Ukrainian SBU whistleblower Lieutenant Colonel Vasily Prozorov released a documentary about the MH17 tragedy late last month titled “MH-17: In Search Of Truth“, which true to its name shares some shocking truths about what transpired on that fateful summer day back on 17 July, 2014. His investigative work relies on his personal knowledge of the events surrounding that affair (including through his contacts at the time), classified documents, eyewitness reports, and logic to strongly make the case that the UK conspired with Kiev to take down that civilian aircraft as part of a preplanned Hybrid War plot against the Donbas rebels. The nearly 40-minute-long documentary is worth watching in full, but for those who aren’t able to at the moment yet are still interested in learning more about this cover-up, what follows is a brief summary of some of the most important points raised in his documentary.
Prozorov draws attention to how suspicious it was that supposedly leaked recordings from rebel leaders allegedly implicating them in the tragedy were shared on social media within hours of MH17 being shot down. Ukrainian law has very strict bureaucratic guidelines for declassifying wiretapped evidence which couldn’t have been followed in less than a few days’ time at the absolute earliest, strongly suggesting that the recordings were faked in advance by the country’s SBU security service after intercepting voice samples of the alleged suspects ahead of time. The purpose in doing so was to immediately take control of the narrative per the preplanned Hybrid War plot of delegitimizing the Donbas rebels’ cause by framing them as “terrorists” and thus preventing a possible Russian military intervention in their support like was widely speculated to be in the planning stages around that time, but that last-mentioned point will be returned to in a moment.
The next one that Prozorov talks about is how Kiev’s claims that its armed forces weren’t in the combat area during that time are unconvincing since he proves that the battle lines were actually very fluid. Not only are there eyewitness reports to this effect, but also evidence of their tire tracks going back and forth all throughout the area, as well as countless ration wrappers proving that presence of the armed forces and their allies there. This is very important since part of Kiev’s defense rests in its insistence that even if the BUKs under its control were deployed somewhere near the front lines (which will also be returned to later on in this analysis), they allegedly weren’t close enough to shoot down MH17. Prozorov, however, proved that this isn’t true since the Ukrainian Armed Forces freely moved all around the area and could easily have been within striking distance of the aircraft at the time of the tragedy.
One of the more interesting tidbits that Prozorov revealed in his documentary was his participation in a conference at the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine on 8 July, 2014, focusing on making amendments to the country’s so-called “anti-terrorist” legislation. He vividly recalls overhearing an exchange between Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Col. Gen. Mikhail Koval and an unknown Defense Ministry representative right after the event ended. Prozorov remembers how the representative expressed his fear (which was widespread at the time) that Russia was preparing a military intervention in support of the Donbas rebels which he was worried would crush Kiev’s forces in the region. Koval, however, reassured his interlocutor by telling him that he heard hints that something will soon happen which will pose a serious challenge to Russia’s alleged plans. Nine days later, MH17 was shot down.
In response to the obvious question about how that happened, Prozorov begins by explaining that Donbas’ airspace wasn’t forcibly closed by Kiev unlike what one would ordinarily expect a responsible state to do. This created ample opportunities for the organizers to prepare their provocation since international aircraft continued to transit over the conflict region for convenience’s sake. Facilitating their preplanned plot, Prozorov points out how a radiolocation station in Donbas’ Artemovsk was mysteriously disabled a month before MH17 was shot down. He notes that it could have pinpointed where the BUK missile came from had it been active at the time of the tragedy and wonders aloud why the Ukrainian media didn’t make a fuss out of blaming the rebels back then. His answer is that the third regiment of the Special Operation Forces of Ukraine were responsible, suggesting that these sabotage experts carried out their operation to cover Kiev’s future tracks.
Another relevant fact that Prozorov discusses in his documentary is that the US didn’t immediate release the satellite evidence that they claimed to have from the day of the tragedy. He believes that this was done in order to give the perpetrators enough time to finalize their “alternative facts” in the immediate aftermath of what happened and not accidentally screw everything up for them. In addition, he questions why the Joint Investigative Team (JIT) didn’t accept the evidence that was promptly provided by the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) from the crash site, as well as why it took the Dutch investigators months to show any real interest in the wreckage. These curious observations give credence to the claim that many of those tasked with investigating the incident weren’t impartial and instead wanted to push a very specific preplanned narrative. It’s also strange that the Malaysian authorities were initially marginalized by the intelligence-led investigative team.
Prozorov shared some very important information about the role that the 156th anti-aircraft regiment of the Ukrainian Armed Forces played in MH17’s downing, too. He spoke to two former conscripts who served with the unit during that time but have since defected to the rebels. They explained how their forces counted a BUK among their armaments and were deployed to the Donbas front lines prior to being mysteriously withdrawn from combat service despite the widespread fear that summer that Russia was about to militarily intervene in the conflict. Officers and contract soldiers then accompanied the BUK to a so-called “training range” while the conscripts were ordered to remain at base. It was only later that they learned from their colleagues who were physically there that the BUK was actually deployed to the combat area and had fired at least one missile right at the time that MH17 was shot down.
There’s some pretty intriguing evidence that Prozorov shared in his documentary about suspected British involvement in all of this as well. He relied on a document to prove that that chief of the counterintelligence department Major General Valery Kondratyuk accompanied two British secret service agents and others to the Donbas operational area on 22 June, 2014 for a one-day visit, after which all of the SBU representatives left except for Lieutenant Colonel Vasily Burba, who remained with Kiev’s British “guests”. Prozorov happens to know Burba since the latter replaced him and his colleagues there earlier that month, and he says that Burba participated in the MH17 plot together with the foreign agents. Afterwards, Kondratyuk and Burba’s careers “coincidentally” experienced meteoric success, with the former becoming the chief of the Main Intelligence Directorate before being replaced by the latter and then becoming the presidential deputy chief of staff.
Two other pieces of evidence also point to British involvement. The first is that Peter Kalver, the Australian intelligence agent tasked with leading his country’s investigative expert group in Donbas, used a British phone number. That would be strange in and of itself since he’s an Australian working in Ukraine, but when combined with what was previously revealed, it suggests that British secret involvement was even more far-reaching than initially suspected and raises questions about how many other less-important “investigative” figures might also have been connected to the UK. As for the second piece of evidence, Prozorov mentions that the UK-based “investigative journalism website” Bellingcat (funded in part by the Open Society Foundation and National Endowment For Democracy) was founded just days before the incident and then suddenly became the primary source of accusations against Moscow, making one wonder whether it’s actually an intelligence infowar front.
Wrapping everything up, Prozorov concludes his documentary by reviewing his main points, namely that MH17’s downing was a meticulously preplanned plot by the Ukrainian and British security agencies to pin the blame for this false flag attack on the Donbas rebels, all with the intent of portraying them as “terrorists” and thus also make it politically impossible for Russia to militarily intervene in their support like was widely suspected to be in the planning stages during that summer. There was also the grander intention of framing Russia as the West’s main geopolitical competitor. All of this is relevant to still keep in mind since the JIT’s judicial proceedings will begin in March 2020, thus returning the issue back to the international spotlight as the perpetrators attempt to absolve themselves by convincing the world that the innocent suspects are guilty. Altogether, Prozorov’s documentary is extremely insightful and worth watching in full if one finds the time.
Is it not exceedingly strange that if the separatists (or Russia) were the ones responsible or the downgrade of MH17 that they shortly after voluntarily handed over the black boxes which could possibly have contained incriminating evidence for them? Also why would they shoot down the plane in an open field in the middle of the day. One would think they would have chosen the darkness of the night?