures of the original MH17 (no new information here).

3. Rebel leader describes the MH17 victims: rotten corpses, drained of blood (no new information here).

4. ALL the videos were created before MH17 was allegedly shot down (no new information here).

5. Flight MH17 was cancelled, according to flight radar screen (no new information here).

6. Invalid and pristine passports at the crash site.

– Some readers suggested that the invalid passports could be required as they could contain unexpired visas. This makes sense, but unfortunately none of the ones presented had any visas or stamps.

– It is still the matter of their condition, which is pristine. They all look brand new, even the clipped/perforated ones (and you will see why).

7. U.S. State Department Deputy admits: MH17 ‘evidence’ is based on YT clips & social media posts

– In a new press conference with the U.S. State Department Deputy Spokesperson, Marie Harf, AP reporter Matt Lee points out the lack of evidence for her claims:

“Marie, I think that it would be best for all concerned here, if when you make an allegation like that you’re able to back it up with more than just ‘Because I say so’.”

Thank you, Mr. Lee, that’s common sense and sanity speaking. There’s too much at stake to simply take your word for it! Period.

8. Award-winning reporter blows whistle: U.S. satellite images show Ukrainian troops shooting down the plane that was presented to us as MH17 (no new information here).

9. Additionally, before proceeding to the key point, there are multiple other questions that I haven’t properly analyzed, because I was interested in the key pieces of information exposing the false flag. You can read more here.

CLICK HERE for my complete analysis. Please read it before proceeding.
Update: Sound expert says tape is fake
A group of experts studied the tape and came to the conclusion that it was made up of numerous unrelated recordings.

“This audio recording is not an integral file and is made up of several fragments,” said Nikolai Popov, a reputable expert in sound and voice analysis.

But the most indicative moment is that the audio tape clearly shows that it was created almost a day before the airliner crash, the expert said. – Reference: ITAR-TASS News Agency;

Original article below:

When it was first announced that flight MH-370 disappeared without a trace, there had been voices suggesting that the same plane will be later used in a false flag operation.

Personally, I tried to ignore the speculations thinking that no secret agency could ever conduct such an insanely-obvious operation, expecting that the rest of the world is stupid enough to buy it.

Boy, was I was wrong!

It’s not only that the official MH17 story is filled with gaps, but there are also bizarre accounts and ‘coincidences’ that are impossible to ignore:

1. The alleged MH17 was the same plane model as MH-370

The aircraft allegedly shot down over Shaktarsk is a Boeing 777-200, ID number M9-MRD.

The missing MH370 was the same model, 777-200, but with a different ID number M9-MRO.

Recent, “near conclusive” evidence reports that MH-370 (M9-MRO) was actually hijacked before it disappeared. This means that the hijackers could have safely landed the plane somewhere else.

The US military base Diego Garcia is conveniently located within flying distance of the spot where MH-370 disappeared from the radar.

One of the passengers on board MH-370, Phillip Wood, allegedly managed to send a photo from his iPhone, tracing back to the previously mentioned military base.

If the US secret services got possession of the MH-370 jet, then it was a child’s play for them to set it up for a false flag operation suiting their needs.

After the story of a passenger jet having been shot down by pro-Russian separatists broke loose, Russia lost a lot of credibility and support due to the US propaganda machine.

2. The crashed plane had a different configuration of windows than MH17

Unfortunately for those who staged the false flag event, the MH17 plane had an extra window (below) next to the second right-side door, which MH370 did not — and neither did the wreckage of the airplane!

#1 Update [07.25.14]: Jim Stone brings more photographic evidence supporting the connection between the wreckage and flight MH-370:

#2 Jim Stone Update [07.26.14]:

The flag in the wreckage is now getting cropped out of images posted of the shoot down, and someone either kicked the aluminum plate over the window out or a second window got Photoshopped in. Take a look at this photo:

And ask yourself, WHY HAS THIS BEEN DONE? Obviously, to muddy the waters, that is a super professional Photoshop hack, we all know what the real photo is supposed to look like and this was obviously done in response to people discussing the flag, and having the window arrangement match flight 370 exactly.

They HAD TO release a photo showing a window where there was none in the original crash scene, to muddy the waters and just “PROVE” this is MH17. Notice the flag is cropped out, because it is the smoking gun that proves this is flight 370. [1]

Image source: © REUTERS

#3 Update [07.26.14]: There is a lot of official Photoshopping going on. The following is a prime example:

01. Image source: AFP; | 02. Image source: Official © REUTERS/ Maxim Zmeyev;

The first picture is the original, taken at the crash site, while the second one has been obviously Photoshopped, adding a black window under the flag.

