Government of Ukraine Responsible for Downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH-17

Shazana Salleh, stewardess and MH17 crash victim.

The Ukraine Government delivered Buk anti-aircraft missile systems to the war zone where Malaysia Airlines Flight MH-17 was downed. Use of such missiles would place commercial aircraft traversing the war zone in danger and it was, therefore, the responsibility of the Ukraine Government to exclude commercial aviation from that zone. This the Government of Ukraine failed to do. Thus, if in fact MH-17 was struck by a Buk anti-aircraft missile, the Ukraine Government must take full responsibility. This is the case even if, at the time of the downing of MH-17, the Ukraine Government knew that Ukraine forces were not in a position to launch their missiles, for they knew that separatist rebels had acquired Buk anti-aircraft missiles and thus represented a threat to commercial aviation in the zone of conflict.

If MH-17 was shot down by a missile operated by Ukraine Government forces, Ukraine owes the World an immediate apology and a full explanation. Failure by the Government of Ukraine to offer an apology and explanation, will only strengthen the supposition that the destruction of MH-17 was a war crime committed by the Government of Ukraine with the purpose of casting blame on separatist fighters or Russia or both.

If the plane was downed by a missile loosed by separatist fighters, we can assume that it was the result of a mis-identification of the target,  since no benefit can possibly accrue to the separatists as a result of the killing of 295 foreign nationals. If such a miscalculation occurred, separatist leaders should immediately acknowledge their responsibility and offer an apology. In so doing, they will not relieve the Government of Ukraine of its responsibility for directing commercial air traffic into harm's way.

Evidence that MH-17 was brought down by a ground-based missile remains to be made public. If it was destroyed by an air-launched missile or a bomb on board, then the responsibility of agencies other than the Government of Ukraine would have to be considered.

Related:

The Saker:
The Russian military finally speaks!

... We now have hard proof that the Ukies lied at least twice. They lied about the footage of [what they claimed were] Buk missiles being moved back to Russia (the footage was taken in Ukie-occupied territory) and they most definitely lied when they denied having any military aircraft in the area when in reality they had one in the immediate proximity of MH17. That is a huge lie which the Ukies will have a very hard time dismissing.

As I said in my first post about MH17, I have no hope whatsoever that the western plutocracy will ever admit that the junta did it. Ditto for the corporate presstitues of the MSM, but I do hope that the world will see this tragedy for what is clearly was: a deliberate false flag on the part of the Nazi junta in Kiev. As David Chandler correctly points out about 9/11, the proof of a cover up is in itself already a proof of a conspiracy.

Zero Hedge:
China Blasts "One-Sided Western Rush To Judge Russia" Over MH17

Zero Hedge:
Russia Has Photos Of Ukraine Deploying BUK Missiles, Radar Showing Warplanes Near MH17

Mish:
Video of MH17 Hit by Missile; Update From Jacob Dreizin; Black Box Thoughts

(1) For unknown reasons, the flight diverted or was diverted from its usual course to fly smack over a tiny patch of land---of roughly 5000 square miles, or the size of Connecticut---controlled by pro-Russian rebels. (In fact, the 777 went down a few miles from the geographic bottleneck where three desperate Ukrainian brigades are trapped between the rebels and the Russian border.) Why? And if this airspace had been closed by Ukraine (on July 8th), why was that closure never registered with international aviation authorities or coordinating bodies?

(2) Russian media has quoted multiple Russian defense experts as saying that "Buk" missiles are designed to explode within several hundred meters of a target, sending between 50,000 and 100,000 pieces of shrapnel in all directions at supersonic (maybe hypersonic) speeds. According to these experts, an aircraft met by a "Buk" would be instantly riddled with holes, and the wreckage would evince that type of damage pattern. However, the few large pieces of Malaysia 777 wreckage that we have seen so far don't seem to fit the bill. In that case, was it really a "Buk", or some other missile system? (And if the latter, is it even worth arguing over whether the rebels have a "Buk"?) Or was the plane not destroyed from the ground at all?

(3) Related to number (2), why were the Ukrainians so quick to say it was a "Buk"? How would they know, within just minutes or an hour of the event? Especially if both the alleged missile launch and the 777's coming down to earth occurred on territory not under their control? And, why did they immediately (and wrongly) claim that 23 Americans were on board the plane? Did they just make that up?

