Wizeus > Religious Affairs
| Video Links
| Book Reviews
email@example.com | 23Jul2014 | Will Zuzak,  Illarionov,  BUK system for MH17
Putin deliberately raising
(1) Early this morning George Knysh pointed out that:
“And American Intelligence
also corrects some Obama statements. We are
now told that Boeing-777 was shot down "accidentally". Well accidents
will happen. I suspect that a lot of people, not just the Russians,
still consider Ukraine to be an accident...”
despite a 23Jul2014 article on CNN:
in which Vitaly Nayda, Ukraine’s director of informational
well-equipped, well-educated officer ... pushed
that button deliberately."
It seems that President Obama wants to give Vladimir Putin and the
Russian Federation the benefit of the doubt by labeling the shooting
down of Malaysia MH17 flight on 17Jul2014 as an “unfortunate accident”.
Has American Intelligence ruled out the possibility that Vladimir Putin
personally and deliberately ordered that the passenger plane be shot
Preposterous? Unlikely? Perhaps. But the inner workings of the mind of
a murderous psychopath cannot easily be predicted:
Unless and until the exact details of the incident and the
involved become known, all options must be kept open.
(2) Later this morning [23Jul2014], George Knysh reports:
Meanwhile Ukraine accuses Russia (not the terrorists) of directly
shooting down two of its warplanes today...
The bombardment of ATO forces at Zelenopillya on 11Jul2014
resulting in some 23 Ukrainian deaths presumably originated from the
Russian side of the border utilizing a more sophisticated Grad
launching system. Since then, various ATO forces near the Russian
border have increasingly been subjected to bombardment from the
territory of the Russian Federation. Several Ukrainian aircraft have
been shot down by air-to-air or ground-to-air missiles launched from
Russian Defense Minister, Sergei Shoigu, has been placed in charge of
the terrorist operations designed to destabilize or conquer Ukraine. In
my opinion, this forebodes a major escalation of the conflict, which
may lead to severe economic sanctions against the Russian Federation
and which could eventually lead to a new cold war or World War Three.
Is Putin deliberately raising the stakes?
Will Zuzak; 2014.07.23
2014.07.26: Since writing the above note, I came across this article by
Andrei Illarionov, former advisor to President Vladimir Putin.]
Euromaidan Press | 25Jul2014 | Andrei Illarionov
MH17 crash is a planned
The information that flooded us over the last five days
provides enough facts to come to the most likely conclusion in this
situation: it was a planned terrorist attack. I
will not mention the relevant numerous information sources
with documents, calculations, publications in this article, as they are
freely available to all that are interested.
Where was the Anti-aircraft
guided missile system Buk-M1 located at the time that the
surface-to-air missile (SAM) was launched?
In a field near the Berezhys settlement, close to
Pervomaiske and Chervoniy Zhovten, South of Snizhne and
South-East of Torez.
Who controlled the launch area and the Buk-M1
The so-called “Donetsk People’s Republic” (DNR) separatists.
At what time was the the BUK-M1 in combat position
from which the SAM was launched?
From morning till evening of July 17th, 2014.
Who was the Buk-M1’s crew?
Russian citizens actually serving RF Internal Forces.
Under whose direct and indirect command was the
Direct -- the Russian Federation’s Armed Forces Southern
Military District Headquaters in Rostov-on-Don.
Indirect -- the General Headquarters of the
Russian Armed Forces in Moscow.
Was the Buk-M1 ever transferred under
DNR civilian or military command?
Where was the order to launch the SAM issued?
General Headquarters of the Armed Forces of the Russian
Is it possible for the SAM to have been launched
accidentally, leading to the MH17 catastrophe?
Taking in consideration technical specifications of launching
SAMs (including the so-called illumination support of an
already-launched missile), this is impossible.
Is it possible that the SAM was targeting a Ukrainian
AN-24 (AN-26) military transport plane?
Due to different technical characteristics (sizes and airframe
silhouettes, maximum altitude of flight of the AN-24 (AN-26) and
Boeing-777, and taking into account their different flight routes, this
is absolutely impossible.
Why the MH17?
On July 17, 2014, several dozens of passenger aircrafts (among them
were the Munich-New Delhi Lufthansa flight 20 minutes before the strike
and the Copenhagen-Singapore Singapore Airlines flight a minute prior)
flew over the area where the Buk-M1 was situated. None of them but MH17
came to harm. Why had the MH17 been chosen?
