MH17 SHOT DOWN WITH BULLETS

SEE PICTURES OF COCKPIT
30MM BULLET HOLES?
FROM TWO WAR BIRDS?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-pilot-speaks-out-shocking-analysis-of-the-shooting-down-of-malaysian-mh17/5394111

http://www.prisonplanet.com/veteran-us-intelligence-analysts-to-obama-provide-evidence-or-stop-lying-about-malaysia-plane-crash.html

Veteran US Intelligence Analysts to Obama: Provide Evidence or Stop Lying About Malaysia Plane Crash

Prison Planet.com
Aug 1, 2014
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Intelligence on Shoot-Down of Malaysian Plane
Executive Summary
U.S.–Russian intensions are building in a precarious way over Ukraine, and we are far from certain that your advisers fully appreciate the danger of escalation. The New York Times and other media outlets are treating sensitive issues in dispute as flat-fact, taking their cue from U.S. government sources.
Twelve days after the shoot-down of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, your administration still has issued no coordinated intelligence assessment summarizing what evidence exists to determine who was responsible – much less to convincingly support repeated claims that the plane was downed by a Russian-supplied missile in the hands of Ukrainian separatists.
Your administration has not provided any satellite imagery showing that the separatists had such weaponry, and there are several other “dogs that have not barked.” Washington’s credibility, and your own, will continue to erode, should you be unwilling – or unable – to present more tangible evidence behind administration claims. In what follows, we put this in the perspective of former intelligence professionals with a cumulative total of 260 years in various parts of U.S. intelligence:

