Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov August 5 interview on MH17

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov gave an interview to Channel News Asia, Kuala Lumpur, August 5, 2015.

The video in english can be seen here. Some more details on the interview here.

Some of the statements of Lavrov made in this and other interviews at August 5 are:

  • The participants in the investigation did not contact the Russian corporation Almaz-Antey, the manufacturer of the Buk surface-to-air missile system, which, as Kiev and some Western countries claim, was used to down the plane (RbtH)
  • The investigation is not independent, not comprehensive and not truly international. (Russia Today)
  • Members of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) for the MH17 crash, especially from Western countries, “seem to be quite, quite prejudiced,” (Russia behind the headlines)
  • Malaysia is the only “sincerely interested” country, while other Western nations have “political motivations”. (ChannelNewsAsia)
  • Russia is the only country that provided the data from its radars for investigation, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov notes (Tass)
  • The Russian participants are not receiving all information, which has been distributed among some other participants in this group (RbtH)
  • most of the demands of UN Resolution 2166 were ignored by the countries who joined the Joint Investigation Group (source)
  • Malaysia was not member of the JIT for 5 months
  • Resolution 2166 required to submit recommendations to the UN how the UN can facilitate and support the investigation.Such recommendations were not submitted to the Security Council

Lavrov did some more statements which will be discussed in a later blogpost.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

48 Comments on Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov August 5 interview on MH17

  1. I highlight these statements from Mr. Lavrov. Seems the official investigation is not doing a good job.

    “The Americans said that they did have images from the satellite, but never submitted them, never made them public. The same is true for the Ukrainians, who were asked to provide recordings of the air controllers and between the planes up in the air in the area of incident.”

    “The first thing professional investigators do is to conduct chemical analysis of those particles. With modern technologies it is possible to immediately identify what the metal is and what factory in what country produced this particular thing.”

    “But still, the chief of the criminal investigation team said that he didn’t exclude that the plane might have been hit by an air-to-air missile, not just by surface-to-air missile.Our experts have been looking into both options, and they believe that both of them must be investigated.”

    • I could write a lengthy post about the statements of Mr. Lavrov. If someone states something, it does not mean this is true. I guess no discussion about this. There is something like propaganda. Some of the statements of Lavrov are simply not true. This reduces the credibility of the other statements.

      Lavrov does not tell the truth about submission of radar data. The preliminary report of DSB clearly states both Russia and Ukraine provided radar data.
      Also the report does show a transcript of air traffic control and MH17 communications.

      What is the proof the JIT/prosecutor did not conduct chemical analysis of the shrapnel? Russia is not in a position to have knowledge of the criminal investigation.

      A lot of the statements are lies. Hard to 100% confirm at this stage. We can use common sense.
      One of the reasons I created this website is to have an archive for many years to come.
      In a couple of years we might know the complete truth.

      The chief of the criminal investigation cannot tell what they know. Simply because in each and every criminal case the prosecutor will keep his info secret till the court case.

      • Mr Lavrov didn´t lie. The preliminary report only showed a partial transcript of the recordings. That´s not enough, that´s not transparent. I hope in the final report the full audio file from the black boxes and the ATC is made available, but maybe that´s asking too much. Same for the american satellite images. I still remember Kerry´s statements “We saw the take-off. We saw the trajectory, we saw the hit. We saw this aeroplane disappear from the radar screens. So there is really no mystery about where it came from and where these weapons have come from.” If there is no mystery and Russia is the USA number 1 geopolitical enemy that needs to be vilified all the time I can´t find a good reason why the intelligence that supposedly blames Russia beyond doubt is not made public other than Kerry is lying again as he did in the Ghouta chemical attacks.
        Russia on the other hand provided Radar Data from Rostov and some satellite image of its own showing buks in action on the day of the shooting down. We know that there were fighter jets in the vicinity of mh17 ( russian data + witnesses) Some here

        and Kiev still denies to deploy any military planes in the skies on the 17th July 2014? Pure propaganda.

        It was Westerbeke himself who said that at this moment the use of an air to air missile can not be excluded.
        “Ja, der Einsatz einer Luft-Luft-Rakete kann zu diesem Zeitpunkt nicht zu hundert Prozent ausgeschlossen werden.”

        As Mr Lavrov said, a chemical analysis would say what kind of missile hit the plane, but again, maybe that´s too much work and too many questions for the official investigation to handle.

        I look forward to see what is the evidence presented in the final report.

        • Even in a ‘normal’ aviation accident it can take a year before the full CVR and ATc transcript is made public. If it is made public because sometimes it is not.
          So we have to wait till October and see what the report says.
          Lavrov is just doing one thing: discredit the DSB report because he does not like the content (he knows what the public knows in October)

          One of the reasons the US could no release the 100% proof Russia is involved is the possible reaction of Putin. A cat in danger makes stranges moves is a Dutch saying.
          I think it is diplomacy and strategy to not release intel in the public.

          We know the sat pics of Russia. They removed a unserviceable BUK using Photoshop suggesting it was used by Ukraine. Cheap tricks. Thanks of Google and numberous photos showing the same BUK was broken.

          The propaganda of Kremlin is easily consumed by Russian public because most of the news is conntrolled by Putin.