According to independent journalist Jim Stone,

“It is important to note that MH370 [bellow] was new, and therefore never repainted. This is the way the flag ALWAYS looked on Flight 370, and it forever pegs the shoot down plane as flight 370.”

“Next is flight MH17. Notice the flag position, and ALSO, that MH17 has an extra window on this side of the aircraft, TOTALLY BUSTING THE OFFICIAL STORY.” [1]

So, what does it all mean?

The plane wreckage shown in the propaganda pictures doesn’t have the window configuration of MH17, whilst it matches the one of MH370.

The conclusion is obvious: the wreckage most probably belongs to the ‘lost’ flight MH370.

3. Rebel leader describes the MH17 victims: rotten corpses, drained of blood

“A top pro-Russia rebel commander in eastern Ukraine has given a bizarre version of events surrounding the Malaysian jetliner crash — suggesting many of the victims may have died days before the plane took off. (…) [People at the crash site]: ‘A significant number of the bodies weren’t fresh,’ adding that he was told they were drained of blood and reeked of decomposition.” [2]

According to independent journalist Jim Stone:

“It is being said that a Dutch doctor who was at the scene within a day has released testimony that the bodies on the plane were rotten and dead days before the crash, which would corroborate what the military commander said and that evidence is there that they were also tortured before the crash. However, the translation from Dutch is very poor and I am working on secondary confirmation.”

This means that the bodies found at the crash site in Ukraine are probably the passengers of MH370.

4. ALL the videos were created before MH17 was allegedly shot down

“A look at the time stamps for the nine versions of the video that allegedly shows a conversation between Ukrainian anti-fascists and the Russian military and uploaded to what is said to be the Ukrainian Security Service (SSU) youtube account, indicating that all the videos were created before MH17 wrecked in the afternoon 2014-07-1.” [3]

Remarkable unit with timestamps confirmed by the date stamp for when the videos were uploaded to a local server contained herein.

5. MH-17 propaganda picture doesn’t match the facts

According to the Daily Mail, Flight MH-17 was photographed by one of the passengers just before boarding, but the identification number doesn’t macth!

MH-17‘s ID number is 9M-MRD (Wikipedia):

The ID of the plane in the propaganda picture is 9M-MRC (Daily Mail):

*Please see #5 update: the C could in fact be a D obscured by glare.

6. Flight MH17 was cancelled, according to flight radar screen

Flight Radar-24 screen capture on the day following the crash (7/18) shows MH-17, (9M-MRD) as “canceled” on the date of the crash (7/17): [4]

7. Invalid and pristine passports at the crash site

All the passports appearing in the propaganda video are in mint condition. They want us to believe that ALL passports have escaped undamaged after an airplane filled with fuel was shot down by a SAM missile — not to mention the 33,000 feet drop.

And that’s not all! Many of presented passports are clearly invalid: some have been ‘hole-punched’ in the upper left-hand corner, while others have been ‘clipped’ (triangular cut-out from right-hand center front cover) – making it impossible that any of these decommissioned passports could be used to travel internationally at the flight’s port of Departure in Amsterdam. [5]

8. U.S. State Department Deputy admits: MH17 ‘evidence’ is based on YT clips & social media posts

In a testy exchange between AP reporter Matt Lee and U.S. State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf, Lee virtually corners Harf into admitting that the “evidence” presented by the U.S. to blame Russian-backed rebels for the shoot down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 [now exposed as MH370] amounts to nothing more than YouTube videos and social media posts. [6]

9. Award-winning reporter blows whistle: U.S. satellite images show Ukrainian troops shooting down the plane that was presented to us as MH17

Award winning former Associated Press reporter Robert Parry has been told by an intelligence source that the United States is in possession of satellite imagery which shows that Ukrainian troops were responsible for the shoot down of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 [now exposed as MH370].

“What I’ve been told by one source, who has provided accurate information on similar matters in the past, is that U.S. intelligence agencies do have detailed satellite images of the likely missile battery that launched the fateful missile, but the battery appears to have been under the control of Ukrainian government troops dressed in what look like Ukrainian uniforms.” [7]

10. The declassified Operation Northwoods: Disturbingly similar to MH17!

#4 Update [07.27.14]: Forbidden in the government controlled media, is mention that a SECOND aircraft was nearly on top of Malaysian flight 17 when it was supposedly shot down by a Ukranian missile in separatist hands. Who was in it? Why were they there? Why won’t anyone talk about it, or question the pilots?

A clue may be found in the real-life Operation Northwoods – a declassified top-secret plan devised by the US military, to instigate and “justify” a war with Cuba. Much of Northwoods involved staged ‘shootdowns’ of military and civilian aircraft, and faking crashes.