We, the undersigned former intelligence officers want to share with you our concern about the evidence adduced so far to blame Russia for the July 17 downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17. We are retired from government service and none of us is on the payroll of CNN, Fox News, or any other outlet. We intend this memorandum to provide a fresh, different perspective.
As veteran intelligence analysts accustomed to waiting, except in emergency circumstances, for conclusive information before rushing to judgment, we believe that the charges against Russia should be rooted in solid, far more convincing evidence. And that goes in spades with respect to inflammatory incidents like the shoot-down of an airliner. We are also troubled by the amateurish manner in which fuzzy and flimsy evidence has been served up – some it via “social media.”
As intelligence professionals we are embarrassed by the unprofessional use of partial intelligence information. As Americans, we find ourselves hoping that, if you indeed have more conclusive evidence, you will find a way to make it public without further delay. In charging Russia with being directly or indirectly responsible, Secretary of State John Kerry has been particularly definitive. Not so the evidence. His statements seem premature and bear earmarks of an attempt to “poison the jury pool.”
Painting Russia Black
We see an eerie resemblance to an earlier exercise in U.S. “public diplomacy” from which valuable lessons can be learned by those more interested in the truth than in exploiting tragic incidents for propaganda advantage. We refer to the behavior of the Reagan administration in the immediate aftermath of the shoot-down of Korean Airlines Flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983. We sketch out below a short summary of that tragic affair, since we suspect you have not been adequately briefed on it. The parallels will be obvious to you.
An advantage of our long tenure as intelligence officers is that we remember what we have witnessed first hand; seldom do we forget key events in which we played an analyst or other role. To put it another way, most of us “know exactly where we were” when a Soviet fighter aircraft shot down Korean Airlines passenger flight 007 over Siberia on August 30, 1983, over 30 years ago. At the time, we were intelligence officers on “active duty.” You were 21; many of those around you today were still younger.
Thus, it seems possible that you may be learning how the KAL007 affair went down, so to speak, for the first time; that you may now become more aware of the serious implications for U.S.-Russian relations regarding how the downing of Flight 17 goes down; and that you will come to see merit in preventing ties with Moscow from falling into a state of complete disrepair. In our view, the strategic danger here dwarfs all other considerations.
Hours after the tragic shoot-down on Aug. 30, 1983, the Reagan administration used its very accomplished propaganda machine to twist the available intelligence on Soviet culpability for the killing of all 269 people aboard KAL007. The airliner was shot down after it strayed hundreds of miles off course and penetrated Russia’s airspace over sensitive military facilities in Kamchatka and Sakhalin Island. The Soviet pilot tried to signal the plane to land, but the KAL pilots did not respond to the repeated warnings. Amid confusion about the plane’s identity – a U.S. spy plane had been in the vicinity hours earlier – Soviet ground control ordered the pilot to fire.
The Soviets soon realized they had made a horrendous mistake. U.S. intelligence also knew from sensitive intercepts that the tragedy had resulted from a blunder, not from a willful act of murder (much as on July 3, 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian airliner over the Persian Gulf, killing 290 people, an act which President Ronald Reagan dismissively explained as an “understandable accident”).
To make the very blackest case against Moscow for shooting down the KAL airliner, the Reagan administration suppressed exculpatory evidence from U.S. electronic intercepts. Washington’s mantra became “Moscow’s deliberate downing of a civilian passenger plane.” Newsweek ran a cover emblazoned with the headline “Murder in the Sky.” (Apparently, not much has changed;Time’s cover this week features “Cold War II” and “Putin’s dangerous game.” The cover story by Simon Shuster, “In Russia, Crime Without Punishment,” would merit an A-plus in William Randolph Hearst’s course “Yellow Journalism 101.”)
When KAL007 was shot down, Alvin A. Snyder, director of the U.S. Information Agency’s television and film division, was enlisted in a concerted effort to “heap as much abuse on the Soviet Union as possible,” as Snyder writes in his 1995 book, “Warriors of Disinformation.”
He and his colleagues also earned an A-plus for bringing the “mainstream media” along. For example, ABC’s Ted Koppel noted with patriotic pride, “This has been one of those occasions when there is very little difference between what is churned out by the U.S. government propaganda organs and by the commercial broadcasting networks.”
“Fixing” the Intelligence Around the Policy
“The perception we wanted to convey was that the Soviet Union had cold-bloodedly carried out a barbaric act,” wrote Snyder, adding that the Reagan administration went so far as to present a doctored transcript of the intercepts to the United Nations Security Council on September 6, 1983.
Only a decade later, when Snyder saw the complete transcripts — including the portions that the Reagan administration had hidden — would he fully realize how many of the central elements of the U.S. presentation were false.
The intercepts showed that the Soviet fighter pilot believed he was pursuing a U.S. spy aircraft and that he was having trouble in the dark identifying the plane. Per instructions from ground control, the pilot had circled the KAL airliner and tilted his wings to order the aircraft to land. The pilot said he fired warning shots, as well. This information “was not on the tape we were provided,” Snyder wrote.
It became abundantly clear to Snyder that, in smearing the Soviets, the Reagan administration had presented false accusations to the United Nations, as well as to the people of the United States and the world. In his book, Snyder acknowledged his own role in the deception, but drew a cynical conclusion. He wrote, “The moral of the story is that all governments, including our own, lie when it suits their purposes. The key is to lie first.”
The tortured attempts by your administration and stenographers in the media to blame Russia for the downing of Flight 17, together with John Kerry’s unenviable record for credibility, lead us to the reluctant conclusion that the syndrome Snyder describes may also be at work in your own administration; that is, that an ethos of “getting your own lie out first” has replaced “ye shall know the truth.” At a minimum, we believe Secretary Kerry displayed unseemly haste in his determination to be first out of the starting gate.
Both Sides Cannot Be Telling the Truth
We have always taken pride in not shooting from the hip, but rather in doing intelligence analysis that is evidence-based. The evidence released to date does not bear close scrutiny; it does not permit a judgment as to which side is lying about the shoot-down of Flight 17. Our entire professional experience would incline us to suspect the Russians – almost instinctively. Our more recent experience, particularly observing Secretary Kerry injudiciousness in latching onto one spurious report after another as “evidence,” has gone a long way toward balancing our earlier predispositions.
It seems that whenever Kerry does cite supposed “evidence” that can be checked – like the forged anti-Semitic fliers distributed in eastern Ukraine or the photos of alleged Russian special forces soldiers who allegedly slipped into Ukraine – the “proof” goes “poof” as Kerry once said in a different context. Still, these misrepresentations seem small peccadillos compared with bigger whoppers like the claim Kerry made on Aug. 30, 2013, no fewer than 35 times, that “we know” the government of Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical incidents near Damascus nine days before.