It was of primary importance to exclude Russian aircrafts,
airlines from the former USSR countries, USA airlines, German and
French airlines, aircrafts of all the airlines coming from the Eastern
and Southern directions. The victim aircraft had depart either from
Warsaw (“the capital of the states at the front line” in the WW4 led by
Russia) or Amsterdam (“the capital of sin” of the rotten West to which
the deeply spiritual Putin’s Russia, rising from its knees, stands up
However, downing a Warsaw aircraft would unavoidably give a
new impulse to accuse the Kremlin of systematic terrorist acts against
the Poles. In addition, it wouldn’t be effective enough for the authors
of this devilish plan. That’s why only the MH17 Amsterdam flight fit
the criteria for being shot down on July 17, 2014. Since the MH17’s
flight route usually runs more to the South, the Russian
authorities had to close 12 air corridors to leave for the pilots the
only possible route of L980, above the towns of Torez and Snizhne. This
is where the qualified, highly prepared, and sober Russian crew of
Buk-M1 was waiting for it, acting exclusively under the orders of their
What is the gist of the Amsterdam Flight
The “Novorossiya” project, so solemnly announced on April 17, 2014,
aiming to prevent Ukraine from integrating into Western economic,
political, and military alliances, is on the verge of collapse. The
possible consequences of its termination for the authors, initiators,
and organizers have already been discussed repeatedly. The only way to
save “Project Novorossiya” from its complete and final collapse is to
stop military operations of Ukrainian army in Eastern
Ukraine. By July 17th,  the following attempts were
made to do
- military resistance of the “separatists,” which at the
beginning was relatively effective, and lately is being suppressed by
the regular Ukrainian army growing stronger day by day;
- diplomatic pressure carried out by Merkel, Holland, and
others, which turned out to be insufficient.
Thus, new, stronger means were called for. These means,
according to their author’s plan, intend to send a shiver down the
spine of the slumbersome European community, so that it would become
horrified at the death of hundreds of its citizens, children included,
and strictly demand from its governments to push in all possible ways
at the leaders of the “Banderites and Ukrainian fascists,” and
at any price force them to terminate military actions of
Ukrainian army in Eastern Ukraine.
An armistice at any cost would allow Kremlin to keep stirring
the conflict in Donbas by sending militants and weapons, at the same
time institutionalizing and legitimizing the huge Ukrainian
“Transnistria.” After the initial armistice, mechanisms for prolonging
it for 5, 10, 20, 30, 50 years should be initiated. These mechanisms,
well-proven by Transnistria, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia, would allow
to prevent Ukraine from integrating into Western unions by preserving
its Donetsk and Luhansk separatist ulcers.
After the successful resolution of Operation Amsterdam Flight,
Operation Peacekeeper was begun.
After receiving confirmation of a successful terrorist act,
the main author of the Operation Peacekeeper connected with the US
President Obama and informed
him about the tragedy. He “reiterated the need for an immediate
unconditional cessation of hostilities by both sides in the southeast
of Ukraine, which has already led to numerous casualties and has forced
hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians to seek refuge in Russia. He
stressed the inadmissibility of opening fire at Russia’s territory by
the Ukrainian army, which led to casualties among Russian citizens. The
President of Russia briefed his American counterpart on the measures
taken by Russia to resume consultations by the contact group with the
participation of representatives from southeast Ukraine. Hope was
expressed that the American side will also contribute to the start of
peace talks in Ukraine.”
The following day all the actions of the author (telephone
talks with leaders of other countries, public speeches, and minutes of
silence) without exception were directed at achieving a ceasefire with
the Ukrainian side. As if by command, a campaign of petitions and
protests demanding to “immediately stop the violence in Ukraine” rolls
over Europe and the US.
They partly succeeded: Petro Poroshenko has already announced
ceasefire in the radius of 40 km from the MH17 crash site.
The role of “separatists” in Operation Amsterdam
- The Kremlin framed them as the main suspects.
- The MH17 wasn’t downed by “Chernukhin’s Kazaks” (40 km from
the place of the incident, making it physically impossible).
- The “Bezler report” was passed in such a way so that SBU
(Security Service of Ukraine) intercepted it and presented it to the
world, steering the search for the culprits into the separatist
- Bezler himself was obviously shocked when it was revealed
that the destroyed aircraft was a passenger plane, as opposed to the
icy cold calm of his Moscow curator (which proves that Bezler didn’t
take part in operation and only reported).
- The way the “separatists” handled the bodies of the dead
and the aircraft pieces (despite Moscow’s hand in directing them) only
enforce this impression.
- Materials in social networks on behalf of Hirkin were
posted, aiming to attract attention to the “separatists’” authorship of
the terrorist act.