Operation Northwoods Exposed:

“An aircraft at [US military base] would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civilian registered aircraft.

At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases.

The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.

Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous…

From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude [in order to disappear from the radar] and go directly into an auxiliary [military base] where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status.

The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan.

When over [the target area] the drone will begin transmitting on the international distress frequency a ‘MAY DAY’ message stating he is under attack by [the chosen enemy]. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal.

… a pre-briefed pilot would fly tail-end Charley at considerable interval between aircraft.

[After giving the distress call] the pilot would then fly at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base. The aircraft would be met by the proper people, quickly stored and given a new tail number.

The pilot and aircraft would then have disappeared.

At precisely the same time that the aircraft was presumably shot down, a submarine or small surface craft would disburse F-101 parts, parachute, etc. [i.e. plane parts].

Search ships and aircraft could be dispatched and parts of aircraft found.”


Related

#MH370 – Role Of Israel & Soros Exposed By MH370 Twin Jet In Tel Aviv

#MH370 – Connecting the Dots to Two Major Military Exercises?

Is Maureen Baginski behind the missing #MH370?

#MH370 not yet found: Emirates chief suggests hijack as possible reason behind mysterious disappearance

Benjamin Fulford – July 21, 2014: #MH17 incident is being managed out of the State Department and by the Rand corporation

Vanishing Airliners, “ISIS”, and 9/11. “Timing is Crucial in Politics”

..

Examining the Evidence of Russia’s Involvement in a Malaysia Airlines #MH17 Crash


Stratfor

Analysis

Satellite imagery obtained by Stratfor sheds new light on the July 2014 downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine. Recent scrutiny of open-source materials, much of it led by a U.K.-based collective investigation project known as Bellingcat, has zeroed in on a Russian-made Buk surface-to-air missile system that was in eastern Ukraine around the time Flight MH17 was shot down. The Buk system is suspected of originating from an anti-aircraft missile brigade based in Russia. In early May, new video footage of unknown origins was released, appearing to place the Buk system in question near separatist-controlled Donetsk on July 17, 2014, just hours before the airliner was shot down.

Building on this new information, AllSource Analysis — Stratfor’s satellite imagery partner — was able to locate images that confirm the exact time and location of the air defense system on the day of the crash. The imagery shows the air defense system, mounted atop a transloader, being transported east through the Donetsk town of Makiivka. The images were taken approximately five hours before Flight MH17 was shot down from a location near the town of Snizhne, about 40 kilometers (25 miles) away.

This aligns with the body of existing circumstantial evidence tracing the Buk system’s route to and from Snizhne. Combined, the evidence appears to show the Buk system moving from the Russian border toward Donetsk on July 15, 2014, and then moving back to the east on the afternoon of July 17, 2014, just hours before Flight MH17 was shot down.

The new imagery obtained by Stratfor does not prove that this particular Buk system fired a missile at the airliner. Nonetheless, it further substantiates the narrative being pieced together by the collective analysis of open-source information.

The mounting evidence showing a separatist- or Russian-controlled air defense system in the area of the crash, combined with the results of the official investigation conducted on the remnants of the downed aircraft, make it increasingly difficult for Moscow and the Ukrainian separatists to blame the incident on Kiev. The implication is unlikely to lead to consequences for the Russian side, but at a minimum, it provides a stern reminder about the dangers of the proliferation of weapons like the surface-to-air missile in question.

Examining the Evidence of Russia’s Involvement in a Malaysia Airlines Crash is republished with permission of Stratfor.”

..

#MH17 Brought Down by Ukrainian Military Aircraft. The BBC Refutes its Own Lies?


Global Research

The BBC has announced the release of a documentary on the crash of Malaysian airlines MH17, which will be broadcast on May 3″:

“On 17 July 2014, Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, travelling from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, crashed, killing 298 passengers in the worst air disaster for two decades.

Alarmingly, the devastating crash occurred just four months after the mysterious disappearance of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370. Is this just a coincidence? The cause of the crash has been focus of a host of conspiracy theories, many of which involve Russia, Ukraine and the CIA.

The official investigation report into MH17 flight argues that only a powerful ground-to-air missile could be responsible. Yet, there are eyewitness accounts of other aircrafts seen flying next to MH17 close to impact. To further fuel the conspiracies, Russia and Ukraine blame each other but both countries are unable to provide all the critical radar data from that day.

Family members do not trust the official explanations and there is a long way to go to bring about justice for the victims. This programme tracks down eye witnesses, and speaks with secret intelligence sources to try to sort fact from fiction. Don’t miss this compelling Conspiracy Files unfold to see whether the mystery can be unravelled.” ( See BBC notice here),

In an unusual twist, the description of the BBC documentary not only goes against the official narrative, it also refutes the BBC’s own July 2014 coverage of the downing of MH17.