On September 3, 2013 – following your decision to call off the attack on Syria in order to await Congressional authorization – Kerry was still pushing for an attack in testimony before a thoroughly sympathetic Senate Foreign Affairs Committee. On the following day Kerry drew highly unusual personal criticism from President Putin, who said: “He is lying, and he knows he is lying. It is sad.”
Equally serious, during the first week of September 2013, as you and President Vladimir Putin were putting the final touches to the deal whereby Syrian chemical weapons would be given up for destruction, John Kerry said something that puzzles us to this day. On September 9, 2013, Kerry was in London, still promoting a U.S. attack on Syria for having crossed the “Red Line” you had set against Syria’s using chemical weapons.
At a formal press conference, Kerry abruptly dismissed the possibility that Bashar al-Assad would ever give up his chemical weapons, saying, “He isn’t about to do that; it can’t be done.” Just a few hours later, the Russians and Syrians announced Syria’s agreement to do precisely what Kerry had ruled out as impossible. You sent him back to Geneva to sign the agreement, and it was formally concluded on September 14.
Regarding the Malaysia Airlines shoot-down of July 17, we believe Kerry has typically rushed to judgment and that his incredible record for credibility poses a huge disadvantage in the diplomatic and propaganda maneuvering vis-a-vis Russia. We suggest you call a halt to this misbegotten “public diplomacy” offensive. If, however, you decide to press on anyway, we suggest you try to find a less tarnished statesman or woman.
A Choice Between Two
If the intelligence on the shoot-down is as weak as it appears judging from the fuzzy scraps that have been released, we strongly suggest you call off the propaganda war and await the findings of those charged with investigating the shoot-down. If, on the other hand, your administration has more concrete, probative intelligence, we strongly suggest that you consider approving it for release, even if there may be some risk of damage to “sources and methods.” Too often this consideration is used to prevent information from entering the public domain where, as in this case, it belongs.
There have been critical junctures in the past in which presidents have recognized the need to waive secrecy in order to show what one might call “a decent respect for the opinions of mankind” or even to justify military action.
As senior CIA veteran Milton Bearden has put it, there are occasions when more damage is done to U.S. national security by “protecting” sources and methods than by revealing them. For instance, Bearden noted that Ronald Reagan exposed a sensitive intelligence source in showing a skeptical world the reason for the U.S. attack on Libya in retaliation for the April 5, 1986 bombing at the La Belle Disco in West Berlin. That bombing killed two U.S. servicemen and a Turkish woman, and injured over 200 people, including 79 U.S. servicemen.
Intercepted messages between Tripoli and agents in Europe made it clear that Libya was behind the attack. Here’s an excerpt: “At 1:30 in the morning one of the acts was carried out with success, without leaving a trace behind.”
Ten days after the bombing the U.S. retaliated, sending over 60 Air Force fighters to strike the Libyan capital of Tripoli and the city of Benghazi. The operation was widely seen as an attempt to kill Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who survived, but his adopted 15-month-old daughter was killed in the bombing, along with at least 15 other civilians.
Three decades ago, there was more shame attached to the killing of children. As world abhorrence grew after the U.S. bombing strikes, the Reagan administration produced the intercepted, decoded message sent by the Libyan Peoples Bureau in East Berlin acknowledging the “success” of the attack on the disco, and adding the ironically inaccurate boast “without leaving a trace behind.”
The Reagan administration made the decision to give up a highly sensitive intelligence source, its ability to intercept and decipher Libyan communications. But once the rest of the world absorbed this evidence, international grumbling subsided and many considered the retaliation against Tripoli justified.
If You’ve Got the Goods…
If the U.S. has more convincing evidence than what has so far been adduced concerning responsibility for shooting down Flight 17, we believe it would be best to find a way to make that intelligence public – even at the risk of compromising “sources and methods.” Moreover, we suggest you instruct your subordinates not to cheapen U.S. credibility by releasing key information via social medialike Twitter and Facebook.
The reputation of the messenger for credibility is also key in this area of “public diplomacy.” As is by now clear to you, in our view Secretary Kerry is more liability than asset in this regard. Similarly, with regard to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, his March 12, 2013 Congressional testimony under oath to what he later admitted were “clearly erroneous” things regarding NSA collection should disqualify him. Clapper should be kept at far remove from the Flight 17 affair.
What is needed, if you’ve got the goods, is an Interagency Intelligence Assessment – the genre used in the past to lay out the intelligence. We are hearing indirectly from some of our former colleagues that what Secretary Kerry is peddling does not square with the real intelligence. Such was the case late last August, when Kerry created a unique vehicle he called a “Government (not Intelligence) Assessment” blaming, with no verifiable evidence, Bashar al-Assad for the chemical attacks near Damascus, as honest intelligence analysts refused to go along and, instead, held their noses.
We believe you need to seek out honest intelligence analysts now and hear them out. Then, you may be persuaded to take steps to curb the risk that relations with Russia might escalate from “Cold War II” into an armed confrontation. In all candor, we see little reason to believe that Secretary Kerry and your other advisers appreciate the enormity of that danger.
In our most recent (May 4) memorandum to you, Mr. President, we cautioned that if the U.S. wished “to stop a bloody civil war between east and west Ukraine and avert Russian military intervention in eastern Ukraine, you may be able to do so before the violence hurtles completely out of control.” On July 17, you joined the top leaders of Germany, France, and Russia in calling for a ceasefire. Most informed observers believe you have it in your power to get Ukrainian leaders to agree. The longer Kiev continues its offensive against separatists in eastern Ukraine, the more such U.S. statements appear hypocritical.
We reiterate our recommendations of May 4, that you remove the seeds of this confrontation by publicly disavowing any wish to incorporate Ukraine into NATO and that you make it clear that you are prepared to meet personally with Russian President Putin without delay to discuss ways to defuse the crisis and recognize the legitimate interests of the various parties. The suggestion of an early summit got extraordinary resonance in controlled and independent Russian media. Not so in “mainstream” media in the U.S. Nor did we hear back from you.
The courtesy of a reply is requested.
Prepared by VIPS Steering Group
William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
Larry Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)
Edward Loomis, NSA, Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)
David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East (ret.)
Coleen Rowley, Division Counsel & Special Agent, FBI (ret.)
Peter Van Buren, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret)
Ann Wright, Col., US Army (ret); Foreign Service Officer (ret.)
Related posts:
US behind Russia plane crash: Russian military intelligence org.
Pentagon Official: Russians Likely Responsible For Shooting Down Malaysia Plane
U.S. Fails to Provide MH17 Technical Evidence, Admits No Link to Russia
On Malaysian Crash, Obama’s Case Against Russia Disintegrates
Malaysia MH17 crash: 10 questions Russia wants Ukraine to answer
This article was posted: Friday, August 1, 2014 at 5:51 am