        • Oh, yes there could be SU-25 in the air near Torez. Remember there was a war going on and separatists backed by Russia started a war. Ukraine is fully in its right to selfdefense. I just do not believe those SU’s shot down MH17.

          • Unless the offcial investigation has something to hide there is no reason why the full audio of CVR and ATC communications should´t be made public.

            The DSB report is nothing but a cover up. Where in the world one of the suspects has veto power over the results of the investigation? Is like asking O.J.Simpson to be the judge of his own trial.

            Your argument why USA doesn´t release the intel is puzzling as well. Do you really believe Putin can get away with anything? The USA intel just doesn´t show what it claims. In fact sources within the CIA say that the american satellite images show ukrainian soldiers in control of a buk system on the day of the shooting down.

            As far as I know the russian sat pics havent been proved as fakes.Do you have any serious study to share or do I have to debunk for you the bellincat fantasies?

            And by the way, there were fighter jets near mh17 so I am afraid the ukrainians lied again.

            And Russia did not start any war. There was a coup d´etat in Kiev. Why on earth would Crimea and Donbass be under fascist law if they dont want to?

          • Igor, oh Igor, let me count the ways.
            Unless the offcial investigation has something to hide there is no reason why the full audio of CVR and ATC communications should´t be made public.
            – It will be at the criminal and civil trial. There is no reason to present it now when there is a chance to prevent a global nuke war.

            The DSB report is nothing but a cover up. Where in the world one of the suspects has veto power over the results of the investigation? Is like asking O.J.Simpson to be the judge of his own trial.
            – UA has rights about making certain evidence public or not, but not the results of the investigations.

            In fact sources within the CIA say that the american satellite images show ukrainian soldiers in control of a buk system on the day of the shooting down.
            -quoting a Robert Parry piece of my sources (a clerk in the mail room with his own opinion) inside the CIA tell me that this person said that this person said, that a bunch of Ukrainian soldiers were standing around a BUK at an airbase they control getting drunk is just hogwash and you know it from the Kremlin paid media spokesperson.

            As far as I know the russian sat pics havent been proved as fakes.Do you have any serious study to share or do I have to debunk for you the bellincat fantasies?
            -Sorry but the still standing grove of trees that was contracted out to be removed four weeks prior and completed two weeks prior prove you wrong, and the fact they are still standing in the Russian MoD images makes them clear fakes.

            And by the way, there were fighter jets near mh17 so I am afraid the ukrainians lied again.
            A few witnesses trying to get on TV and a radar image of a tail section of the plane flying away give you this impression?

            And Russia did not start any war. There was a coup d´etat in Kiev. Why on earth would Crimea and Donbass be under fascist law if they dont want to?
            – Most of the Crimea and Donbas people were just happy with getting rid of yanukothief.
            They were just as tired of the Moscow mafia ruining Ukraine as anyone else.
            The occupiers from Russia have made it all the more obvious that Russia has to be kicked out to those that live there with their Kremlin directives.
            Go cry in your little dacha yanukothief, you only have a death sentence awaiting you after your trial in Ukraine.

            Fare thee well

          • Admin:

            “separatists backed by Russia started a war”

            Normally, we speak of the invaders of a place as starting a war. Who did the rebels in Donbass invade? Themselves and their own homes?

            “Ukraine is fully in its right to selfdefense.”

            Do you believe Spain had a right to self-defense during the Dutch revolt?

            Do you believe in the natural right to self-determination?

            Did Ukraine have some sort of right to secede from the Soviet Union, but Donbass does not have such a right to secede from Ukraine? How does that work exactly in logic? What makes Ukraine special and having such rights but not Donbass? Or Crimea?

            Where is the captive nation of Cossackia, exactly?


            Do the Cossacks also enjoy “the right of people to choose their leaders” as proclaimed by Barack Obama in 2011?

            If the US says in the 2011 Captive Nations week proclaimation: “We will continue to oppose the use of violence and repression”, does that include violence and repression against the people in Donbass?

            If the US says they are in solidarity with: “freedom seeking people everywhere whose future reflects our greatest hope for peace” does that include people in Donbass who have expressed a will to have their own freedom and self-government?

            Do people in Donbass get to walk also on “the road to self-determination” as proclaimed in the 2014 Captive Nations Week?

            Or are the people in Donbass perhaps demonic as claimed by Yatseniuk: “invaders and … subhumans” who deserve only “wiping out” to clean Ukraine “from the evil” and so without natural rights that everyone else enjoys?

          • Please keep on topic. Last warning before I remove comments with no direct connection on MH17!

          • I just deleted a comment of user They Knew about the service ceiling of the SU-25. Not again a discussion about who edited what at Wikipedia please.
            If you do not like comments being deleted: find another place for conspiracy.

          • Antidyatel // August 10, 2015 at 2:03 pm //

            I agree. We should just fix it as fact that SU-25 M1 FROGFOOT (Ukrainian modification) is perfectly capable of operating at 10 km altitude.
            It doesn’t mean that SU-25 is responsible for MH17. But fact is the fact. Nothing to argue about.

          • Lets keep it at your conclusion. Now, while a certain version of SU-25 can operate at 10km, the ability to shot down an airliner flying faster is a different discussion.
            And no, we are not going to discuss it here.