According to Australia News in a review of the forthcoming BBC production, the Kiev regime is identified as the culprit:

A CONTROVERSIAL new documentary will investigate claims that Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down by a Ukraine fighter jet, instead of a Russian missile. In a new BBC documentary titled ‘The Conspiracy Files: Who Shot Down MH17?’, eyewitnesses will share their accounts of how they saw the aircraft being downed by a nearby fighter jet.

“There are eyewitness accounts of other aircraft seen flying next to MH17 close to impact,” a statement from the BBC said.

 

The report also suggests that:

“The documentary is also set to analyse the possibility that the downing of the jet was a CIA plot to pin the blame on Russia.”

 

The geopolitical implications of these statements are potentially dynamite.

They put Washington on the defensive.

What can we expect from the US State Department and John Kerry:

“Sorry, President Putin, we made a mistake, yeah it was Ukraine which brought down the aircraft and we blamed the Russians, sorry for the economic sanctions, we got our countries mixed up”

Highly unlikely.

Already Britain’s tabloids including the BBC are saying there are SEVERAL THEORIES. According to the Daily Mail, the allegation concerning the role of the CIA:

“was put forward by private investigator, Sergey Sokolov, who claimed that the CIA were helped by the Ukrainian secret service and Dutch security service, to place the bombs on the plane in Holland.”

He said: ‘This terrorist act was a pretext for firstly intensifying sanctions on Russia, secondly to show the world that Russia is a barbarian country and thirdly to strengthen the presence of Nato in Europe, particularly Ukraine.’

In all likelihood, Washington will either remain mum or casually dismiss the BBC documentary, while upholding its ongoing hostility towards Moscow.

While the BBC has announced that the documentary refutes the official story as contained in the latest Dutch safety board report (i.e to the effect that MH17 was brought down by a BUK surface to air missile), we will have to wait for the release on May 3, BBC TV Channel 2 to get the full story, including the innuendos. the conspiracy theories, etc.

It is worth noting that according to former UN human rights chief Navi Pillay in a July 2014 statement “the downing of the Malaysia Airines jet could constitute a war crime”.

Analysis

At Global Research, from the outset we have documented extensively the downing of MH17 by a military aircraft. It is important that the underlying record be fully assessed.

Our archive of 100+ Global Research articles and reports on the downing of MH17. confirms that Malaysian Airlines MH17 was not brought down by a BUK surface to air missile. It was brought down by a military aircraft. This was confirmed in our early reports shortly after the downing of MH17.

Read further…

..

Finally, Proof That Russia Was Not Involved In #MH17 Crash


YourNewsWire.Com

MH17

Manufacturers of the Russian BUK missile have confirmed that Russia was not responsible for shooting down Malaysian airlines flight MH17, as has been suggested recently by western governments and media. 

The manufacturers of the weapon, Almaz-Antey, have said that recent tests involving BUK anti-aircraft missiles prove that any explosion caused by such missiles would lave a distinctive “butterfly-shaped’ hole in the shrapnel – something missing from the shrapnel found on flight MH17.

Rt.com reports:

“The Boeing 777, which carried out the flight, did not have a single hole like this and as a consequence, this absolutely excludes the possibility of a missile with double T-shaped shrapnel being used to strike this aircraft,” Almaz-Antey stressed in a statement on Wednesday, following the final report of the Dutch Safety Board that looked into the causes of the crash.

The Dutch Safety Board concluded the plane, which was carrying almost 300 people, was hit with a 9N314M-model warhead mounted on the 9M38-series missile. The weapon was fired from a BUK surface-to-air missile system from an area in eastern Ukraine.

Almaz-Antey maintains that in fact a 9N314 warhead was responsible. On Wednesday, they commented on the differences between the two warheads and whose defense forces may have been using the missiles mentioned by the Dutch investigators.

The manufacturer said the Russian army has not been using BUK missiles with 9N314 warheads filled with shrapnel different from a double T-shape, as these are “outdated,” while the production of such warheads was halted in 1982, Almaz-Antey stressed. Almaz-Antey also noted that as of 2005, there were 991 missiles armed with 9M38M1 warheads in arms depots in Ukraine.

“We obtained this information through official channels. Back in 2005, the company conducted a pre-contractual engineering study of how long these types of missiles could be used for in Ukraine,” Almaz-Antey said, adding that they had a shelf-life of around 25 years.

“We also have data that 502 missiles of the outdated 9M38 modification were used by Ukraine’s armed forces during the same year,” the company added.