A LITTLE MORE INFO BUT ABOUT THE SAME

http://www.blacklistednews.com/Official_'Investigation'_into_Downing_of_the_Malaysian_Plane_Is_Now_Clearly_a_Hoax./36992/0/38/38/Y/M.html

OFFICIAL 'INVESTIGATION' INTO DOWNING OF THE MALAYSIAN PLANE IS NOW CLEARLY A HOAX.

August 1, 2014
Share It | Print This

SOURCE: ERIC ZUESSE

As was pointed out by investigative journalist Donn Marten at OpEdNews on July 31st, "It is ... notable that the MH17 flight recorders were spirited away last week to the UK where the ... government of ... David Cameron rules and will ensure that the actual content of the recordings will be cooked to a fine fricassee ... by the time that they are officially released." However, that's not just "notable," it is far worse. When one checks there the link that's provided to the BBC's July 22nd report "UK Experts to Retrieve Flight Data," one finds the utterly shocking statement:

"British air accident investigators will retrieve data from the black boxes of crashed flight MH17, UK Prime Minister David Cameron has said. This follows a request by authorities in the Netherlands, where the Malaysia Airlines plane had flown from before crashing in Ukraine last Thursday. The experts, based at Farnborough, will download data from the recorders for analysis by Dutch and Ukrainian teams."

This means that the Ukrainian Government, which is itself suspected of having brought the airliner down, is participating in the decoding of the information to determine who brought this plane down. Is it supposed to be acceptable legal practice, anywhere in the world, to have a major suspect in a possible criminal investigation participate in the investigation to determine whom, if anyone, to charge (i.e., whether the event wasn't merely a tragic error on the part of whomever fired the shot or shots that brought this plane down)? Obviously, it is not. Consequently, the immediate question here is whether this "investigation" is itself a crime.

The other two Governments that will be decoding this information are Britain and Netherlands, which are likewise allied with the United States, which is the very country that installed the existing Government of Ukraine -- the suspect that's participating in this "investigation."

Obviously, to place the decoding of this black box into the power and authority of a prime suspect in the case, and of two of that suspect's allies, is itself criminal -- either by intent or else by negligence.

This "investigation" is, in either instance, a criminal operation, which should be thoroughly investigated in an authentic and fully legal investigation to determine who committed the misplacement of the plane-downing's black-box investigation: to determine whether that misplacement was an appalling act of negligence, or itself an intentionally criminal act to deceive the world's public about who downed this plane.

In any case: whatever the "findings" of the present black-box decoding turns out to be, those "findings" will be entirely non-credible, unless the Ukrainian Government, a suspect in the downing, is concluded to be wholly responsible for the shot or shots that downed the plane. If a co-investigator, in such a case, admits to full responsibility for having committed what would then be a crime of intent, not merely a crime of negligence, then at least one can reasonably respect that sole-perpetrator's integrity, for admitting and accepting full responsibility for it. But otherwise, any exculpation whatsoever, by the black-box team, of the Ukrainian Government in this affair, can be believed only by idiots.