          • Any Su-25 can reach 10’000m, as long as you provide oxygen supply to the pilot. Original prototype called T-8 reached 14’600m during flight tests in the 1970’s.

            However, an aircraft type that definitely cannot reach 10’000m and fly there with 900 km/h is the An-26. Any suggestion that MH17 was mistaken for that type of plane proves a lack of information available to the perpetrator.

          • I agree with you that there is strong evidence that Ukrainian Su-25 were operating in the region, and that these probably did not shoot down MH17. What I do suspect is that they were deliberetly flying in civilian air traffic corridors, using the airliners above as human shields, and that is why Kiev denies their jets were flying that day and does not disclose activities of its aircraft and anti-aircraft systems.

            Btw the war did not start with “Separatists” sending tanks to Kiev to quash unruly civilians there, quite the opposite.

        • Your link is very interesting. The monocle witness tells how Boeing broke up into two groups of parts.
          One group performed tail slide toward Hrabowe
          and the other flew to Pietropavlivka.
          It’s completely congruent with my theory of multiple attack on Boeing and appearance of debris field :
          The remains are divided into the two groups : aft parts on the south of Habrove, and forward parts near the Petropavlivka. There is almost nothing between.
          This can easily be explained, if we assume that the plane was moving from east to north-west and there was an inside explosion in the middle part of the fuselage causing the particles to separate into two groups.
          It’s completely congruent with my theory of multiple attack on Boeing.

          • How does your multiple attack on the Boeing theory match with this image:
            Forward section came to rest left of the aircraft’s location after the FDR suddenly stopped the recording. To rest in that position the forward movement of the section must have stopped almost immediately and directed to the left. How do you get this picture with a “multiple attack”?
            The released FDR data together with the last position of a record in conjunction with the position of the forward section cannot be caused by arms small as an A2A missile or guns.

          • I agree the bird, I think to do that damage of cutting off the front of the plane you would have to do it all at the same exact time from multiple weapons, and at least 6 aircraft.
            The radars did not show ANY aircraft approaching MH17 at altitude to attack it before it was hit.

            Also, the timing is next to impossible to complete that and not have the pilots report in or much of the rest of the aircraft showing lots of little holes from aircraft cannons.
            You cannot hold a machine gun firing at a target at 3 to 5 km range and not hit the rest of the plane or only hit a small portion of it.
            An multiple attack hypothesis is impossible.
            Just as an attack by an aircraft cannon being used and it not showing up on the ENTIRE plane.
            SAM is the only explanation, in my opinion.

            Fare thee well

          • A multiple attack is complete nonsense and discussion about this does not belong on this website.
            All futher comments on this will be deleted.

          • Sorry “thebrid” Your link doesn’t work:
            Ihave : Forbidden
            You don’t have permission to access /img/malaysia_b772_9m_mrd_donetsk_140717_18.jpg on this server..
            Could you sent me another link?

  2. To Bahgdad BOB, I say –
    AA has full right to comment and send information.
    A little poor UA witness can get info and evidence to the investigators, so why couldn’t they?
    Russia probably invited them to comment on the report once they received it and there statements would be part of the comments.

    Seems to me like all relevant parties are part of the investigation and can input and are part of the review process. Independence of investigators can be verified as Russia sent in its own.
    Once investigators gain something that says Russia or terrorists did it, they could be said to be less Independent, wouldn’t you be?

    Malaysia had a plane and citizens murdered and destroyed and they had the other unexplained investigation. Of course they are hopeful because this looks like one that might be solved.

    Russia is only country that data provided radar? With them being a suspect, they are not going to have full access of what evidence was provided or know who provided what.

    Last point of Bob, your a suspect, you do not get full access to the info or evidence right now, you will get that at the Tribunal.
    You do not get full access so you can corrupt it by buying off witnesses, murder them, or destroy additional evidence that the investigators of JIT might be searching for.

    Fare thee well

  3. Boggled, tribunal had no relationship to trial or investigation. What you are proposing is inquisition. The guilty party was decided without any investigation. The later was just used as a cover story. Why in your Logic Ukraine was included into investigation team if they are also a suspect. I know your hypocritical answer though. How exactly do you imagine Russia intimidating the main self-proclaimed main witness – USA?

    • “The guilty party was decided without any investigation. ”

      The guilty party was declared in Kiev within 2 hours while the wreckage still smoked and no one had yet looked at anything.

      • Ever heard of US satellites who are able to spot a very small heat source. I think it is reasonable to believe US monitored the area closely.
        I also think it is very likey the US intel knew the trajectory of the missile.

        Not showing the evidence (yet) in public does not mean it did not happen.

  4. Antidyatel, do you honestly believe the Pentagon and DOD that have budgets that make Russia’s look like a dwarf’s did not see the image in skies that they were watching?

    Guilt was made in the USA leaderships eyes at that point.
    They are paid to make those decisions from that moment.
    They are holding back for the rest of the evidence to catch up and giving Russia a chance to get out on a technicality.
    This is an investigation and they are going to follow procedure.

    Think about what they saw when they killed Bin Laden.
    And that was just what they released to the public.
    Imagine what was seen in the WH or the DOD.
    Just think about that.

    They are giving vova his chances to save Russia from utter destruction financially.
    Did you know they were one of the first ones talking about what happened at the Black Sea disaster of the TU-154?