On October 13 the Almaz-Antey defense company presented the results of two full-scale experiments aimed at recreating the MH17 crash. The company concluded the missile that downed the flight was an old BUK model fired from a Ukrainian government controlled area, contesting the preliminary theory by Dutch investigators.

Sean Adl-Tabatabai

Editor-in-chief at Your News Wire

..

Support #MH17 Truth


Global Research

“Support MH17 Truth”: OSCE Monitors Identify “Shrapnel and Machine Gun-Like Holes” indicating Shelling. No Evidence of a Missile Attack. Shot Down by a Military Aircraft

The evidence presented in this article first published by GR on July 31, 2014 (updated in September 2014) contradicts the recently released report of the Dutch Safety Board.

The evidence confirms that MH17 was not brought down by a surface to air missile.

The West accuses Russia and the Donbass separatists of having brought down the plane with a surface to air missile. IT’S A LIE. 

The evidence available in September 2014 –including a BBC report which the BBC decided to suppress– refutes the official story.

As we recall, the alleged role of Russia in bringing down the plane was used as a justification to implement the economic sanctions regime against Moscow. 

Michel Chossudovsky, July 29, 2015, minor update October 18,  2015


According to the report of German pilot and airlines expert Peter Haisenko, the MH17 Boeing 777 was not brought down by a missile.

What he observed from the available photos were perforations of the cockpit: 

 The facts speak clear and loud and are beyond the realm of speculation: The cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile. (Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile”Global Research, July 30, 2014)

mh17 shrapnels

Based on detailed analysis Peter Haisenko reached  the conclusion that the MH17 was not downed by a missile attack:

This aircraft was not hit by a missile in the central portion. The destruction is limited to the cockpit area. Now you have to factor in that this part is constructed of specially reinforced material

The OSCE Mission

It is worth noting that the initial statements by OSCE observers (July 31) broadly confirm the findings of Peter Haisenko:

Monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe reported that shrapnel-like holes were found in two separate pieces of the fuselage of the ill-fated Malaysia Airlines aircraft that was believed to have been downed by a missile in eastern Ukraine.

Michael Bociurkiw of the OSCE group of monitors at his daily briefing described part of the plane’s fuselage dotted with “shrapnel-like, almost machine gun-like holes.” He said the damage was inspected by Malaysian aviation-security officials .(Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2014)

The monitoring OSCE team has not found evidence of a missile fired from the ground as conveyed by official White House statements. As we recall, the US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power stated –pointing a finger at Russia– that the Malaysian MH17 plane was “likely downed by a surface-to-air missile operated from a separatist-held location”:

The team of international investigators with the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) are uncertain if the missile used was fired from the ground as US military experts have previously suggested, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported. (Malay Mail online, emphasis added)

The initial OSCE findings tend to dispel the claim that a BUK missile system brought down the plane.

Evidently, inasmuch as the perforations are attributable to shelling, a shelling operation conducted from the ground could not have brought down an aircraft traveling above 30,000 feet.

Ukraine Su-25 military aircraft within proximity of MH17

SU25

Peter Haisenko’s study is corroborated by the Russian Ministry of Defense which pointed to a Ukrainian Su-25 jet in the flight corridor of the MH17, within proximity of the plane.

Ironically, the presence of a military aircraft is also confirmed by a BBC  report conducted at the crash site on July 23.

All the eyewitnesses  interviewed by the BBC confirmed the presence of a Ukrainian military aircraft flying within proximity of Malaysian Airlines MH17 at the time that it was shot down: 

Eyewitness #1: There were two explosions in the air. And this is how it broke apart. And [the fragments] blew apart like this, to the sides. And when …

Eyewitness #2: … And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it. Everybody saw it.

Eyewitness #1: Yes, yes. It was flying under it, because it could be seen. It was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.

Eyewitness #3: There were sounds of an explosion. But they were in the sky. They came from the sky. Then this plane made a sharp turn-around like this. It changed its trajectory and headed in that direction [indicating the direction with her hands].

The original BBC Video Report published by BBC Russian Service on July 23, 2014 has since been removed from the BBC archive.

In a bitter irony, The BBC is censoring its own news productions.

This is the BBC Report, still available on Youtube

Media Spin

The media has reported that a surface to air missile was indeed fired and exploded before reaching its target.  It was not the missile that brought down the plane, it was the shrapnel resulting from the missile explosion (prior to reaching the plane) which punctured the plane and then led to a loss of pressure.

