Long list of indications showing the Dutch are not very keen in finding MH17 truth

Soon after MH17 was shot down indications came that showed the Dutch were not very keen into finding the truth on what happened to MH17. Initially this could be seen as coincidence but the list continues to grow. Time to get an overview:

  1. It took a couple of days before the Dutch appeared at the crash site. Safety concerns were the main reason. The Dutch and Australian government considered to deploy army forces to the crash site but this never happened.
  2. The Malaysian government was able to obtain the black boxes because they negotiated directly with the separatists. The Dutch seemed to be not interested in obtaining the black boxes. See more here.
  3. Dutch authorities did not talk to the firebrigade for weeks. The firebrigade did the recovery of the bodies. They made records of where bodies were found and which areas were searched. Dutch authorities did not ask for these records. Only after RTL Nieuws found out simply by asking the firebrigade the records were collected (RTL Nieuws) and here
  4. The Dutch, Ukraine, Australian and Belgium prosecutors Joint Investigation Team signed a secret agreement end of July. Each country has a veto on publication of information supplied by the country. The contract was initially secret. Later parts were published after pressure from press and politicians.
  5. Malaysia was initially excluded from the JIT. Only after monts Malaysia was added to the JIT.
  6. Despite severall requests the spokesman of JIT does not want to answer why Malaysia was not member of JIT from the start. Also the role of Malaysia in JIT was not explained by the spokesman.
  7. Ministy of Safety and Justice refuses to release information on the JIT agreement (Parool)
  8. A line in the preliminary Dutch Safety Board report was deleted in the final version. The line reported about a NOTAM which was issued after the shotdown of an Antonov 26 at July 14. See this post.
  9. The Dutch government never requested the United Nations to sent peace keeping forces to secure the area. United Nations Security Council Resolution 2166 calls for a thorough investigation of the crash, free and unlimited access of the crash site, ceasing of all military actions at and around the crash site and those responsible for the crash to be held to account.
  10. Some parts of the aircraft which could possibly tell more about the cause of the crash were left behind in Ukraine after the second recovery mission ended. For example the front part of one of the engines. Also a door was left behind. See this post. 
  11. The Dutch recovery mission likely never requested the OVSE to monitor the crash site for safety. The OVSE reported only once that on request of the Dutch they visited the crash site. The Dutch government did not clearly state the number of times they requested OVSE to monitor the crash site when asked by Dutch member of Parliament.
  12. It took many months before the recovery of the debris started. The reason for that was safety. However journalists were able to walk around freely on the crash site. The most likely reason for the delay was that the Dutch government did not want to negotiate with the separatists. Could this be tactics to delay investigation?
  13. In Oktober Minister of Foreign Affairs Timmermans said during a TV interview one of the passengers was wearing an onxygen mask. The next of kins were never informed about this fact. Why is not clear. The Police stated only one passenger was wearing a mask. (see April 2015 why this is not correct)
  14. At February 5, 2015 Minister Koenders of Foreign Affairs told the Dutch Tweede Kamer that during a briefing of ambassdors in Kiev it was said “there were possibly surface to air missile in Eastern Ukraine”. Later, in April it was found out that the Minutes of Meeting described there were heavy weapons in the area. (RTL) and Argos Radio
  15. The Dutch prosecutor (Openbaar Ministerie) Fred  Westerbeke said in an interview they contacted all journalist who visited the crashsite. End of February 2015 there were at least 5 Dutch journalist who were not contacted. Stangely enough Pro Russia journalist Graham Phillips was contacted and invited to come over to the Netherlands by the Duch police (not verified if this is true).
  16. A crucial part of the cockpit showing holes was not recovered for many months. At the end it was recovered by an unknown party around mid February 2015 . DSB did not want to tell journalists if they had recovered this part. Here a colomn of journalist Jeroen Akkermans about this piece. Photos which were publised by Ukraine new news site Censor.net showed the cockpit section including the part shown below.
    famous-cockpit-part
  17. PM Rutte refuses to make public a minutes of a meeting in Kiev attended by ambassadors of various western countries. Ukraine warned for the safety of airspace because an Antonov was shot down.
  18. After a  WOB (wet openbaarheid bestuur) request of RTL Nieuws many  documents where handed over by Dutch authorities to RTL Nieuws. However there was little value in the documents. Also many lines were made unreadable.More here. RTL objected at March 20  to the limited amount of documents by sending a letter of objection to the Ministry of Justice. See this newsarticle.
    At August 12 the Dutch Goverment let RTL know the documents will not be released. Specifically it is about documents which described Dutch actions after the crash.
  19. RTL also requested documentation on agreements between the Dutch government and separatists about the recovery of MH17. RTL did not get all the documents and objected. The objection letter was sent at December 24 to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.. At March 10 RTL received a letter from the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He said he will need more time to decide on the objection. The delay can be maximum 6 weeks.