    UA knows, they had situational awareness on the ground.
    USA knows, they had the skies covered.
    Russia knows, they were watching intently.

    And you know as well as I that with all the military equipment they had at the time flooding into Ukraine because they had destroyed border checkpoints, they sent in ground and lower elevation radar emplacements to identify all those planes that UA had going into Eastern Ukraine, Russia knows.
    They have spun lie after lie and been caught in them.
    Su25 is impossible.
    MANPADS is impossible.
    A mig29 is impossible.
    other SAMs are impossible.
    USA shared its intelligence with others and Germany was taking a lead in the events, they make political decisions with France and UK playing backup.
    They decided, give vova time, we do not need EU becoming a cinder or the world.
    Lets give them a chance.
    Russia knows and they are obfuscating.
    IF they wanted to prove terrorists and they did not do it in public they could have and would have.
    They have not.
    They have just produced lie after lie.

    I do not know what kind of end game the Kremlin elite are playing, but with MH17, they are being given every opportunity to come clean.
    Someone shot it done, and it was not some off the wall accident.
    You know as well as I do, USA and Europe would drop UA like a tinfoil hat and crash it if it was guilty, no reason to invest any more in propping them up.
    NO reason at all, and if it was questionable who shot down MH17 they would be stating that.
    They would prefer RF as an ally and a voice in that section of the world.
    They would prefer not to have sanctions that might cause recessions.
    They would prefer to have RF helping curb and control Iran and NK.
    They would drop UA just like they did Georgia if they could acheive that, without MH17 happening.
    Give baby vova his warm water port, give vova his Donetsk.
    MH17 and vova’s demands for more more more, is bringing the world to a breaking point and it is all of his own creation.

    The guilty party was decided by his actions and deeds and words.
    There was investigation in public opinion.
    The OFFICIAL investigation, which still has to play out and will be fairer, but give the prosecution enough to make its case so they can present it in court, fairer then any court in Russia, will ultimately put the guilt in the place it should be officially.

    You make this claim we are all Russaphobes, that is not it.
    And are you not being hypoicritical when all you say is UA did it, they did it with BUK, they did it with SU25, they did it with Israeli missile, they did it with cannon.

    YOU are using a phobia and fear.
    What we are using is evidence supported by a lot of facts and statement.
    I am not a Russaphobe, I am a Kremlinphobe and I will admit that.
    I am not attacking Russia unfairly, there is a LOT of evidence pointing that way in public.

    There is very LITTLE evidence to say UA did it, but you Ukrainaphobes venomously say it is UA and NOTHING to back it all up.
    Face it, your looking in the wrong direction.
    And the Kremlin sponsored media is leading you, the horses, to water.
    You are blind sheep, and the Kremlin is playing you that way.
    I am sorry you refuse to see what the rest of the world sees.
    If you had a VALID dog in the chase about UA being guilty, I would be right there with you.
    If you had a half a dog in the chase and the Kremlin media kept its mouth shut about blaming Ukraine with a new theory every week since the disaster, I would be holding the torch of lets wait for the trial to play out.

    IF the Kremlin sponsored media actually presented worthwhile facts, I would be right there with you.
    They have presented a continual litany of lies.
    MH17 was shot down, the criminal knows he did it.
    The global leadership he did it.
    Investigation is about trial.
    Court is about legal justice and giving the defendant a chance to plead his case and ask for clemency if admits guilt.

    This is international matter, and will be decided judicially, but right now, it is important for you to understand – there are people who have seen the missile launch, know where it came from, where it went, who owns it, saw the destruction, and saw that in the first 30 minutes of the disaster on both sides of the fence.
    Look at it this way, a cop sees a drug dealer sell drugs and arrests him.
    He knows he is guilty, but a trial is the West’s manner of justice.
    Cops release a video showing him peddling drugs.
    Public opinion is yup, he sold drugs.
    Sure he is guilty in public opinion but he will get his day in court.
    That is how it works in the west.
    And you know it.
    I write too much and admin will yell at me, but the simple thing is it is not inquisition.
    Russian actions and their exposure have caused Russia to look in a negative light.
    Sorry a rat hates being called a rat and would rather be called a squirrel.
    If he is going to get caught on video and other places lying, murdering, shooting down airplanes, he is going to be called a rat.

    Fare thee well

    • Let me use Rob’s tactics
      You said “Su25 is impossible.”
      What is your evidence for this. Provide your URL. I’m not in favour of Su25 theory but denial that Su25 can do it is one of those lies that Ukrs are easily exposed in

    • I love history and I know how not to trust faked stories used for propaganda. Unfortunately westerners are totally incapable to see it through. And it repeats itself throughout history. Just simple hint for you – there was an illiterate idolworshiping community with poor sense of hygiene that for centuries attacked a tolerant society with highly developed science and literature, and very strong sense of hygiene. Imagine which of those is vilified in propaganda “history” books.