According to Ukraine’s National security spokesman Andriy Lysenko in a contradictory statement, the MH17 aircraft “suffered massive explosive decompression after being hit by a shrapnel missile.”  (See IBT, Australia)

In an utterly absurd report, the BBC quoting the official Ukraine statement  says that:

The downed Malaysia Airlines jet in eastern Ukraine suffered an explosive loss of pressure after it was punctured by shrapnel from a missile.

They say the information came from the plane’s flight data recorders, which are being analysed by British experts.

However, it remains unclear who fired a missile, with pro-Russia rebels and Ukraine blaming each other.

Many of the 298 people killed on board flight MH17 were from the Netherlands.

Dutch investigators leading the inquiry into the crash have refused to comment on the Ukrainian claims.

“Machine Gun Like Holes”

machine gun holes

The shrapnel marks should be distinguished from the small entry and exit holes “most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile” fired from a military aircraft. These holes could not have been caused by a missile explosion as hinted by the MSM.

While the MSN is saying that the “shrapnel like holes” can be caused by a missile (see BBC report above), the OSCE has confirmed the existence of what it describes as “machine gun like holes”, without however acknowledging that these cannot be caused by a missile.

In this regard, the GSh-302 firing gun operated by an Su-25 is able to fire 3000 rpm which explains the numerous entry and exit holes.

According to the findings of Peter Haisenko:

If we now consider the armament of a typical SU 25 we learn this: It is equipped with a double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302 / AO-17A, equipped with: a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum), arranged in alternating order. The cockpit of the MH 017 has evidently been fired at from both sides: the entry and exit holes are found on the same fragment of it’s cockpit segment (op cit)

The accusations directed against Russia including the sanctions regime imposed by Washington are based on a lie.

The evidence does not support the official US narrative to the effect that the MH17 was shot down by a BUK missile system operated by the DPR militia.

What next? More media disinformation, more lies?

See:

Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” By Peter Haisenko, July 30, 2014

..

NYT Plays Games with #MH17 Tragedy


Consortium News

Exclusive: There was a time when The New York Times showed some skepticism toward the words of the U.S. government but those days are long gone, as the Times sinks even deeper into the propaganda swamp with an editorial playing games with the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 tragedy, writes Robert Parry.


By Robert Parry

In its single-minded propaganda campaign against Russia, The New York Times has no interest in irony, but if it had, it might note that some of the most important advances made by the Dutch Safety Board’s report on the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 came because the Russian government declassified sensitive details about its anti-aircraft weaponry.

The irony is that the Obama administration has steadfastly refused to declassify its intelligence information on the tragedy, which presumably could answer some of the key remaining mysteries, such as where the missile was fired and who might have fired it. While merrily bashing the Russians, the Times has failed to join in demands for the U.S. government to make public what it knows about the tragedy that killed 298 people on July 17, 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)

In other words, through its hypocritical approach to this atrocity, the Times has been aiding and abetting a cover-up of crucial evidence, all the better to score some propaganda points against the Russ-kies, the antithesis of what an honest news organization would do.

In its editorial on Thursday, The Times also continues to play on the assumed ignorance of its readers by hyping the fact that the likely weapon, a Buk surface-to-air missile, was “Russian-made,” which while true, is not probative of which side fired it. Ukraine, a former Soviet republic, is armed with Russian-made weapons, too.

But that obvious fact is skirted by the Times highlighting in its lead paragraph that the plane was shot down “by a Russian-made Buk surface-to-air missile,” adding: “Even Russia, which has spent much of those [past] 15 months generating all kinds of implausible theories that put the blame … on Ukraine, and doing its best to thwart investigations, has had to acknowledge that this is what happened.”

Though some misinformed Times’ readers might be duped into finding that sentence persuasive, the reality is that Russia has long considered it likely that a Buk or other anti-aircraft missile was involved in downing MH-17. That’s why Russia declassified so many details about its Buk systems for the Dutch investigation – something governments are loath to do – and the Russian manufacturer issued a report on the likely Buk role last June.

But the Times pretends that the Russians have now been cornered with the truth, writing that Russia “now argues that the fatal missile was an older model that the Russian armed forces no longer use, and that it was fired from territory controlled by the Ukrainian government.” Yet, much of that information was provided by the Russian missile manufacturer a long time ago and was the subject of a June press conference.

Blinded by Bias

If the Times editors weren’t blinded by their anti-Russian bias, they also might have noted that the Dutch Safety Board and the Russian manufacturer of the Buk anti-missile system are in substantial agreement over the older Buk model type that apparently brought down MH-17.

Almaz-Antey, the Russian Buk manufacturer, said last June that its analysis of the plane’s wreckage revealed that MH-17 had been attacked by a “9M38M1 of the Buk M1 system.” The company’s Chief Executive Officer Yan Novikov said the missile was last produced in 1999.