    At April 30 RTL received a letter. The Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs will NOT release the documents to the public!
  20. RTL Nieuws requested on March 16 documents with information on the safety of airspace above Crimea and East Ukraine. The information request was done on base of the Wet Openbaarheid Bestuur (WOB). The responsible authority responded by letter dated April 3 that they need more time to respond. Part of the letter is here.
  21. Dutch opposition does not get answers to their questions. Many questions are asked multiple times. No clear answers by Dutch ministers. Dutch government did not inform airlines about safety situation above Eastern Ukraine even when they were informed by Ukraine authorities.
  22. Dutch coalition parties seems to block a plenary debat in the Tweede Kamer on MH17. There are now three debates done by the Commissie Buitenlandse Zaken. These debates are done in small rooms and gets less attention. Read more here.
  23. Crucials parts of the cockpit roof top are still not recovered as of March 3 2015. These parts are somewhere in the northern area of the crash site. This area was unsafe to visit because of the war. RTL Nieuws on the MH17 wreckage seeing for press. Chairman Joustra of DSB confirms debris of the upper part of cockpit are still in Ukraine. (RTL) Item starts around minute 6:44. This part is probably not recovered and still at Petropavlovka.
    cockpit-roof-Petropavlovka
  24. The Dutch secret service (AIVD) seems not very willing to exchange information with the Dutch police and prosecutor. Here a news item in Dutch main newspaper Telegraaf dated March 3, 2015.
  25. The Dutch investigation team has not started reconstruction the cockpit and business class section of MH17 as of March 3 2015. The first debris arrived in Gilze Rijen at December 9. Only at the beginning of March the reconstruction will start. So three months after arrival all what happened in the Netherlands is probably registration of the debris (taking photos, registration of each debris in database).
  26. At July 16 a plenary debat was held. The topic was not MH17 but Pieter Omtzigt asked a couple of questions on MH17. He asked why the government did not state why information about what was said in the Kiev briefing was not released. The PM Rutte referred to a letter. However the reason was not given in that letter. Joost Niemoller has a blogpost about the debat. Also Geenstijl.nl has a posting including a link to the complete discussion.
  27. At April 8 the Dutch government released many documents to the public. These documents were requested by newsstations NOS and RTL Nieuws as well as newspaper Volkskrant. However many documents were edited by making  lines unreadabe using a black pencil. 147 documents were not released. More information by RTL Nieuws.
    At October 7 the news media NOS, RTL and De Volkskrant announced they will sue the State of the Netherlands to force them to release documents.
  28. A letter from the Dutch government dated April  17 with answers to question of Dutch members of Parliament states that Ministeriële Commissie Crisisbeheersing (MCCb) recordings of meetings and decisions taken within three months are state secrets. See the Tweet of Pieter Omtzigt (MP)
  29. A memo sent to severall Dutch ministries after the July 17 meeting in Kiev was only given to the Dutch Safety Board on January 15 2015. This after Dutch newspaper Algemeen Dagblad published about this meeting at July 14. In the meeting Kiev government told ambassadors that Russian equipment probably downed an Antonov 26.   This was revealed at April 17 when the Dutch government answered questions. 
  30. During the first plenary debat on MH17 at April 23 Minister of Foreign Affairs Koenders explains that the Dutch government will hand over any document which the DSB asks for. This to explain that the report on the ambassadors briefing in Kiev was not handed over immediately to the DSB. So the DSB has to asks for documents they do not know the existence of.
  31. Dutch ministers have a statutory duty to hand over information. 6 ministers received the Kiev meeting report and did not hand it over to the DSB
  32. During the first plenary debat on MH17 at April 23 Minister Van der Steur of Safety & Justice department told Air France was one of the airlines which continued using East Ukraine airspace after July 14. That is not correct. Der Spiegel did research on airlines using airspace over East Ukraine. Air France is not  listed as airline operating over East Ukraine in the week before July 17.
  33. In April George Maat, a forensic expert in identification of victims told there was a second passenger wearing an oxygen mask. In October 2014 the Dutch Police told there was only one passenger wearing a mask. The Dutch government denies passengers were wearing oxygen masks.  Earlier Minister of Foreign Affairs Timmermans said during a TV internview someone was found wearing a mask which was later denied by Police.
  34. The Tweede Kamer rejected  at April 28 a request for vote  submitted by Pieter Omtzigt. The vote requests that  the Dutch government should produce a list of dcocuments on MH17 and an overview of decisions made  and hand over that information to the Dutch Safety Board and  OVV and WOCD/Universiteit van Twente. Political parties which rejected the vote were VVD, PvdA, D66 and SP. Remarkable that D66 rejected as member Sjoerdsma was one of the very few members of Parliament who was looking for the truth. The reason for D66 to reject is that the believe a first step is the proposal of Minister van der Scheur to have a talk with the DSB.
  35. At April 28 also the vote of Sjoerd Sjoerdsma who requested to execute an analyses to improve the exchange of information on flying over conflict zones  was rejected by the Tweede Kamer. At April 28 also the vote of Louis Bontes to make available all documents on MH17 was rejected. See Plenair Debat 15:00 on MH17
