Michael Collins

(Updated 9/9) The official investigators of the Malaysia MH 17 shoot down over Ukraine released just a bit of preliminary findings. The Dutch Safety Board summarized its findings as follows (Image: AnderweltOnline.com):

"Damage observed on the forward fuselage and cockpit section of the aircraft appears to indicate that there were impacts from a large number of high energy objects from outside the aircraft.

"The pattern of damage observed in thei forward fuselage and cockpit section of the aircraft were not consistent with the damage that would be expected from any known failure mode of the aircraft, its engines or systems." (p. 30) Preliminary Report, Dutch Safety Board, Sep 9, 2014

The preliminary findings failed to name a perpetrator. The full report will be out sometime in mid 2015.

With all due respect to the Dutch Safety Board, they have not expanded their findings much beyond those of thirty year Lufthansa pilot Peter Haisenko. The pilot grabbed a high resolution photograph (see high resolution image of the MH17 cockpit area) off of the internet right after the crash, studied it, and concluded that:

"The cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likeley that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile." Peter Haisenko, Shocking Analysis of the ‘Shooting Down’ of Malaysian MH17, AnderweltOnline.com, July 1, 2014

You don't need a PhD in the Obvious to grasp one interpretation of this finding.

There was no mention of a missile, just " high-energy objects from outside the aircraft." That sounds like the "30 millimeter caliber projectiles" or similar projectiles fired from … the cannon of a fighter aircraft. It could be something else but the photograph and finding are compelling evidence. In addition, there is no mention of a missile bringing down the aircraft.

Therefore, the resistance militias maligned with the presumption of guilt by the White House and its chorus in the European Union seems to be off the hook. Since the photograph that Haisenko used was published right after the crash, the resistance should have been removed from the suspect list at that time.

Haisenko analysis was available on July 1, based on direct photographic evidence from the scene, a photograph of the cockpit area of MH17. The safety board noted that they didn't go onsite to the crash due to fears about safety. Hence, their observation of evidence was similar, albeit more extensive, than Haisenko's.

Kevin Zuesse wrote an extensive article on the German pilot's theory on July 31. Zuesse also reported on a secret agreement to keep the findings within a chosen circle including the United States, European Union, and Ukraine government. We have no flight recorder tape to hear. We don't have tapes from the Ukraine air traffic control. If fact, we just have what the US-EU alliance chooses to give us.

The report doesn't name a perpetrator. However, it casts doubt on the rapid and highly damaging blame assigned to the eastern Ukraine resistance.

The real finding based on this report are:

• The White House rushed to judgment when it blamed resistance forces and Russia for the shoot down since it couldn't now that a missile brought down MH17;
• The U.S. and EU acted irrationally when they issued sanctions against Russia based on a presumed built associated with the MH17 shoot down; and
• The relentless campaign for hostilities against Russia and support of a neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine is based on proof that was never there.

All the US and EU officials had to do was what Peter Haisenko did: look at the picture of the cockpit and start from there.

Creative Commons 3.0

N.B. There are arguments that the Dutch report may still indicate a missile attack. In point of fact, it was essential that the report not exclude a missile. Nevertheless, the explanation by Peter Haisenko in his July 1 analysis.

Haisenko goes into some detail to explain why the evidence from the high resolution image of the crash argues against the claim that a missile brought down MH17.

Michael Bociurkiw , head of the Office for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), came to the same conclusion after reviewing the wreckage as one of the first on site responders. He said: "There have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really pockmarked with what almost looks like machine gun fire, very, very strong machine gun fire that has left these unique marks that we haven't seen anywhere else."

Excluding a missile shoot down means that the Ukraine government moves to the top of the suspect list.

Also see: Eyewitness Evidence of Machine Gun Fire on MH17, Michael Collins, August 17