Already, "First Examination of Malaysian MH-17 Cockpit Photo Shows Ukrainian Government Shot that Plane Down." A credible pilot and investigative journalist had managed to screen-save key pictures of the crash-site before those pictures were removed from the Internet, and has now concluded definitely that the two Ukrainian Government SU-25 fighter jets that were "accompanying" the Malaysian airliner into and through the conflict zone had virtually simultaneously shot "double-barreled 30-mm gun, type GSh-302,” carrying “a 250 round magazine of anti-tank incendiary shells and splinter-explosive shells (dum-dum),” which are “designed to penetrate the solid armor of a tank." The cockpit on one side of the plane was clearly shown in one of those photos, and it had not only entrance bullet-holes but exit bullet-holes, holes from firing from both sides of the airliner, and this can only result from both of the SU-25 jets firing into the cockpit, firing at it from both sides.

Unless that pilot's analysis is subsequently shown to be flawed or else faked, the world now knows, as well as it ever is going to be able to (unless and until that piece of the wreckage is publicly shown from the crash-site, though even then it might by now have been tampered-with), precisely who and how downed the Malaysian airliner: this photo taken moments after the crash show it was downed by those two Ukrainian Government planes. There was no ground-based firing that brought it down, because no ground-based firing could possibly have produced the bullet-holes from both sides of that fragment of the cockpit.

This is a war-crime, with a criminal attempt to cover it up, and with criminal participation by the Western press and others, to hide it from the public.

That's what it is, as well as will now likely ever be able to be reconstructed of the downing of that plane, because the official "investigation" (at least of the black-box portion of it) is clearly a hoax.

ANOTHER LINK:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-28424115

A radar guided SAM will attempt to detonate close to or in the direct flight path of its intended target. At that point a good analogy of the warhead would be taking down a duck with birdshot fired from your trusty 12 Guage. 

(Basically a big frag grenade detonated by a radar proximity fuse)

clean bullet holes, look at wings also.

I've been busy scarfing photo's from the Internet before they are gone. It's already getting hard as nails to find anything hi-resolution. I do have a 1600x1200 shot of the cockpit pitting that I want to share with y'all. Open the photo to expand it to it's full 1600x1200 size and save it. You may never get another chance to snag it. Also a few others I've archived at highest resolution I could locate.

Nothing would surprise me, including evidence tampering whilst in a Ukrainian field, but the first photo is interesting. Looking top left to bottom right there's a near perfect pattern that seems to correspond with a bunch of oversized ball bearings shoved in front of a shaped charge russian style, I.e. FRAG-HE.  These buggers were engineered to penetrate and disable military aircraft skin so it isn't too much of a stretch to envision a rapid cockpit egress with the wings catching the messy leftovers and the outliers. All modern FRAG-HE tech 'owes' its theory to the "bouncing-betty",  this is the aviation equivalent of the gut shot. (No thank you nazi Deutschland)

Discussing a probable precursor to WWIII is regrettably interesting, the only people who are wrong are the idiots perpetrating this hot mess.

Add this to the pile of info. This alert was from Peter Goodgame via email. I'm on his mailing list.

Peter Goodgame wrote:

Is this just another wild-eyed conspiracy theory? Or are we being manipulated by a Western media that only presents one side of the story?

--------

August 9, 2014

---Malaysian press charges Ukraine government shot down MH 17---

A Thursday article in the New Straits Times, Malaysia's flagship English-language newspaper, charged the US- and European-backed Ukrainian regime in Kiev with shooting down Malaysian Airlines flight MH 17 in east Ukraine last month. Given the tightly controlled character of the Malaysian media, it appears that the accusation that Kiev shot down MH17 has the imprimatur of the Malaysian state.

The US and European media have buried this remarkable report, which refutes the wave of allegations planted by the CIA in international media claiming that Russian president Vladimir Putin was responsible for the destruction of MH17, without presenting any evidence to back up this charge.

The New Straits Times article, titled "US analysts conclude MH17 downed by aircraft," lays out evidence that Ukrainian fighter aircraft attacked the jetliner with first a missile, then with bursts of 30-millimeter machine gun fire from both sides of MH17. The Russian army has already presented detailed radar and satellite data showing a Ukrainian Sukhoi-25 fighter jet tailing MH17 shortly before the jetliner crashed. The Kiev regime denied that its fighters were airborne in the area, however.