  36. At a pressconference at May 4 minister of Emergency Alexei Kostrubitsky  told 2500 human remains were found during the recovery mission in April. Sputniknews reports in English.  The Western media did not cover this. Dutch journalist Rudy Bouma sent out a Tweet with this news.
    The Dutch Ministry of Safety and Justice responded the same evening saying the number of 2500 is incorrect. They did not state what the correct number is. Russian media reported here and here and many other media in Russia.
    Interesting enough an interview in Dutch newspaper AD (Algemeen Dagblad) with a next of kin showed that 7 coffins as well as thousands body parts were being transported on Saturday.
    Velen spraken zaterdag volgens Ploeg de hoop en verwachting uit dat er nu toch duidelijkheid moet komen. ,,Zeven kisten, duizenden body parts – een vreselijk woord. Het kan toch niet anders..So the number of 2500 seems to be correct. The article at AD.nl was posted at 4 May at 14;10. So the info cannot be based on the pressconference of  Alexei Kostrubitsky.
  37. At May 27 the Ministry Of Infrastructure and Environment of the Netherlands released documents about the safety of the airspace over Crimea and East Ukraine, Many documents are censored. In such way nothing of complete pages can be read. See the documents here. 
  38. At June 15 the Joint Investigation Team went to East Ukraine for technical investigation into the cause of the crash. News on that here. A video posted June 20 showed JIT experts taking ground/soil samples of the area what appears to be the possilble launch location south of Snizhne. The JIT is helped by Russian exports on explosives.
    So almost one year after the crash the team investigation who did it, what happened went to one of the most likely locations a BUK missile was fired. This area has been under control of separatists ever since July 17. So there was no reason at all to no start much earlier. Except that an involved party did not want to cooperate in the first months after the crash.  Video: MH17-onderzoekers aan het werk in Oost-Oekraïne (NOS)
  39. Dutch police did an investigation into the presentation of professor George Maat. Member of Parliament Pieter Omtzigt asked questions to minister van der Steur about why Maat was fired. The answers are here.  One of the anwers is : Het onderzoek zelf is een intern onderzoek dat alleen binnen de politie bekend is”. The investigation is an internal one which is only known inside the police. The report will not be made public. Also Maat himself will not be able to read this report.
    At August 5 George Maat said he demands full access to the internal investigation
    At August 14 members of parliament Omtzigt and Sjoerdsma asked 22 questions about the situation.
    At September 21 the answers were made public.
  40. Russia Today went to the area where MH17 crashed in June 2015. They found someone who found debris still not recovered by the DSB recovery mission. Those parts are crucial for understanding what happened. See this post for details. The mayor of Petropavlivka Natalya Voloshina told RT that the Dutch did not contact her after May 2015. There is no date set to collect these parts. She told DSB requested photos of the parts. It is amazing these parts are not part of the reconstruction.
  41. At October 7 2015 Ministry of Safety and Justice answered questions of Pieter Omtzigt. A report of the conversation between Maat and Minister Van der Steur will not be made public. The police investigation will be made public at the latest at October 13. Pieter Omtzigt . wrote in a Tweet: “making the report took a couple of days. It tooks weeks to answer my questions and also to publish the report’
  42. At October 12, 2015 Dutch police releases documents on the internal police investigation into the presentation of George Maat. Despite what minister Van der Steur promised the Tweede Kamer, namely that all documents would only be anonymised, many parts are made black! See the promise Van der Steur made here.
    At November 2 Members of Parliament Omtzigt and Sjoerdsma again ask question on the investigation into Maat.
    Capture
  43. At the presentation of the final report by DSB the press (250 journalists will attend) is not allowed to ask questions. At briefing (confidential) for the members of the Parliament  each political party can just ask one question.
  44. At November 24 2015 the Dutch Minister of Justice did not answer the questions of Omtzigt (see point 38). Normally answers are provided within three weeks. Pieter Omtzigt at November 25 requested answering within 24 hours.
  45. At November 26  minister van der Steur answers the request of Omtzigt in a letter. He writes that he cannot answer all questions in the normal period of three weeks as not all information has been received yet. The dossier of the investigation is available for  confidential inspection by Members of Parliament starting December 2. This means the dossier will not be made public.
    This is the letter
    dossier-vertrouwlijke-inzage
  46. ThePostOnline reports that George Maat had no objection to making the meeting between him and Miniser van der Steur public. However Minister van der Steur wrote in answers to questions of Pieter Omtzigt that Van der Steur and Maat agreed to keep the meeting confidential.
  47. At December 8 2015  the Dutch Government responds to the results of the DSB investigation. They state they will take actions to improve safety and crisismanagement. There is no mentioning on sending a letter of complaint to ICAO about Russia and Ukraine not providing primary radar data.
  48. At December 15 2015 , 4 days after the deadline of three weeks, still no answers to the questions of Pieter Omtzigt. He announced he will ask the questions oral at December 15.
    However the chairman of the Parliament Khadija Arib of ruling party PvdA did not allow this question to be asked by Omtzigt.