The Dutch report, released Tuesday, said: “The damage observed on the wreckage in amount of damage, type of damage, boundary and impact angles of damage, number and density of hits, size of penetrations and bowtie fragments found in the wreckage, is consistent with the damage caused by the 9N314M warhead used in the 9M38 and 9M38M1 BUK surface-to-air missile.”

Also on Tuesday, the manufacturer expanded on its findings saying that the warhead at issue had not been produced since 1982 and was long out of Russia’s military arsenal, but adding that as of 2005 there were 991 9M38M1 Buk missiles and 502 9M38 missiles in Ukraine’s inventory. Company executives said they knew this because of discussions regarding the possible life-extension of the missiles.

Based on other information regarding how the warhead apparently struck near the cockpit of MH-17, the manufacturer calculated the missile’s likely flight path and firing location, placing it in the eastern Ukrainian village of Zakharchenko, a few miles south of route H21 and about four miles southwest of the town of Shakhtars’k, a lightly populated rural part of Donetsk province that the Russians claim was then under Ukrainian government control.

Calculation by the Buk manufacturer showing the likely area of the launch that took down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.

The area is about three miles west of the 320-square-kilometer zone that the Dutch report established as the likely area from which the missile was fired. In July 2014, control of that area was being contested although most of the fighting was occurring about 100 kilometers to the north, meaning that the southern sector was more poorly defined and open to the possibility of a mobile system crossing from one side to the other.

Almaz-Antay CEO Novikov said the company’s calculations placed the missile site in Zakharchenko with “great accuracy,” a possible firing zone that “does not exceed three to four kilometers in length and four kilometers in width.” However, Ukrainian authorities said their calculations placed the firing location farther to the east, deeper into rebel-controlled territory.

Thus, the importance of the U.S. intelligence data that Secretary of State John Kerry claimed to possess just three days after the plane was shot down. Appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on July 20, 2014, Kerry declared, “we picked up the imagery of this launch. We know the trajectory. We know where it came from. We know the timing. And it was exactly at the time that this aircraft disappeared from the radar.”

But the U.S. government has released none of its evidence on the shoot-down. A U.S. intelligence source told me that CIA analysts briefed the Dutch investigators but under conditions of tight secrecy. None of the U.S. information was included in the report and Dutch officials have refused to discuss any U.S. intelligence information on the grounds of national security.

In the weeks after the shoot-down, I was told by another source briefed by U.S. intelligence analysts that they had concluded that a rogue element of the Ukrainian government – tied to one of the oligarchs – was responsible for the attack, while absolving senior Ukrainian leaders including President Petro Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. But I wasn’t able to determine whether this U.S. analysis was a consensus or a dissident opinion.

Last October, Der Spiegel reported that German intelligence, the BND, concluded that the Russian government was not the source of the missile battery – that it had been captured from a Ukrainian military base – but the BND blamed the ethnic Russian rebels for firing it. However, a European source told me that the BND’s analysis was not as conclusive as Der Spiegel had described.

Prior to the MH-17 crash, ethnic Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine were reported to have captured a Buk system after overrunning a government air base, but Ukrainian authorities said the system was not operational, as recounted in the Dutch report. The rebels also denied possessing a functioning Buk system.

Who Has These Buks?

As for whether the 9M38 Buk system is still in the Ukrainian military arsenal, government officials in Kiev claimed to have sold their stockpile of older Buks to Georgia, but Ukraine appears to still possess the 9M38 Buk system, based on photographs of Ukrainian weapons displays. In other words, Ukrainian authorities appear to be lying about this crucial point.

It should be noted, too, that just because Russia no longer deploys the outmoded Buks doesn’t mean that it might not have some mothballed in warehouses that could be pulled out and distributed in a sub rosa fashion, although both the Ukrainian rebels and Russian officials deny this possibility. According to the Ukrainian government, the rebels were only known to have shoulder-fired “manpads” in July 2014 – and that weapon lacked the range to destroy a civilian airliner flying at 33,000 feet.

Yet, rather than delve into this important mystery, The New York Times’ editorial simply repeats the Western “group think” that took shape in the days after the MH-17 tragedy, that somehow the rebels shot down the plane with a Buk missile supplied by Russia. The other possibility that the missile was fired by some element of the Ukrainian security forces was given short-shrift despite the fact that Ukraine had moved some of its Buk batteries into eastern Ukraine presumably to shoot down possible Russian aircraft incursions.

As described in the Dutch report, this Ukrainian concern was quite real in the days before the MH-17 shoot-down. On July 16 – just one day before the tragedy – a Ukrainian SU-25 jetfighter was shot down by what Ukrainian authorities concluded was an air-to-air missile presumably fired by a Russian warplane patrolling the Russia-Ukraine border.

