86

MH17: "New evidence", same issues

Nearly four years since the incident, and over two years since they last reported any progress, the MH17 Joint Investigative Team (JIT) have held a press conference. To underline their previous position – they still think Russia did it.
The timing of this statement could be seen as very politically convenient for the NATO allies and the Kiev regime. The West would have you believe that the proximity to the World Cup is purely coincidental. Whilst those suggesting that this is a great cover for Ukraine’s renewed shelling of separatists regions in the Donbass will surely be dismissed as “apologists” or “cynics”.
None of that is really the issue though.
Whether they truly have “new evidence”, or whether this is just a rehash of discredited Bellingcat nonsense, is immaterial. If the politically convenient timing is a coincidence or a stunt does not matter.
The most important point is that the JIT is fatally and irredeemably flawed.
The JIT, made up of investigators from Australia, the Netherlands, Malaysia and Ukraine…but not Russia, has obvious credibility problems from the outset. The presence of Ukrainian investigators instantly means the end of objectivity. You can’t have an impartial investigation when one of the main suspects is doing the investigation. That’s simple common sense.
It’s not just the presence of the Ukrainian investigators that taints the JIT’s findings either. The four countries involved have signed a joint non-disclosure agreement (NDA), which states that none of their evidence can be made public unless ALL FOUR of the national governments agree.
Essentially, Ukraine have a veto on whether any single bit of evidence they find ever sees the light of day. This is absurd.
This NDA isn’t just a rumour or bit of gossip either. It was reported here in December 2014, and confirmed by the Australian government in a letter:

SO: Any and all evidence ever brought into the public eye by the JIT has first been screened and okayed by ONE OF THE SUSPECTS.
As such, none of their evidence, analysis or conclusions can be counted as, in any way, objective, impartial fair or even accurate.
The whole operation is a farce, and an obviously politically motivated one at that.