    At December 15 Minister van der Steur responds with a letter. He writes he cannot answer the questions yet as not all information is available. He will answer the questions as soon as possible. Here is the letter 

  49. Pieter Omtzigt files a motion to have the Dutch government request both Ukraine and Russia to hand over the radar data. Prime minister Rutte does not agee with this motion.
    See the Tweet of Pieter Omtzigt.
    Both ruling party VVD and PVDA rejected the motion. All other parties except a single person party were in favour of the motion. The voting result is here.
    motie-omtzigt
  50. At December 16 2015 the Dutch government (Minister van der Steur) releases his answers to 33 questions of Pieter Omtzigt. The Dutch government states it will not send a letter of complaint to UN and ICAO. The letter was released at a moment it would get less attention because of an important debate. Details here. This behaviour is totally contrary to the statement by PM Rutte days after July 17 saying “no stone will be unturned in finding the truth”
  51. At December 17 the ruling parties PvdA and VVD rejected a vote filed by CDA member Pieter Omtzigt to have the Dutch government via the EU request both Ukraine and Russia to hand over radar recordings. This is the vote.
  52.  University of Twente performed an evaluation of the handling by Dutch authorities of the  MH17 crisis. Interviews with people were not recorded.
  53. at January 12 2016 member of parliament Pieter Omtzigt requested to ask oral questions to the Dutch government on the missing radar recordings of both Ukraine and Russia. However the request was not granted by the chairwomen of the dutch parliament. (source: Tweet of Pieter Omtzigt). Omtzigt will now request a debate about the radar recordings. VVD and PvdA initially disagree to have a debat on the missing radar recordings. (Tweet Omtzigt). Later both VVD and PvdA agreed to have a seperate meeting on radar images.
  54. Pieter Omtzigt and various other members of parliament asked minister van der Steur 42 questions on Mr Maat. Prime minister Rutte promised to have these questions at the latest at January 12. However van der Steur sents a letter to the Parliament dated January 12 that he will not be able to answer the questions on Tuesday and will take the regular time for answering questions. (Tweet Omtzigt)
  55. minister Van der Steur who fired Professor Maat for no good reason and without waiting for results of an investigation wants to talk to Maat in secret. Maat disagrees and demands a public sorry.
  56. The team of University Twente doing an investigation into how the Dutch authorities handled the crisis in the weeks after July 17 were not allowed to view the minutes of meetings of Dutch ministers. See this Tweet of Pieter Klein of RTL. Commission Davids who did an research into the motive for Dutch government for supporting the war on Iraq was able to view the minutes of meetings for their investigation.
    In april minister van der Steur promised the House of Parliament that the University of Twente would get access to all secret documents, (Tweet Pieter Klein RTL)
  57. The Dutch parliament requested the Dutch government to provide the protocol/conditions under which the University Twente would investigate the acting of Dutch government in first three months after July17. The Dutch Governement did not provide the protocol to the Parliament before the investigation started.
    When the report was published, it became clear the Dutch government had decided that the interviews with Prime Minister, ministers and other members of government would have a confidential status. So the Dutch Parliament  was not able to discuss the protocol of interviews beforehand and could not object to a confidential status.  So the Dutch Parliament is not able to read the interviews even in confidence. The only possible way to obtain the info is by having a parlementaire enquete.
  58. The Dutch government did not do anything to obtain radar images by filing a complain at ICAO. Dutch newspaper Telegraaf reports at January 20 2016.
  59. At January 27 Pieter Omtzigt send a letter to the Minister with questions on the missing radar and satellite data.
  60. So far the Dutch prosecutor has not given a signed ‘ambtsbericht’ to the Minister of Safety and Justice Van Der Steur. This ambtsbericht informs the minister that the Prosecutor (OM) does not require radar recordings for the investigation. The minister says he does not care if there isn’t  a signed and written ambtsbericht. Member of Parliament Omtzigt requests the minister in plenary debate MH17 at February 4 to have a signed ambtsbericht
  61. At the plenary debate on February 4 Pieter Omtzigt submitted a new motion. He requests government to contact Russia, Ukraine, VS and NATO and ask for radar recordings. Voting on the motion will be on Tuesday 9 February. VVD and PvdA will likely not support the motion.
  62. Minister Van der Steur did not answer 12 question of Omtzigt and Sjoerdsma on missing radar recordings on time. Deadline was Monday February 15.
  63. Ruling parties VVD & PvdA  rejected the motion of Louis Bontes demanding the government to file a complaint at ICAO against Russia and Ukraine for not handing over radar recordings. The only parties in favour of the motion were PVV, VNL, D66 and CDA. Motion here.
  64. At the third plenary debate on MH17 in Dutch Parliament, secretary of state Dijksma told that DSB and representatives of Dutch State during an ICAO meeting did not mention the fact that Russian Federation destroyed radar data. This is strange as DSB clearly stated in final report that Russia Federation did not comply to ICAO Annex 11 by not archiving radar data.At March 1 2016 there is a plenary debate in Dutch parliament. Member Bontes asks PM Rutte a couple of questions. Rutte does not answer and gets angry. He denies Dutch government hides information. He states: you can throw a hand of mud in clear water and then claim it is dirty.
    De heer Bontes (Groep Bontes/Van Klaveren):Maar ik heb toch, denk ik, een redelijk goede vraag. Waarom is dan bijvoorbeeld zo’n Kievbriefing geheimgehouden? Waarom zijn passages zwartgelakt? Waarom zijn verslagen van interviews niet vrijgegeven?Minister Rutte:
    Ach! Hou toch op. Onzin!De heer Bontes (Groep Bontes/Van Klaveren):
    De minister-president kan boos worden wat hij wil, maar het feit blijft dat bij de nabestaanden en bij een deel van het Nederlandse volk de indruk bestaat dat dit allemaal gewoon in een soort doofpot gestopt wordt.Minister Rutte:
    Je kunt honderd keer hier … De heer Zijlstra zei een keer heel mooi in een debat: je kunt in schoon water een hand modder gooien en vervolgens zeggen dat het water troebel is. Dat is de heer Bontes hier aan het doen. Ik ga daar verder niet op in.