  5. As far as the SU25, you must recognize all possible modifications Ukraine had at the time and what missiles were available to fit the plane.
    Yes, with billions of dollars, which Ukraine has now, but did not have then they could have almost modified SU25 to fly to moon.
    I will be honest in that.
    Bt why, when the money was needed other places and for Ukraine to survive bankruptcy and continue changes they had to end government corruption as quick as they could.
    Could they do it that quick, and do it with a plane SU25- maybe.
    Many doubts are there, why use that when have a few other planes to do it.
    Why is that one claimed by Russian MoD when they have choice of others?
    Radar signature? Communications? Witnesses or what?
    An IR missile could not have done it that fast.
    A small lightweight warhead missile could not have.
    Frogfoot is the wrong plane for the mission, if there were three of them, they would be noticed by the crew and other radar.
    If they fly up to 7km, they would be noticed by Rostov, and that what they need at minimum to fire 30mm cannons at the least.
    Rostov never saw a plane that high or admitted it.
    For that damage, it would take 10 planes firing at same time to produce that damage and cut off front of the plane.
    Pilots would have screamed bloody murder.
    It is just impossible scenario.
    BUK, which UA and USA have said from beginning is only possibility unless you begin talk about S200, S300, and ballistic missiles.
    NO evidence of this.
    Could I modify SU25 to fly to 10km with full armament?
    You would need full armament to destroy MH17 that quick.
    I might be able to do it with other plane and other missile, but not that plane without a billion dollars and 2 years to work on it.
    Easier buy other plane and missile and cannon.
    No plane or modification of plane UA had could do it.
    IT that simple.
    It is an idiot who believe this possible.
    I do not need a URL, to prove it.

    You say Westerners about propaganda.
    Please explain how your ancestors recognize propaganda?
    Russian Gulag? RUssian Holodomor?
    Russian Occupation of Baltics?
    Russian invasion of Finland?
    Russian invasion in Afghanistan?
    Support of communism in Korea, Cuba, Vietnam?
    Russian invasion on Georgia?
    Chechnya 1 and 2?
    Occupation of Crimea with those are not our little green men ‘snicker’?
    Our military are just in Ukraine on vacation, like Serbia, Afghanistan, Georgia?
    They on safari, just get lost.
    No, we not fire across border.
    No we not destroy border checkpoints.
    No Pskov dead not our soldiers from Ukraine, they die in training accident in Rostov.
    Sureeeeeeeeeee, you know propaganda and can interpret it correctly.

    Fare thee well.

    • Antidyatel // August 9, 2015 at 4:37 am // Reply

      I knew that you are planning to embarrass yourself, so I didn’t give the link directly.In 2012 Ukrs declared themselves that they upgraded their SU-25 TO SU-25 M1. That was the selling point at 8th International Aviation and Space Salon AVIASVIT-XXI,
      Let’s see if you are capable to admit that you are sokoto wrong

      • Antidyatel, The upgraded some, not all.
        Oh gosh, look at all the various modifications of the SU25 Ukraine has.

        And MiGs and SU24s and SU27 (2 restored and brought into service in January 2015)

        A list, but I imagine Ukraine military is holding what they actually have for them to know only, can be found at –

        The discussion originally from the Russian MoD that presented this was specifically the unmodified version a SU25.
        They did NOT say this could include modified versions.
        So pushing a modified version is against what the MoD said that they thought they could prove.
        And from what I have seen they have not made a statement for clarification to it could be a modified version.
        And this would be another good video for you to watch and think about.

        Sorry admin if you do not think it relevant to MH17, but since the depth of Kremlin propaganda is getting discussed, I thought it important to included this documentary as something valid and connected to the way the Kremlin political systems in power use media as a tool and the methods of aggression they use.

        Fare thee well

  6. admin said: So we have to wait till October and see what the report says.
    Lavrov is just doing one thing: discredit the DSB report because he does not like the content (he knows what the public knows in October)
    One of the reasons the US could no release the 100% proof Russia is involved is the possible reaction of Putin.

    I say: Admin, Either your English is very poor or you are saying you know that Russia is responsible.
    If you think Russia is responsible then what evidence says they are.
    If you don’t why are saying they are responsible? If you don’t think Russia is responsible then you can’t claim you know why Lavrov is saying what he is saying

    • Eric, I do not think the admin said Russia is responsible 100 percent, it was said to wait until October and we will have more clarity.
      It is a fact Lavrov knows what the DSB report says now.
      It is a fact he is trying to discredit the DSB investigation.
      One conclusion can be made with him making these statement before the the final report is released to the public.
      Lavrov does not like the results in an investigation that Russian people were included in.

      Does that mean Russia is responsible? Nope, just that Russia’s political leadership does not endorse or like the results.
      And they are going to work hard to discredit the investigation they supported in the beginning because they thought they could twist truth to make it a witch hunt on Ukraine.
      Sorry he is crying that investigators do not buy propaganda, they use the evidence and actual facts to do their investigation that they feel has credibility.
      Propaganda has little credibility, but sometimes you can gain little glimmers of truth in Kremlin sponsored media.
      That is what propaganda is, a bunch of lies, misinformation, distraction, and discrediting surrounding a pearl of actual truth put in their to make the rest of the argument appear halfway plausible.
      I did not see the admin saying Russia is responsible.
      Just that Lavrov does not like the results he read in the report.
      Quite trying to twist the truth Eric.
      Now your trying use half truths to discredit the admin of this site? hmm

      Fare thee well

  7. Even Ukrainian TV is showing a video of a Ukrainian woman who saw jets.

  8. Answering Boggled commentary (9 August, 12.11 am)

    Former CIA analist, Larry Johnson corroborated Parry´s story. USA has satellites images related to mh17 and they show ukrainian soldiers in control of a buk system on the day of the crash. That´s why the USA will never release the intel because it proves that Ukraine was behind the shooting down.