Thus, it would make sense that the Ukrainian air-defense forces would have moved their Buk batteries close to the border and would have been on the lookout for possible Russian intruders entering or leaving Ukrainian air space. So, one possibility is that a poorly organized Ukrainian air-defense force mistook MH-17 for a hostile Russian aircraft high-tailing it back to Russia and fired.

Another theory that I’m told U.S. intelligence analysts examined was the possibility that a rogue Ukrainian element – linked to a fiercely anti-Russian oligarch – may have hoped that President Vladimir Putin’s official plane was in Ukrainian air space en route home from a state visit to South America. Putin’s jet and MH-17 had very similar markings. But Putin used a different route and had already landed in Moscow.

A side-by-side comparison of the Russian presidential jetliner and the Malaysia Airlines plane.

A third possibility, which I’m told at least some U.S. analysts think makes the most sense, was that the attack on MH-17 was a premeditated provocation by a team working for a hard-line oligarch with the goal of getting Russia blamed and heightening Western animosity toward Putin.

Obama’s Secrets

But whatever your preferred scenario – whether you think the Russians or the Ukrainians did it – the solution to the mystery could clearly benefit from President Barack Obama doing what Putin has done: declassify relevant intelligence and defense information.

One might think that the Times’ editors would be at the forefront of demanding transparency from the U.S. government, especially since senior U.S. officials rushed out of the gate in the days after the tragedy to put the blame on the Russians. Yet, since five days after the shoot-down, the Obama administration has refused to update or refine its claims.

Earlier this year, a spokesperson for Director for National Intelligence James Clapper told me that the DNI would not provide additional information out of concern that it might influence the Dutch investigation, a claim that lacked credibility because the Dutch investigation began within a day of the MH-17 crash and the DNI issued a sketchy white paper on the case four days later.

In other words, the initial U.S. rush to judgment already had prejudiced the investigation by indicating which way the United States, a NATO ally of the Netherlands, wanted the inquiry to go: blame the Russians. Later, withholding more refined intelligence data also concealed whatever contrary analyses had evolved within the U.S. intelligence community after Kerry and the DNI had jumped to their hasty conclusions.

Yet, The New York Times took note of none of that, simply piling on the Russians again and hailing a dubious online publication called Bellingcat, which has consistently taken whatever the U.S. propaganda line is on international incidents and has systematically screwed up key facts.

In 2013, Bellingcat’s founder Eliot Higgins got the firing location wrong for the sarin gas attack outside Damascus, Syria. He foisted the blame on Bashar al-Assad’s forces in line with U.S. propaganda but it turned out that the missile’s range was way too short for his analysis to be correct. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “The Collapsing Syria-Sarin Case.”]

Then, earlier this year, Higgins fed Australia’s “60 Minutes” program wrong coordinates for the location of the so-called “Buk-getaway video” in eastern Ukraine. Though the program treated Higgins’s analysis as gospel, the images from the video and from the supposed location clearly didn’t match, leading the program to engage in a journalistic fraud to pretend otherwise. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “A Reckless Stand-upper on MH-17.”]

But the Times’ editorial board simply gushed all over Bellingcat, promoting the Web site as if it’s a credible source, writing that the Dutch report “is consistent with theories advanced by the United States and Ukraine as well as evidence collected by the independent investigative website Bellingcat.com, which hold that the fatal missile was fired from territory controlled by Russian-backed rebels in eastern Ukraine.”

The Times then distorted the findings of the Buk manufacturer to present them as somehow contradicted by the Dutch report, which substantially relied on the declassified information from the manufacturer to reach roughly the same conclusion, that the missile was an older-model Buk.

However, without irony, the Times writes, “This fact is not something Russians are likely to learn; Russian television has presented only the Kremlin’s disinformation of what is going on in Ukraine and, for that matter, Syria. … Creating an alternative reality has been a big reason for President Vladimir Putin’s boundless popularity among Russians. He sees no reason to come clean for the shooting down of the Boeing 777.”

Yet, the actual reality is that Russia has provided much more information and shown much greater transparency than President Obama and the U.S. government have. The Dutch report also ignored one of the key questions asked by Russian authorities in the days after the MH-17 shoot-down: why did Ukraine’s air defense turn on the radar used to guide Buk missiles?

But the Times remains wedded to its propaganda narrative and doesn’t want inconvenient facts to get in the way. Rather than demand that Obama “come clean” about what the U.S. intelligence agencies know about the MH-17 case, the newspaper of record chooses to mislead its readers about the facts.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). You also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.

..