     

  65. At March 8 PvdA ,VVD , D66, GL, SGP en Houwers en Van Vliet rejected the vote of Omtzigt which demands Dutch government to contact US,Russia to find out what radar data is available
    Motie-omtzigt-march-8
  66. At February 15, 2016 RTL issued a WOB-request. RTL requested documents which were exchanged during the investigation of the University of Twente into the way the Dutch government performed. At March 11 the Dutch State replied stating the State would require more time. At the latest April 12 the Dutch State would decide if documents were released. RTL never received a letter. At May 11 2016 send a letter indicating no response was received from Dutch State. At May 31 RTL send a letter of ‘ingebreke stelling’ to the Dutch State. In October 2017 PM Rutte decided to appeal at the Raad van State.
  67. At the Verantwoordingsdebat at May 26 2016 Louis Bontes and Pieter Omtzigt asked questions on MH17 to Mark Rutte. One of the questions of Omtzigt is why the Dutch government did not complain at ICAO about the missing radar recordings of Russia. Rutte responded saying he does not want to interfer in the prosecutor investigation. Omtizgt replied saying the Netherlands has the right to obtain radar recordings in the DSB investigation. ICAO confirmed an objection can be made. Rutte states an objection is not possible and does not want to answer. Complete video of debate here.
  68. At June 2 Pieter Omtzigt requests the Dutch government for a debate and a letter to inform the Dutch Parliament about the progress of MH17 investigation,  cooperation between states part of JIT and the possibilities for prosecution. The fact that Dutch parliament has to request this kind of updates is telling. Transcript of the request for debate and letter here.
  69. At June 13 2016 RTL Nieuws still had no reply from Ministerie van Algemene Zaken lead by Prime Minister Rutte on a letter dated May 31. The letter notifies Rutte about the repeated non-response of the government to Freedom of information act request reminders. (WOB). The RTL letter can be seen here.
    At July 28 RTL received a response. The letter stated an answer to the WOB will be given at October 27 2016 at the latest. (Tweet Pieter Klein)
  70. At June 22 the Dutch state finally responded to the WOB request of RTL. RTL already in February requested the minutes of meeting of the Dutch Ministerraad as well as the report of interview between Twenthe University and the Dutch PM and minsters.
    The Dutch state refuses to release these documents. They state that friendly states provided the Dutch with information. Of this confidential information was made public, friendly states would no longer provide information. The interviews by Twenthe University were stringly confidential and an ageeements was made to never make the content of the interview public.
    Pieter Klein of RTL Nieuws sent some tweets showing photographs of the letter here.At July 19 2016 RTL Nederland send another letter to the Ministry of Algemene Zaken lead by PM Rutte. The letter is an objection to the June 22 response (point 69) of the Ministry on the WOB request issued in February 2016 (see point 65). The Tweet containing parts of the letter is here.
  71. At July 7 the JIT made public that it requested Russia to hand over the raw primary radar data. Earlier in 2016 the Dutch minister of Justice van der Steur informed the Parliament that the OM did not require these radarrecordings. Member of Parliament Pieter Omtzigt today again asked Kamervragen. Here they are.
  72. At July 8 MP Rutte told the press at a NATO meeting that he will NOT ask President Poroshenko to hand over radarimages. This because the Dutch government should not leave fingerprints on the JIT investigation (source)
  73. At July 13 2016 the lawyer of the Dutch State sent a letter to the Utrecht court requesting a postpone of the deadline to adjust censored documents. The judge ordered Dutch state to correct documents which were censored for incorrect reasons at the latest on  July 29. The lawyer of Dutch State now requests to postpone to August 26. The reason provided in the letter is the holiday of the minister and holidays of other people. The letter can be read here.
    The verdict in this court case has been postponed several times. And now again Dutch State wants to postpone. Read all about this here.
    The start of all this was a WOB-requested dated October 2014. Read about all the delays of the Dutch government in this post.
  74. At August 8 2016 10 questions asked by Member of Parliament Pieter Omtzigt to Prime Minister Rutte and minister of Justice and Safety about MH17 radar recordings are still not answered. The questions were asked at July 11. Omtzigt requested to respond within two weeks. A response of three weeks is normal. It as now been four weeks ago the questions were asked. Update: six weeks after the answers were finally provided.
  75. At Friday August 26, at 17:30 , 6 and a half hours before the deadline by Dutch court expired, the Dutch Ministry of Justice handed over requested documents to the lawyer and court. If the Dutch government was dedicated to solve MH17 as soon as possible, it would not frustrate the WOB request so much. The Ministry was given many weeks to release documents. Yet it waited till the last day!!