The New Straits Times article began, "Intelligence analysts in the United States have already concluded that Malaysia flight MH17 was shot down by an air-to-air missile, and that the Ukrainian government had had something to do with it. This corroborates an emerging theory postulated by local investigators that the Boeing 777-200 was crippled by an air-to-air missile and finished off with cannon fire from a jet that had been shadowing it as it plummeted to earth."

It cited "experts who had said that the photographs of the blast fragmentation patterns on the fuselage of the airliner showed two distinct shapes -- the shredding pattern associated with a warhead packed with 'flechettes,' and the more uniform, round-type penetration holes consistent with that of cannon rounds."

The New Straits Times cited several sources to substantiate its position. One was testimony by a Canadian-Ukrainian monitor for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Michael Bociurkiw -- one of the first investigators to arrive at the crash site. Speaking to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation on July 29, Bociurkiw said: "There have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really pockmarked with what almost looks like machine gun fire; very, very strong machine gun fire."

Another source the paper cited was an article, "Flight 17 Shoot-Down Scenario Shifts," by former Associated Press reporter Robert Parry, who now writes for the ConsortiumNews.com web site. Given the lack of any evidence supporting US charges that pro-Russian forces shot MH17 down with a Buk anti-aircraft missile, Parry said, "some US intelligence analysts have concluded that the rebels and Russia were likely not at fault, and that it appears Ukrainian government forces were to blame, according to a source briefed on these findings."

Perry indicated that sections of the US intelligence apparatus have concluded that US secretary of state John Kerry's claims that pro-Russian forces shot down the plane are lies.

"Only three days after the crash, Secretary of State Kerry did the rounds of the Sunday talk shows making what he deemed an 'extraordinary circumstantial' case supposedly proving that the rebels carried out the shoot-down with missiles provided by Russia. He acknowledged that the US government was 'not drawing the final conclusion here, but there is a lot that points at the need for Russia to be responsible,'" Perry wrote. "By then, I was already being told that the US intelligence community lacked any satellite imagery supporting Kerry's allegations, and that the only Buk missile system in that part of Ukraine appeared to be under the control of the Ukrainian military."

Finally, the New Straits Times and Parry both cited retired Lufthansa pilot Peter Haisenko, who has pointed to photographic evidence of MH17 wreckage suggesting that cockpit panels were raked with heavy machine gun fire from both the port and starboard sides. "Nobody before Haisenko had noticed that the projectiles had ripped through the panel from both its left side and its right side. This is what rules out any ground-fired missile," Parry wrote.

---------

To read the entire article go to http://www.opednews.com/articles/Malaysian-press-charges-Uk-by-Alex-Lantier-Government-Corruption_Malaysia-Airlines-Flight-17_Putin_Russia-140809-576.html

If it were brought down air to air and subsequently strafed the Russians and or Russorebels would likely have presented the evidence, would they not? 

"Nobody before Haisenko had noticed that the projectiles had ripped through the panel from both its left side and its right side. This is what rules out any ground-fired missile," Parry wrote.

Patently inaccurate conclusion. A radar proximity fuse detonates the SAM, at which point it becomes what you would visually perceive as a fireworks display if it were colorful. They explode symmetrically to the role axis of the missile and many of the russian designs were basically packed with lead ball bearings. Not really much different than radar guided flak,  if you're in close proximity and fly into it you get it on all sides, not to mention the fact much of it may pass through both sides of the narrow cockpit of a 777.

Regardless, its pretty clear they were placed in harm's way by Kiev ATC and likely intentionally,  wouldn't rule out Kiev using a BUK battery of their own.

1st pick, posted by researcher, look at the symmetry.

Granted this is gatling style 20mm, & a super hornet not an outdated sukhoi, but the randomness of the buggering would be evident, not a symmetrical pattern that's clearly identifiable imho.....

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/08/09/mala-a09.html


The New Straits Times article, titled “US analysts conclude MH17 downed by aircraft,” lays out evidence that Ukrainian fighter aircraft attacked the jetliner with first a missile, then with bursts of 30-millimeter machine gun fire from both sides of MH17. The Russian army has already presented detailed radar and satellite data showing a Ukrainian Sukhoi-25 fighter jet tailing MH17 shortly before the jetliner crashed. The Kiev regime denied that its fighters were airborne in the area, however.

Ok. "The World Socialist Website" has proclaimed US analysts concluded.......while also heralding MAY DAY and Leon Trotsky, because that is the "source".