    I am looking right now at the russian sat pic taken at 11.32 on the 17th July 2014 to the ukrainian military base a-1428 and there are no patch of trees to be seen on the left hand side of the photo. If you say that “grove of trees that was contracted out to be removed four weeks prior and completed two weeks prior” then you must give details of the contract and support your claims with photo/video evidence. Can you do it?

    • The interesting part about Bellingcat’s sect is that they were happy to see that clouds are suspicious ofbthe 17 July photo. What they don’t like to notice that apart from BUK several other vehicles at the bottom. No evidence was presented that Buk and those service, I guess, were doctored out

    • Igor, maybe your looking at the wrong pic, here is one blown up and cut and cropped for you.
      A – is May 30 thanks to Digital GLobe
      B- is a section of the the MoD photo number three on the left hand side.
      C- is another of the MoD presented images and dated.
      D- is how Digital Globe took an image on July 2nd 2014.
      E – is Digital Globes image from July 17, 2014.

      You do not see a grove of trees there in the MoD image?
      Contract with lumber company was estimated, contracted for, completed, and done before July 2 21014. Contact Ukraine to see if you can get those records if you need further validation.
      I do not.
      As to the drinking soldiers near a BUK, it could have been from any time in 2013 2014 or earlier.
      He wants tyo make you think it is related to MH17, but he has no proof and provide no proof of it, just a statement a bunch of Ukrainian military were around a BUK getting drunk and some CIA guy saw the video or satellite images saying that.
      How could they identify them as UA? RF had taken over most UA military bases in Crimea and had access to UA uniforms, they were also captured in Eastern UA.
      How could he say for 100 percent certainty it was even UA troops?
      Patches, face recognition, something else?
      Parry is just spreading more Krmlin sponsored BS around.
      Parry putting that out there without proving the date or other items to back up that statement should not have made that statement.
      Parry is just a large scale Kremlin paid Trollop.

      Eric, yippee she saw jets sometime in 2014.
      I saw jets sometime in 2014, even some MiGs.
      Maybe she did maybe she didn’t.
      He claims can either be proven or disproved with other evidence which will be made available during the criminal trial.
      It is UA territory and UA Air Force has a right to protect and patrol the skies.
      If I remember right, that woman was proven to be in a city about 30km away when the incident happened.
      That could be wrong statement also, but it seems to suggest there is the possibility of her not being fully factual.

      And Igor, it is analyst, they way you spell it it looks pornographic.
      Please use the correct spelling if you would not mind.

      And last thing, it is going to be interesting when evidence is compiled and identified if they actually find the weapon parts of the BUK on the ground in Ukrainian controlled territory.
      You think they are not searching for it? Think again.

      Fare thee well

      • No details then for your “grove of trees that was contracted out to be removed ” story.

        You provided no name of the company, no name of person responsible, no date when it was done, no photocopy of the contract, no video/photo of works in progress. Your proof of what you say is your own statement. Well done 🙂

        Regarding Bellingcat report

        here are just 2 blatant lies from them

        page 15
        “Plow marks visible in the Digital Globe 17 July 2014 imagery are clearly absent from the Ministry of Defense image, and it is possible to confirm that the plow marks were visible before and after 17 July 2014 using Google Earth imagery.”

        I and anyone with 2 eyes can see the plow marks (both horizontal and vertical) in the russian sat pic too. I am really sorry for the poor eyesight of Higgins&Co. No wonder he uses glasses. And he is not the only one in the team :))

        page 11
        Bellingcat compares a Digital Globe image from 17-7-2014 with a russian satellite image from 17-7-2014 so it is claimed in red ink. It turns out the latter was taken on the 14th. There is a 3 day gap between the images. No wonder they don´t match. This is a new low from Bellingcat team, misdating russian satellite images.

        That segment in discussion is from a russian satellite image from the 14th July 2014 as can be seen here

        • Igor
          page 11 – You may be right, they mislabeled that in one of the reports they did.
          They did not make that mistake in this article or the rest of the report.
          Human errors happen, not blunders like the MoD caught in a lie.

          Regardless, the July 14th date is also incorrect.
          If you notice Google Earth’s and Digital Globe’s images on July 2nd, July 17th and July 21 are all identical.
          July 14 MoD image should have shown the same, it did not.
          It was identical to other pre July 2nd images.
          ie most likely FAKE.

          page 15 – It is obvious to me the farmer’s field is plowed under with the DG and GE images on July 2, 17, 21
          The May 30 GE and MoD image from July 14th match perfectly.
          Of course a farmer is going to have a similar track he uses for irrigation, fertilizing, and seeding his crops.
          The discussion is not about the tracks of the tractor, although they are firmly more noticeable in the July 2 GE image then they are in the MoD July 14th image.
          It is the fact the field has been turned over igor that is important.

          Maybe you need to revisit your analysis and look at those images again, because it is plain to me.
          Or get fitted for a new pair of glasses, then look. 🙂

          Fare thee well

          • Not surprised you dropped the “grove of trees that was contracted out to be removed ” story.