  76. Despite promises by the Dutch government in August 2016 the government still did not start with a national archive MH17. The purpose of the archive is transparency. In the future documents in the archive can shed a light on why the government made decisions. Also the secret documents on MH17 will be archived. A mailbox of the assistent of Minister Opstelten could not be restored. (GeenStijl)
  77. At September 14 Minister van der Steur sent a letter to the Parliament informing he cannot answer the questions of Pieter Omtzigt about a national archive (see point 75) within the common timeframe of about 3 weeks.
  78. In a debate in the Tweede Kamer on OCtober 12 PM Rutte said he will not attend the second plenair debate on MH17 at October 26. The reason why he will not attend is unknown. A transcript of the debate here. VVD and PvdA requested the debate but did not demand the presence of Rutte.
  79. At September 26 Member of Parliament Pieter Omtzigt asked questions to Minister Van der Steur about radar recordings. Normally answers are given within three weeks. However at October 17 the answers were not received.
  80. Russian Federation orded military to deliver and operate a BUK TELAR. State of Ukraine failed to close the airspace. Despite this the Dutch government will only consider prosecution of both states at ECHR when the criminal investigation of acts by individuals has ended. (source)
  81. Rutte denied that Ukraine had made a second link between the association treaty and MH17. (source)
  82. Dutch State again refuses to release documents (source)
  83. Around October 28 2016 RTL received a letter from MP Rutte. The letter says Rutte will not make public minutes of meetings of Minsterraad. Also interview done by Twente University are not made public. The letter was a response to the objection of RTL to an earlier decision not to make public documents. The initial request was dated February 15, 2016 with kenmerk 3877281
  84. Questions asked by Pieter Omtzigt about JIT agreement, radar recordings, deleted emails MH17 archive and more were not answered by Dutch government in the usual three weeks.
  85. The Dutch court Midden Holland ordered Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security to make public certain MH17 documents. The deadline is April 7. At April 7 the Ministry announced it would appeal and go to the Netherlands highest court Raad van State. More info here.
    This is contrary to the words of Mark Rutte, PM, who said “de onderste steen zal boven komen”
  86. Dutch court ordered PM Rutte to better motivate on what arguments he does not want to make public all text of an interview report with University Twente. However PM Rutte refuses to better motivate why he does not want to make public the whole document. (more info)
  87. At May 8 the usual period of three weeks for the Dutch government to answer questions passed without answering questions by Pieter Omtzigt. These are the questions.
  88. At May 10 finally the government releases the answers. However the government does not tell anything new. All information provided in the answers were known many months ago. Some of the questions are not answered at all.
  89. Dutch government in anwers to Dutch parliament denies there is a non-disclosure agreement part of JIT agreement. However Australian government confirmed such a non-disclosure agreement.
  90. At September 4, 2017, 5 weeks after questions were asked, two weeks later than normally answers are provided. the Dutch government finally answers questions on what kind of information Dutch authorities had about safety over Eastern Ukraine airspace. The answers are here.  Many documents remain a secret. For example agreement made between dutch intelligence agencies and Dutch airlines, made in 2013, about exchange of information in airspace risks, is secret. The agreements will be made available but strictly confidential to Dutch Parliament. Confidential means Members of Parliament can read the document but cannot made the content public.
  91. Dutch government in all cases delays answering questions asked in debates. Normaly response is in two weeks. Pieter Omtzigt sent a letter at September 28 to request ministers Blok and Koenders to respond within 7 days.
  92. At October 3, 2017 Dutch minister Blok of Security and Justice released a verzamelbrief and the 1.0 version of the police evaluation to the Dutch Parliament. He promised to hand it over before October 1. It was a remarkable timing as at October 3 a very important plenary debate was held in the Tweede Kamer about the Minister of Defense.
    Member of Parliament Sjoerdsma on Twitter responded by writing : ” This is not only unfair but also inappropriate”
  93. In the letter released at October 3, Minister Blok refuses to release documents which indicate what kind of information authorities had on safety for aircraft. Dutch newspaper AD reports here. 
  94. At October 18 2017 PM Rutte appealed to a higher court so he did not have to publish the minutes of meetings of an interview by Twente University. RTL Nieuws started a WOB prcedure. The case is now handled at the Raad van State. It will take several months before a judgement is done. (source)
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