(4) On Friday, the Ukrainians claimed to have arrested two Russian officers who had helped with targeting to bring down the 777. However, Kiev did not announce their names, nor the location of their arrest, nor did it provide any photographic or video evidence. So who are these people? Do they even exist?

(5) 23 minutes before the plane was first reported lost, the press secretary for Ukraine's national security council announced that the rebels had acquired a more potent air defense capability. Later that same day or the next morning, Ukraine's chief prosecutor is reported to have said that the rebels don't have any "Buks." What was all that about? The Russians claim that Ukraine recently moved an entire unit of "Buks" into the Donetsk region. Ukraine has not denied that. Given the fluidity of the front line, which is changing almost every day, how can Uncle Sam be sure that the launch he claims to have observed did not come from the Ukrainian side? Moreover, if our spooks have the capacity to track such an event from the sky, why can't they produce any satellite pics of all the Russian military equipment coming over the border? Do they really have a good eye on this area or not? And last but not least, within a few hours of the plane being lost, there was already a claim in the media (I think it was CNN) that U.S. spy assets saw evidence of a missile being fired. How can information like that move so quickly through the government and out to the press?

(6) Finally, on the purely domestic side, why has the U.S. media been referencing airliner shoot-downs in 1983 and 1988, but maintaining total silence about Siberian Airlines Flight 1812, which was downed by Ukraine in 2001? Wouldn't Flight 1812 be at least somewhat relevant to the discussion? It's very strange that it hasn't come up.

Mish:
Some Info About “Buks” : Kiev Has 60 Units; Rebels May Have 1; Not Clear If Latter In Working Order

Sergey Baranov: 
Ukrainian Pearl Harbor and WWIII

Consortium News:
Some CIA analysts say MH-17 downed by Ukraine Government

... some CIA analysts cite U.S. satellite reconnaissance photos suggesting that the anti-aircraft missile that brought down Flight 17 was fired by drunken Ukrainian troops from a government battery, not by ethnic Russian rebels who have been resisting the regime in Kiev since elected President Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown on Feb. 22.

According to a source briefed on the tentative findings, the soldiers manning the battery appeared to be wearing Ukrainian uniforms and may have been drinking, since what looked like beer bottles were scattered around the site.

Asia Times:
It was Putin's missile

And here's the spin war verdict: the current Malaysia Airlines tragedy - the second in four months - is "terrorism" perpetrated by "pro-Russian separatists", armed by Russia, and Vladimir Putin is the main culprit. End of story. Anyone who believes otherwise, shut up.

Why? Because the CIA said so. Because Hillary "We came, we saw, he died" Clinton said so. Because batshit crazy Samantha "R2P" Power said so - thundering at the UN, everything duly printed by the neo-con infested Washington Post. [1]

Because Anglo-American corporate media - from CNN to Fox (who tried to buy Time Warner, which owns CNN) - said so. Because the President of the United States (POTUS) said so. And mostly because Kiev had vociferously said so in the first place.

Finian Cunningham:
Will Russia shoot down West’s lies?

Paul Craig Roberts:
What happened to Flight MH-17?

The National Report:
and in other news, MSNBC Anchor Quits Over Having to "Lie for Obama"

Tony Cartalucci:
MH-17: Weathering the Propaganda Firestorm

Aangirfan:
MI6 INFILTRATED UKRAINIAN REBELS?

The Saker:
Ukraine separatists accuse Ukraine of sabotage of the MH-17 investigation

Zero Hedge:
Ukraine's Security Service Has Confiscated Air Traffic Control Recordings With Malaysian Jet

21st Century Wire:
FLIGHT MH17 – Kiev Flash Mob’s Final False Flag?

IBH:
MH17 Investigation Cannot Rule Out Russian Role: Samantha Power

Actually, we cannot rule out the possibility that that stinker Vladimir Putin personally fired the missile. In fact, we cannot definitely rule out anything at all that would smear Putin and his stinking Russian Federation, and anyway we wouldn't rule it out if we could.

MalayMail: 
Ukraine air traffic controllers instructed MH17 to fly lower, MAS says

WSJ:
Ukraine Knew of Separatists' Air-Defense Capabilities

Aangirfan:
MH17 DOWNED BY UKRAINE GOVERNMENT; MH17 ESCORTED BY UKRANIAN FIGHTER JETS

Bodhita:
Minutes before MH-17 crash Putin warned Obama that Royal Canadian Air Force war games being carried out over Romania could lead to "catastrophe”