            Concerning Bellingcat fantasies – You can go around in circles as much as you like. The facts are they lied. Plow marks are visible in the russian satellite images.

            Maybe you can explain me this one too.
            The Digital Globe image they purchased there is a structure at the bottom with a blue roof top , but in the ukrainian presentation the same structure has an orange roof top.

            Why is that?

          • Antidyatel // August 10, 2015 at 11:36 pm //

            Igor said:
            “there is a structure at the bottom with a blue roof top , but in the ukrainian presentation the same structure has an orange roof top.” As one wise bear once said, when you go hunting for honey, the most important thing is that bees will not notice you. Hence you choose the colour of the balloon/roof based on tactical advantaged in each circumstances

          • Igor, oh igor.
            Nope, read about the batch of trees getting remove a long time ago.
            It is obvious the MoD date is incorrect.
            If you want further proof talk to the SBU about who they contracted with.
            It was stated the day of the MoD briefing.
            I know it, I believe it, I see the proof with the satellite images.
            IF you need more proof do it yourself.

            Tractor marks are in the MoD images, not the plow marks and not the missing vegetation of the farmer’s field.

            Read the BC for their explanation about the roof, it looks like Antidyatel did.
            Or elsewhere, it has been talked about over and over again.
            Call or write the SBU, they might give you the lowdown and more info then you could ask for about the trees at base A1428 in Avdiyivka and the contract to remove them or if they had their own troops remove them.
            IT is a stand of trees about 100 feet by 800 feet.
            Sorry I cannot remember if they were junk trees like poplar or pine but that is what I believe it was.
            I think it was maidantranlations I read it on, but it could have also been somewhere else like inforesist.
            Regardless you can see the inconsistency with your own eyes if your not blond or blind for that matter.

            Fare thee well

  9. Does Lavrov in fact know what the final DSB report says? Is the final report even written? Lavrov is well informed and no doubt aware of the contents of the draft of the final report. He is aware of the comments submitted by Russia’s representative. But in the absence of a leak he does not know what comments have been submitted by other countries. In the absence of a leak he does not know how the DSB is processing the comments and what changes, if any, the DSB is making to the draft of the final report. To say that he knows what will be released to the public is to say that he either can read minds or can see the future. Lavrov is an ordinary man with no supernatural powers.

    Consider what it means when Westerbeke said 7/17/15 that the criminal investigators can’t rule out an air-to-air missile attack. In the first place it should be obvious that a ground-to-air attack and an air-to-air attack are not mutually exclusive alternatives. Also, it should be remembered that the preliminary DSB report made no comment about fighters in the vicinity of MH17. The presence of one or more fighters was neither confirmed nor denied. If Westerbeke, who has access to radar data and satellite data that is not public, can’t rule out an air-to-air missile, then what does that mean? It means that one or more fighters were within the effective range of air-to-air missiles from MH17. If no fighter was present then they could rule out the scenario. If fighters were flying but not within range then they could rule out the scenario. But they can’t rule it out.

    Lavrov never supported the present investigation. From the beginning he supported the investigation that was demanded 7/21/14 by the UN Security Council that is known as Resolution 2166. He still adamantly supports Resolution 2166 and said so repeatedly in the interview. It is wrong to say that he initially supported the DSB investigation and then attempted to discredit it when it didn’t go his way. There is no need for him to discredit the DSB investigation. It speaks for itself. Lavrov has not flip-flopped. The investigation that Lavrov supports in specified at It incorporates by reference a statement by the Trilateral Contact Group that can be read at

    Regarding the intelligence that the US has not made public, Westerbeke has discounted that evidence. It is known that as of 10/27/14 the US had not released the requested satellite photos to the investigators.
    However, we have Victoria Nuland’s assurance that as of 12/17/14 the US has handed over all of its intelligence to the Dutch investigators. Why would Victoria Nuland say so if it was not true?
    Two days later Westerbeke made observations about this intelligence. He said regarding the perception that satellite images exist that show the launch of a Buk missile, its trajectory in flight and the explosion beside MH17 that there has been “a misunderstanding.” “There are no satellite in the sense of a movie when you see a rocket going into the air. There is no conclusive evidence in intelligence with the answer to all the questions.”
    Why would Westerbeke say that the US does not have conclusive evidence when in fact it does have conclusive evidence? Again, Nuland said that the US is holding back nothing from the Dutch investigators. The investigators have seen it all, and it is not conclusive. On 6/3/15 Marie Harf underscored what Victoria Nuland said. The US has already turned over everything it has that is relevant to the MH17 investigation.

    Lavrov in the interview is speaking from a position of strength. Time is on Russia’s side. Allegations that Russia did it or the rebels did it remain unsupported by hard evidence that is independently verifiable. The US does not have any game changing “secret” evidence about the downing of MH17.

    • I believe the final report will say a SAM downed mh17 and I´m expecting the investigation to put forward a scenario where the missile was fired from a rebel held position but with no hard evidence presented the results will end up being a possible theory and not a serious investigation.

      • Message from admin:

        I deleted this message from user They Knew. Last warning for him for submitting comments which are completely not relevant.

        Next time you get an IP-ban.