20 Comments on Long list of indications showing the Dutch are not very keen in finding MH17 truth

  1. good piece. list will probably contain 50 items in a few months.

  2. Bernie Steinberger // April 8, 2015 at 10:25 pm // Reply

    What happened to the black boxes and the information they contained?

    • The black boxes were recovered and handed over after a long procedure by the separatists. After threatening to bring them to Moscow.
      The boxes were analyzed in the UK. Parts of the Flight Data Recorder were published in the preliminary report of the DSB.
      Stop with trolling about the black boxes please. Wait till the final report has been published.

      • When did they threaten to send the black boxes to Moscow? Could you provide a link, please? Thanks.

      • @admin,
        Do I always have to ask the same question more than once?

        Please, answer: when did the rebels threaten to send the black boxes to Moscow? And give me some links on this matter, please. 10x.

        • Mrs V, a few places from Western media that can give you guidance to where the allegations can be found are at –

          http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/22/mh17-black-boxes-handed-over-pro-russia-rebels

          States – Ukraine’s security services had previously released recordings of what it said were rebel leaders coordinating a ground search for the black boxes and insisting that they not be given to international leaders, as Moscow wanted to get them first. The rebels denied that the recordings were genuine.

          Another link or two with the recordings –

          http://news.sky.com/story/1304439/russia-told-rebels-to-hide-mh17s-black-boxes

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/07/20/watch-ukraines-pro-russian-rebels-discuss-mh17s-black-box-in-secret-recording/

          Fare thee well

        • Dear Kim: you contribution to various websites have not been more than just propaganda. You are ill informed, always asking for evidence while if you are serious you could have done some investigation yourself!
          This website is not a place for Kremlin trolls. I appreciate all opinions as long as there is not a smell of propaganda around it and statements are backed by URLs.

          To answer your question:
          http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10975264/Problems-loom-for-investigators-as-Flight-MH17-black-box-may-be-in-Moscow.html

          The news service Interfax reported that rebel Russian separatist forces in Ukraine had already found the black box and agreed to give it to a Russian-run regional air safety authority.
          Andrei Purgin, the self-styled deputy prime minister of the separatist Donetsk People’s Republic, told Interfax: “Of course, we most likely will give them (the recorders) to the Interstate Aviation Committee, to Moscow.
          High-level experts, who will be able to determine exactly the reason of the catastrophe, work there

          Now, I understand the Interfax agency is of Ukraine so it could be just propaganda.
          However, the separatists used a complex protocol to hand over the black boxes. It did not looked like how it should have been. I am sure Malaysia had to negotiate quite a bit to get those boxes.

          • I am ill-informed?! You say that your ‘proof’ “could be just propaganda”, but call ME ill-informed? I’ve been doing my own research/investigation since Day 1, and never trusted any information that could be just propaganda. “Said to be”, “allegedly”, “can possibly”, “presumably”, “is believed”, … – these prove NOTHING. And calling anyone who reasonably disagrees with you “a troll” doesn’t make your claims better-grounded.

            As for PM Najib Razak, he has never complained about his telephone conversation with Borodai. Never defined it as “negotiations”, and never defined the reached agreement as “deal” – here’s his official statement: https://www.facebook.com/najibrazak/posts/10152172545680952
            All the unproved complaints originate from Western and Ukrainian authorities; both have lied on many other occasions. Razak has never complained, but he could have, if this was the case. I don’t think you know better than him how “difficult” the “negotiations” were, sorry.
            And how difficult could these telephone “negotiations” be, since Razak talked to Borodai only a couple of hours before Borodai handed over the black boxes on July 21? Neither very difficult, nor very long.

