take some time, this is complicated

Vladimir Suchan, Facebook, Jul 23/24 2014

A fuller version of what happened starts emerging piece by piece. First, as I pointed out earlier, in one his daily battle reports, Strelkov or his associates indicated as if in passing that the Malaysian airliner, Boeing 777, was shot down by Ukrainian jet fighters. Then came the briefing by the Russian Ministry of Defense, which showed a Ukrainian SU-25 within 3-5 km from the Boeing at the very moment when the Boeing was hit. In the next four minutes, the Ukrainian fighter remained in the area. At the moment, when the Boeing was hit, it was also within the range of several Ukrainian Buk batteries, which were deployed close to Donetsk and then, just for that very day, 8km south of Shakhterskoye, which is also only several miles from the crash site.

Today (July 23), Anna-News published an interview with a Russian Air Force retired colonel Aleksand Zhilin (Александр Жилин) who is a frequent military commentator on the conflict in Ukraine. The most important information is stated at 2:00-5:00 in the interview.

According to the colonel, at 16:19:45, a Ukrainian jet fighter targeted the Boeing with an air-to-air missile R-60. The missile damaged the right engine of the Boeing. The Boeing was hit, but still managed to stay in the air. However, in doing so, the Boeing turned 180 degrees to the left. It was at this moment that the false flag attack started falling apart. According to Zhilin, part of the plan controlled by the US with Ukrainian hands executing it was to have the Boeing crash past the southern frontline by the Ukrainian-Russian border. Had the Boeing fallen there, securing the crash sites with the troops in response to international pressure was on top of all else effectively allow Kiev to lift the encirclement of its brigades in the southern pocket by the Russian border.

When, however, the Boeing started to turn in the opposite direction and was still apparently manageable, “the US-Ukrainian headquarters of the special operation panicked and order the Buk battery to destroy the plane in the air in order to pre-empt the possibility of the Boeing’s emergency landing.” A Buk missile was fired and the plane was then finally destroyed.

The disclosure of the Russian electronic intelligence (in fact, only one part of it) on July 21 put the US against the wall. The existence of this intelligence and other data also means that the US cannot show the real intelligence, which they also have, including the data from their electronic warfare exercise SEA BREEZE 2014 and the data from their spy satellite, which just happened to be over the area during the downing of the Malaysian Boeing.

The other relevant information, which the Russian colonel revealed, was that the Malaysian Boeing was insured for $97 million against damages or losses as a result of military actions.


Footnote (in comments)

Zhilin’s analysis is based in part on investigation of Nikolai Istomin (http://nikolay-istomin.livejournal.com/3057934.html) reveals one singularly shattering fact, which Kiev, the US, NATO, and corporate media kept under the wraps. A more detailed and careful analysis of the flight path of MH17 does, indeed, confirm that LH17 reached Snezhnoye at 16:19 local time still whole, complete, and in good health, so to speak. But the crash site is in Grabovo, which is almost 20 km (25km by road) NORTH of Snezhnoye. That, indeed, means that the plane 1) flew then backwards and that 2) its crash site ended up well behind the furthest southern point which the plane reached.

This completely disapproves the US (US State Department) creative “drawing” of the supposed NAF BUK missile hitting the plane head on from Snezhnoye. This U-turn then also helps explain why Kiev’s first fake “leaked conversation of the rebels” tried to place the “rebels’s Buk battery” in Debaltzevo, which is just straight ahead from Grabovo–further north. However, that would not explain the U-turn, which they tried so much to conceal, for it points to the Ukrainian jet fighter.

The second “leaked” tape tried to place the “rebels’ Buk battery” to Donetsk, for the first attempt was too much at odds with the timing of the (first) impact. The missile would have to pass the plane, then turned around and hit it from behind … The quickly produced “Donetsk” fake tacit correction was supposed to address these inconsistencies, which were expected to arise. But the crash site in Grabovo, north of the acknowledged fight path and hence also further from the range of a battery put into Donetsk, did not resolve well all the remaining discrepancies, not to mention the fact cunningly or just sloppily overlooked by the White House and the Western media, that already these two tapes were not only mutually exclusive, but also mutually refuting each other.

So, just several hours after the second tape, Kiev came up with a video, most likely showing the very Ukrainian Buk battery which was actually shooting 8 km south of Shakhtyorsk against the Boeing. Kiev, however, claimed that it was the rebels’ Buk battery. Alas, the billboard on the left side of the short video shot from behind a bush, made it clear that the video was made in early morning hours on July 18 in Krasnoarmeysk, controlled by the junta since May 11.

This video and further fake US “intelligence” thus started to assert that the rebels shot at the plane from Snezhnoye. This, however, required either to lie about the location of Grabovo, which, indeed, some Western media then put south of Snezhnoye, or to move the point when the (first) missile struck back northward. This still, however, could not explain why the crash site was east of the route, and it also presupposed that the plane would have been hit the Buk missile head-on.

To keep this story flying required revealing as little facts and topographic data (or a map of the crash site) as possible, which, for, the Western media, has never been a problem.

As a result, the one crucial fact revealed by Zhilin is the crucial fact that the rear of the plane and the main crash site is in Grabovo, some 20km north-west of Snezhnoye, which the plane actually passed, and, on top of it, that the pilots’ cabin is even more north (and more to the west) than the rest of the plane. The pilots’ cabin crashed in the village of Rassypnoye, which is few kilometers north-west of the main crash site of the plane, as can be glanced from the maps of Zhilin and Istomin and this map of the area (click to enlarge):


This location of the pilots’ cabin and the main body of the plane clearly shows in which direction and from which direction the plane was falling to the ground; the very opposite to what we were led to believe.


  1. Crazy Ivan Report
    Posted July 24, 2014 at 4:43 pm | Permalink

    OT. I found Russian slang dictionary, you may need it in your works.
    Cheers, CI

  2. Richard Hack
    Posted July 24, 2014 at 11:38 pm | Permalink

    One question: If the plane turned, why didn’t the Russian civilian radar tracks shown in the Ministry of Defense video show this? Was it omitted? Did the plane drop below radar range as a result of the first missile hit?

  3. nobody
    Posted July 24, 2014 at 11:43 pm | Permalink

    Something’s wrong here. This story says an Air India flight was in the immediate vicinity of MH17 and heard Ukraine ATC issue reroute instructions. If in fact MH17 was first hit by an air-to-air missile fired from a Ukrainian SU-25 the Air India pilots should also have also heard a distress call from MH17.

  4. Milu
    Posted July 25, 2014 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

    »…main crash site is in Grabovo, some 20km east and north of Snezhnoye…«
    Please check on the map and fix the error:
    Grabovo is north-north-west of Snezhnoye.
    Otherwise there wouldn’t be a U-turn.

  5. niqnaq
    Posted July 25, 2014 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

    Sorry… I’ve fixed it up, and included the clickable map from the russian original.


  6. Posted September 9, 2015 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

    Aleksand Zhilin was wrong!


  7. niqnaq
    Posted September 9, 2015 at 12:08 pm | Permalink

    This is a very extreme hypothesis indeed:

    The fact is, that the GPS data received by MH17 and forwarded to Russian ATC by its transponder beeps and to the FlightRadar24 database through its automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) beeps is 20 km from where the plane was at the time. This can only be explained in two ways: Either the false GPS data came form an escort fighter spoofing HM17, or MH17 was fed false GPS by the GPS jammer on the escort fighter. Both of these techniques were on the menu in the NATO SeaBreeze exercise. RIA Novosti now reports that GPS manipulation had been observed in the area.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.