VIDEO: MH17 Inquiry: "To Whose Benefit?"

As the findings of the Dutch “investigation” are released today, we present the concluding part of MH17 Inquiry’s video series.

With the investigation and examination of the physical evidence concluded, the sixth and final part of MH17 Inquiry sums up their findings, and asks the key question: Who stands to gain from the MH17 disaster, and Donbass war in general?

can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

OffGuardian does not accept advertising or sponsored content. We have no large financial backers. We are not funded by any government or NGO. Donations from our readers is our only means of income. Even the smallest amount of support is hugely appreciated.

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Just in, further technical analysis by Russia on the discrepancies in the Dutch Safety Boards report – by this account, slipshod and incomplete.
But never let careful facts get in the way predetermined propaganda 😉


Hi David
Parapara here.
good links, probably a bit technical for me. What gets me is how the scenario that Ukraine may have done it by mistake has not been explored at all. Any honest investigation would start there. After all,we know, and they admit they had Buks operating. That the civilian radar was down for maintenance and the military turned off because their plane weren’t flying stretches credulity to ridiculous levels.They’d moved the Buks up in anticipation of a Russian invasion, and they had their radar turned off!!!??
Bit depressing that no newspapers take a critical look at it.

Rhisiart Gwilym
Rhisiart Gwilym

Good informative video – except for the irritating background noise constantly cluttering up the soundtrack. WhyTF do video makers imagine that this irrelevant-muzak stupidity is needed?


Alexander Mercouris has written as good an analysis as you will read anywhere about the latest MH17 claims.
The key arguments may be summarized in 6 points:
[1] The MH17 Inquiry is being conducted by Ukraine, as confirmed by UN Security Council Resolution 2166 of 21st July 2016. The Netherlands, Australia and Malaysia were invited to join. This was not an investigation set up by the UN Security Council. Russia was not invited to join the investigation, and played no role in it. The countries which agreed to join the investigation were required to sign a non-disclosure agreement which gave Ukraine the right to veto publication of any findings. The evidence was gathered largely by Ukraine, under its supervision.
[2] Ukraine was, or ought to have been, a suspect in the case. MH17 was shot down in its airspace at a time of armed conflict. Any investigation set up by a suspect in a case in which the suspect continues to play a major role by definition cannot be impartial or independent. There was a presumption on the part of countries participating in the Inquiry of Ukraine’s innocence and of others’ guilt.
[3] A separate investigation into the tragedy was also carried out by the Dutch Safety Board, which reported last year. It was conducted under the aegis of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The Dutch investigation said that MH17 was shot down by a BUK missile but failed to identify the precise launch point, and did not name those responsible for launching the missile. It claimed that under the ICAO it was not authorized “to apportion blame or liability,” which is not the same as determining events or the cause which was its duty. Had they pursued this line the Russians would have been legally entitled to make submissions and receive written responses, an option they were denied.
[4] Ukrainian BUK missile launchers were in the area where MH17 was shot down yet the Dutch Inquiry made no mention of them.
[5] The Russians provided a deluge of technical evidence which was never acknowledged or reported on. The Dutch report paid no heed to detailed technical advice from Almaz-Antey, the manufacturer of BUK missiles. It claimed the missile and warhead combinations alleged by the Dutch Inquiry were not possible and that the MH17 launch had taken place in the village of Zaroshchenskoe — outside the area alleged by the Dutch Inquiry and close to Ukrainian BUK missile launchers. No mention of either of these details were made in the Dutch Report nor any response to their extensive technical submissions which disputed Dutch technical claims.
[6] The latest report relies principally on information originating from Ukrainian sources. It includes the eye-witness, radio intercept, video, and social media evidence, much of which has already been in the public domain for some time, where it has been vigorously contested. It is a template of a Ukrainian government prosecution case against Russia. It is not an independent, comprehensive examination of the evidence. It’s a political exercise.


So, whats new on western front.
Whitewash, rinse, repeat…


Remember that Sevastopol is the sole water port usable in winter by Russia, short of crossing Siberia to Russia’s east coast.
USA sees Ukraine as a means to deny Russia effective access to the Black Sea. Next stop Kaliningrad, if they hadn’t botched Ukraine so stupidly. Would they blockade Vladivostok?
The world has seen through the USA now. It knows it is a lawless master-race bunch of conquistadors. It only has 5% of the population, so if 80% unites against America, there will only be one winner. It might take some time, but the end game is clear.
One does wonder what punishment will be meted out to master planners who see global conquest through mass murder as strategic priority number one?