          • Yes, you are ill-informed.
            If you watch the interview Razak gave AFTER the bodies/black boxes were handed over you can hear him say negotiations.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE1akL4IKS4
            At minute 3:50

  3. No. 20: “At July 16 a plenary debat was held.” – The date must be wrong! March 16?

  4. The photo in the article shows inside hole of armour percing bullets.
    Compare with: http://mm.salon24.pl/ko/kp/kokpit1aa-jpg-fc6714e3ab971d2e54,2,0.jpg

    • Nice try! But this is not holes in really, this is damage to frontal armor plate of German tank Panther from WW2 with thickness 65-85 mm under angle 55 degree which give equal armor 139-187 mm. USA tested allied 76 mm/17 pdr. guns and got only a few penetration. All rounds which cannot penetrate armor left a big hole as result of moving shell on surface (ricochet or destroying shell’s body) instead of depth.
      And you cannot compare holes from AP shells in ARMOR 65-85 mm with holes in NO-ARMORED plane skin with thickness of a few mm.

  5. admin, as far as number 32, I encourage you to do a search for May 2, 2015 6 7 coffins and find out how many ‘western’ media sites covered it.
    Interestingly enough, some say six, but most say seven.

    Why should the West care about what some occupying organized criminal pissant says in a news conference a few days after the bodies parts and coffins have already flown out of Ukraine?

    Obviously you did not care to mention he was a DNR ministry official that the world does not recognize as holding any power or validity.
    You just mentioned he was an Emergency official, and the way you wrote that part it sounds like he is a Dutch official that no one in the West paid any attention to.

    That vagueness makes you part of the problem, not the cure and opens up propaganda sources to use your statements falsely.
    None of us want that.

    I do not make that critique lightly, but I do not do it out of anger or attempt to discredit you.
    I think you are doing a great job and your site is worthy of high praise.

    7 bodies would be somewhere around 4200 bones, ie decomposed body parts.
    The number could be close to correct, but it probably isn’t.

    Also, my Dutch is not very good to be trusted, but 2 attempts at translation by different methods showed that the statement at AD was interpreted to be – 7 coffins containing thousands of body parts.
    Not – as well as, or in addition.

    You are thorough on much of your analysis and I cannot check them all but most of your points stand true, but that one jumped out at me needing some clarity given to your statements.

    I cannot attest to what Dutch Government says versus the DSB, and why they should have much control there.
    However I can see a reason for governments to deny parts of the DSB evidence procedure not to be released to the public while a criminal investigation is going.
    IF DSB wants to release something just pertaining to their ‘mission’, they can but the various governments have a right to declare what is outside of that mission.
    Sure the governments and DSB may butt heads on some issues, but it is better to hold off public releases until various reports are issued and the investigative governments have a say on what is released.

    There is a reason for that.
    Protecting witnesses, protecting future evidence collection, civility to families of passengers and crew of MH17, and other procedures that are followed in investigations.

    Fare thee well

  6. Jomanda Besneden-Kabeljouw // February 17, 2016 at 3:19 am // Reply

    The Dutch government has repeatedly refused to obtain radar images. One can only speculate that these point to the involvement of Kiev. If comes to light that MH17 was downed not by the Russians but by the Ukrainians, there will be a huge public outcry. That will be the end of the association treaty between the EU and Ukraine. The EU will not let that happen; the treaty is more important than the truth or the lives of 200 people.

  7. The dutch gouverment is a joke, lead by a history student who lives until the last year by his mother.
    From the first moment there isn’t any kind of international leadership shown to the people who diserve it.
    This case is transformed to a soap, without respect for victims or the Dutch people.

    The political games rely on the psychological theory that everybody is stupid.
    For example US declares at day two: we know everything our satellites where right there.
    A few days after it, they told the people that they can find the truth on social media.
    Et voila there was hopeless and useless Elliot Higgins, with his one vision one truth.
    That guy is a joke.

    The victims will be used for geopolitical games for money (EU) and cold war schizo US.
    I do appreciate people who are searching for the truth, around here or other websites in a lot of different country’s.
    It is amazing to see the support for a disaster in another country.

    Because around here any critical question is blocked with the words Kremlin troll nazi or friend of Russia!

    I dont have any connection to Russia or the US, but I do like the truth.
    We ow it to the victims.

    Technically this kind of info is very interesting.

    But ask yourself from the first moment:

    Who needs a disaster like this, and you’ll know the answer.

1 Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Abschuss des Fluges MH-17 über der Ost-Ukraine | Gebetsinfos

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*