The video of dispute is the one showing a BUK with the covers off that Brown Moses claims was taken in Luhansk that somehow found its way to the Ukraine Interior Ministry who then published it on Youtube.
But in the Brown Moses report there is this:
While it is not possible to discern the exact time this video was filmed, there are three pieces of evidence that lend credence to the Ukrainian Ministry of Interior’s claim that the video was filmed on the early morning of July 18:
• The video was filmed approximately 75 kilometers north of Snizhne.
• At least one missile is missing from the set of four missiles that the Buk missile launcher is normally armed with. Additionally, the photograph of the Buk missile launcher in Torez shows four missiles, and local witnesses noted that the Buk missile launcher moving through Torez had four missiles.
• The netting visible in the photograph from Torez is absent from the top of the missiles in Luhansk.
I disagree that these given reasons lend credence. However, the loader appears to be the red loader and the cabin with the distinctive blue stripes appears to be the same. This is much stronger evidence and I will explain why below.
The report states that the owner of the white cabin and red loader that was filmed transporting a BUK says it was stolen by rebels. The disputed video shows a red loader and white cabin, but we cannot be sure they are the ones the rebels had allegedly stolen. I have to say it could be, but we cannot be 100% sure.
But here is what one of the sources of Brown Moses has said, which is linked to by the report:
While the location checks out and I was able to estimate the point from which the video was shot it certainly was a fortuitous piece of videography. The camera operator probably had less than 50 seconds from first hearing/seeing the truck to set-up the 6 second shot. From my analysis there may have also been an opportunity for the camera operator to have filmed it handheld before it reached the overpass. It does appear from the lack of wobble the camera was on a tripod (I didn’t mention these points in email).
It is worth pointing out, if I am correct, that this is the only shot of the BUK on the transporter where the missiles are visible. The camouflage netting-tarpaulin has been pulled back or is missing. I did note that this was odd. However, subsequently I have also seen video of a BUK unit collecting overhead wires so apart from sloppiness by the people loading the unit the camouflage may have been pushed back by accident.
Together with the video and photographs of apparently the same transporter and BUK around Torez and Snizhne and also intercepts of phone conversations with the driver released by Ukrainian security it does make a compelling circumstantial and consistent case. Of course one should always be wary of speculating beyond the “evidence” and while I suggest it was a fortuitous shot it does appear to be doable and that the shot was a bit “too nice” this too is speculative.
What isn’t speculative is the location given in the Russian presentation is wrong.
While we wait for the live imagery from the U.S’s keyhole satellite (allegedly overhead at the time) of the actual launch and impact the citizens open source case is being refined and in this case produced a result.
This comment was posted on 11th August, and I have added bold to highlight particular statements.
Three months after this comment and still no "imagery from the U.S’s keyhole satellite (allegedly overhead at the time)" has been produced.
The commenter suggests the disputed video was shot with a camera on a tripod. What was someone doing very early in the morning of 18th July shooting a video of a crossroads using a camera on a tripod? Perhaps the cameraman/agent had been told to be there by the Ukraine Ministry of the Interior to capture anything suspicious passing by? And that this order had been passed to other agents of Kiev in rebel-held territory to be at certain points that could be used as a transit back to Russia? I don't know. It certainly is possible.
And as for Bogdan Autos (who the advert in the video refers to) they are all over Ukraine and in Romania.
The one piece of evidence in that video that raises serious questions is the white cabin with the blue stripes.
But unfortunately for Kiev they have cried "Wolf" too many times to be believed. They have claimed multiple times that Russia has invaded Ukraine. The authorities in Kiev at the time of MH17 being shot down were overtly neo-Nazi, and had come to power in a violent neo-Nazi NATO-sponsored coup. Their supporters had burned to death over 50 anti-putsch protestors in Odessa.
This report sets out a strong case that the rebels had a BUK in the Snizhne area at the time that MH17 was shot down, and that it came from Russia.
But there is still the disputed video showing a BUK with missing missile.
The report acknowledges that the time and date that this video was shot cannot be verified as early morning 18th July.
But if Kiev had faked the video then Kiev would have had to have known in advance that the rebels would be using a red loader pulled by a white cabin with those distinctive blue stripes. Or at least knew this was occuring, which is possible.
And assuming that that BUK was the one that shot down MH17 then it would probably have been driven overnight towards Russia so few people would see it, thus explaining how it got Luhansk.
And also I assume that an alert would have been put out by Kiev to agents in East Ukraine to keep their eyes and ears open for anything unusual, and that could explain why someone would be aiming a camera on a tripod at a crossroads at the break of dawn on 18th July 2014, and I assume from a house or flat.
And all this would explain why the RT show In The Now attacked Brown Moses in the repulsive way it did.
So, can I believe that the neo Nazis in Kiev could predict that the rebels would be using, or knew that the rebels were using, a red loader and white cabin with distinctive blue stripes and film a video of a BUK with missing missiles either before the event or so very quickly after the event?
It is possible, but putting a precise probability on it is difficult. It is, as stated by a source above, "a fortuitous piece of videography". And this is what is causing my doubt, because the neo Nazis in Kiev have cried "Wolf" too many times.
But at the same time, the red loader and white cabin with those distinctive blue stripes are very, very significant.
So, and here is my big, big question: is it also possible that the rebels had a BUK (the one in the disputed video) and had fired a missile or two but only for training purposes, not at MH17, thus explaining why a BUK with a missing missile or two would be travelling through Luhansk at the crack of dawn on 18th July? Russia is not going to admit this, is it?
And the report does not explain:
1. why NATO has been so slow in producing their alleged evidence, unless they have been in some way guiding the Brown Moses investigation, but why wait for 4 months?;
2. why MH17 was flying over the area in the first place (it was Kiev's responsibility);
3. the statements of the ATC who claimed and still claims at risk of being killed by Kiev that Kiev shot MH17 down (see Spanish Air Controller @ Kiev Borispol Airport: Ukraine Military Shot Down Boeing MH#17 ).
The Belling Cat team must be commended for this report. It confirms what I believed after the statement from Khodakovsky, that the rebels had a BUK on 17th July, but it has not conclusively proved that the rebels shot MH17 down, particularly as it does not address the points 1 - 3 above, and nor does it address the geopolitics: NATO has been desperate to control Ukraine since 1991, ploughing over $5 billion into revolution, because Ukraine controls Russia's pipelines to Europe and thus Russia's influence over Europe; Russia had just averted a war on Syria in 2013 after Bandar's false flag failed to provoke NATO into bombing Syria; Russia had just created a BRICS development bank as a rival to the IMF system; the rebels were defeating the Kiev Nazis.
No comments:
Post a Comment