Not so much US as the “elite” and their puppets around the world (including UK) The only solution that will work – delete the elite.

Iain Wicking
Iain Wicking

The Black sea on the Russian side has a mass of land based surface to surface and surface to air missile batteries. On top of this there are S400 batteries and the ship launched missiles.
When the degenerates in Washington mouth off about their capabilities you only have to look at Iraq. The degenerates keep forgetting that the first Gulf War had large contingents from other countries and it took many months to position the resources with no one interdicting supply chains and holding points.
General Montgomery one said that there are two rules of war. The first one is don’t march on Moscow and the second is don’t invade China.

Secret agent
Secret agent

I thought the elderberry episode was good but I don’t buy this diamonds thing. It’s just a coincidence.
The reason Obama started this war was geopolitical; to stop the European vassal states from drifting out of Americas orbit and into the orbit of the SCO.
To a degree it has worked. Washington has re established an iron curtain between Europe and Russia, but this goes against Europes fundamental economic interests and you see a lot of the vassal political parties losing elections.
Washington played its hand too hard and now it’s only options are failure or war.


Blogger John Helmer has followed MH17 issues in depth. He has a latest post and it deals with radar issues and the latest investigation report.


With the question of “whose benefit” besides the fact that the tragedy was used to smear Russia another aspect Comes in:
On board were several dozens of AIDS Experts on their way to a congress. Among also a high ranking Ebola Expert who had spoken already in a very critical way. See last part of this article:
„Ebola: Pandora´s Box Opened Since Long?“ http://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2014/11/12/ebola-pandoras-box-opened-since-long/
Andreas Schlüter
Berlin, Germany

Barbara Mullin

Could it be? Hunter Biden is a diamond hunter? Very different from his brother Beau Biden, a man of justice, honesty and respect.


Radar data is the irrefutable evidence here.Kerry immediately claimed that US radar evidence was irrefutable proof that the Missile came from rebel held territory. Why then has there been this charade of social media, ,obfuscating evidence?Why not go straight to hard evidence?Why doesn’t the US make its radar data public to once and for all prove their claims?Why waste all this time with second hand testimony?Could it be that the propaganda value of the disaster is more valuable than the truth?
The Ukrainians claim that their stations were “down for maintenance”, or “offline” on that day and only that day defies belief
On July 17th 2014, there were two opposing groups.The Ukrainian forces and the Russian backed people of Donbas. That the Ukrainians had Buks is public knowledge. They published that themselves. Where then, has the possibility that the Ukrainians themselves perpetrated the disaster, been investigated and tested?


Yeah, well, security cameras were off for a day at 07/07 bombing and few others served by same “security” company… Go figure.


Reblogged this on TheFlippinTruth.


This video is definitely Russian propaganda, but truthful at the same time. It advances Russia’s desire for peace between itself and Ukraine, and between Ukraine and Donbass. It throws out some very troubling accusations which may or may not be true, but which bear investigation. The Biden connection with the horrors in Donbass is nothing new, generally speaking, as American enterprise has been in the vanguard of war and regime change throughout the World (check South America for example). This may be same old, same old!

Greg Bacon

To find who who stand to gain from that heinous mass-murderer, one would need to investigate the facts surrounding the downing of the passenger jet, like the military and civilian radars in the Ukraine. Except the investigators were told that the civilian radar was ‘down for maintenance,’ and the military radar was offline.
Down for maintenance? Sounds like the feeble excuse used when some thugs shoot up or blow up parts of New York or London, we hear the CCTV cameras were out of service.
Another investigation of the MH17 tragedy would have investigators looking at the Kiev ATC tower and find out why they ordered MH17 to divert 200 km to the North on that day, when 10 flights before had been to the South.
Why was MH17 ordered to fly over a fluid combat zone?


Exactly. I haven’t had time to watch this video but I’ve just seen a BBC report on this atrocity. The only thing they did state of any significance was ‘even though a military jet had been downed two days earlier’. Of course, they didn’t try to answer but it’s the very first question they should be asking. Investigators and the usual suspects want to implicate the Russians so much, they are deliberately ignoring the elephant in the room. They’ll be consulting the clowns at bellingcat next!


“They’ll be consulting the clowns at bellingcat next!”
According to the Independent they MAY have done just that;
“Much of the footage cited by the JIT had already been analysed for a report released in February by investigative citizen journalists in the Bellingcat group”


Short range missiles are cheaper?