        User They Knew just got an IP-ban. I am normally very friendly and open to any opinion. Only not for tinfoil type of opinions.
        Additionally all other comments of this useraccount have been deleted.

  10. Almaz Antey report is very strange.
    Not explains such important characters on the wreck as:
    and the damage to the right engine.
    In my opinion it is a sign that the Russians came to terms with the West, that Boeing was knocked down with ground-air rocket. It’s just that, they present versions for its citizens blaming

  11. Answering Boggled commentary (August 11, 2015 at 2:42 am)

    You failed again to give a proper explanation about the discrepancy between Digital Globe image (blue roof) and Ukrainian presentation (orange roof).

    I´m sure you devoured the ukrainian propaganda so it shouldn´t be really that difficult to write a few words of your own with a basic explanation. Instead you use the same method as before, diverting the questions. You don´t answer them you avoid them, you say things like – it has been discussed before…

    Same with the lovely “grove of trees that was contracted out to be removed ” story. If you have a point to make about this it´s up to you to come up with the information, not the others. You failed miserably. You can´t give the name of the company you can´t say when the work was done, you don´t have a copy of the contract. You don´t have photo/video to support your claims. You have nothing to show.

    Also you still insist as Bellingcat does that there are no plow marks in the russian satellite image. Page 15

    That’s a lie and anyone with sharp vision can see them. Both the contour and the horizontal lines are visible for the acute eye. I´m sorry for your poor eyesight. There´s not much I can add here.

    While you ponder I have another little thing to say about Bellingcat fantasies in this report. Go to discrepancy 4. Can you see the trees on the top right corner that are missing in the russian image?
    They appear within 15 days and 4 days later they dissapear(according to DG and GE images). Strange place to let trees grow in the middle of what looks like a road. In the russian satellite image those silly trees are never there,obviously.

    I´m sure there must be a simple explanation for this strange occurance.
    Feel free to answer.

    • My guess is either Sich 2 or Sich 1 color camera filters are set not to pick up blue and shade it orange?
      And it was there satellite.
      I am not sure which of their satellites pick up color and which black and white or if each of them can do both.
      Possible reason would be to penetrate clouds better.
      It is possible they got these from another nation like Poland also.
      I am guessing so they can pick up infrared they may have adjusted the spectrum slightly.
      It could be the software of the imaging computer as well.
      It could a software glitch on the ground.
      It could be someone put red ink where the blue was supposed to be in the printer.
      Not sure of the exact reason why an orange roof came up, but those are my guesses.

      Maybe a person from another government who gave them the satellite image did it? I imagine UK and Germany have something.
      Wikmapia uses 2 or three.
      The government one may be different.
      Which is possible if what the MoD said was true that the Sich 1 and 2 were not overhead at the time or it was too cloudy or some such.

      As far as when the work was done? Sometime between June 19 and July 2 as can be seen plainly on page 13.
      If I remember right, it was completed June 30.
      I can plainly see in the images what is a lie and do not need further proof.
      Since you require it, go look for it.
      I informed you what was done, when it was done, where it was done.
      Your eyes show you it was done.
      I believe Donuglestroi arranged the contract, and there number is +38 066 7253338.
      Want more then that, call em.

      Regardless the Roof is blue as this BUK photograph clearly proves.

      It is also blue in page 3 of the BC report.
      And the three images of the BUKs on page 9.

      As far as the field goes, I insist it is not turned over in the Russian image and the wheat or corn removed from it.
      It is clearly removed in the DG and GE images, not in the MoD images.

      As far as the trees missing, you know the satellite changes viewpoint when it takes a picture and tries to avoid getting clouds in the picture don’t you?
      When perspective changes, and shadow changes because of different times of day the image is taken at, you can see artifacts like that change.

      Fare thee well

      • I know the roof is blue and you know the roof is blue.If you are guessing explanations why there is a discrepancy with the ukrainian image, you basically acknowledge something is wrong. This and other errors put in question the validity of the ukrainian images.

        As you know the russians had already debunked the ukrainian presentation

        As far as the field goes this might help you

        I´m sorry your infrared vision is so poor.

        Since no media picked up the Donuglestroi story (and they would be all over it) and I´m not aware of any evidence that supports it (other then your dodgy satellite image analysis)this is more of a superstition on your part. You are not sure yourself. You say- I believe…
        I will contact them anyway.

        About the strange trees that grow in the middle of the road I tell you what it looks like. They have been copied and inserted into the image. Those silly trees should never be there.They don´t even appear on the GE images. Sloppy work.

        • I can see the same vague ‘tractor trails’ in the May image.
          It is closer to that image then any of the others.

          Look closely at the main trail in the May part of the image, you can see the crossing routes.

          To me, the MoD image looks slightly before in time frame then when the May image was taken, less vegetation before the field was turned over but some vegetation was there so the main trail stands out more and is more defined.
          Probably in the 2-3 week time frame before.

          The trees are do to the fact the satellite lens was point at a different angle when it captured the image.
          As you well know, each time the satellite passes around the Earth, it changes slightly in orbit.
          They attempt to hold a precise orbit but do not always do so, partially due to the wobble of the Earth’s axis.
          The trees increased due to angle the lens was to the image it was capturing.
          That is all.

          Fare thee well

Leave a Reply to boggled Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.