- The “It’s not Putin!” propaganda campaign launched by the
- Prominent propaganda forces joined this campaign. Even some
representatives of the intellectual opposition fell for it, spreading
the “guilty separatist/monkey with a grenade” version, so convenient
for the Kremlin. Meanwhile this version is ungrounded, as the
“separatists” never had neither the means, nor possibilities for
implementing such a terrorist act.
A third force
“It’s not the Georgians. Neither the separatists. It’s a third
force,” the OSCE observer officer told me about those responsible for
the terrorist acts in South Ossetia during the summer of 2008,
indicating at a map of Russia. They resulted in a heated phase of the
Russian-Georgian war during August of the same year.
Translated by Alla Demura, edited by Alya Shandra
2014.08.07: The article below demonstrates how the Russian military
(i.e. Vladimir Putin) deliberately shot down MH17. To save bandwidth,
we have archived only one detailed map of the Donbas area. A separate copy of this article is also archived in this directory.]
Ukraine at War | 05Aug2014 | DJP3tros
RUSSIA shot down MH17 and not 'local seperatists'
of all: the war in East-Ukraine is a Russian operation with the help of
some local recruits. See
this blog. But apart from that, the BUK did not operate
The SA-11 GADFLY BUK-system consists of four components:
You can see each of them here:
[Image of BUK system]
- the command and control (C&C)
- the Snow Drift surveillance radar, can also operate as a
- the launcher (Transport Erector Launcher And Radar, or
TELAR). It also has some radar capabilities.
- the loader (Loader Launcher Vehicle: LLV). It transports,
loads and can fire missiles, but has no radar.
Wikipedia about BUK.
C2 Snow Drift Radar
The Snow Drift Radar has an effective range of 85 kms. It can
communicate with and control up to six TELs/LLVs and as such launch and
direct the missiles to the target. The other units must be in range of
max 40-50 kms, but at this range weather and geographical conditions or
jamming may play a bigger role, so a more effective and reliable range
would be 20-30 kms between the different units.
The TELAR has the ability to launch independently from a C&C.
It has a semi-active FIRE DOME radar. The radar sends a signal. The
reflection of this signal is captured and based on the time, angle,
etcetera, the height, range, speed and behavior of the plane is
calculated. These are then send to the rocket. The rocket itself does
not have radar.
The Fire Dome radar has a range of 32 kms, the same as the missile
The TELAR also has an electro-optical guidance system, which is only
being used when the the radar is out of use because of jamming for
The launcher has four missiles and since these missiles cannot be
loaded into the system manually, a separate loader vehicle with a crane
can both transport missiles, load them unto the launcher, or even shoot
them when controlled by a C&C.
Every radar has a friend-or-foe recognition system (IFF).
Here you can see how the four components are working together:
[Image of BUK system]
Question: Does Russia have these units deployed along the
border with Ukraine?
Answer: well of course!! They also used one two days earlier...
AN-26 brought down by BUK two days earlier
Two days prior Russia had been bringing down a Ukrainian AN-26
transport aircraft with a BUK missile. That was the first time they
used a BUK in the war with Ukraine. In this
blog I calculated where the BUK must have been located that
fired that missile.
Drawn on a map it looks like this:
[Map 1 of Donbas area] in which
Dotted blue = border
Light blue = approximate front line at July 17th, 2014.
Explosion icon = crash site AN-26
Red circle = 32 km missile range
Another thing is that we know from all kinds of sources that Russia has
units all along the border with Ukraine and is even ATTACKING Ukraine
across the border.
All red dots on this map are CONFIRMED locations of Russian units
[Map 2 of Donbas area]
Did we spot and locate any of the BUK units alongside the border?
No, but we know that they are there, because:
[Image of soldier with BUK units in background]
- the AN-26 was shot down with a BUK earlier.
- this soldier wanted to be funny and posted a photo of himself with
some BUK units on the background, pretending it was the BUK that shot
What would be good locations to position BUKs along the border?
- A couple of days later they shot down two SU-25 with BUK-missiles from Russisan territory (see below)
You only need three more TELARs to cover ALL of the border where fighting is going on, like this:
[Map 3 of Donbas area]
The most important location is this one:
[Map 4 of Donbas area]
Because it covers the route of Ukrainian aircrafts to the units at the
border. And Russia was and still is trying to cut off these Ukrainian
units at that particular location.
This is the best spot to put a radar unit:
[Map 5 of Donbas area] in which
Yellow area = 85 kilometer operational range of Snow Drift Radar.
One radar unit at this location covers almost ALL the Russian occupied
area. Except for the Western most part. This is where they had
positioned a Strela-10 anti-air unit with 5 km range:
[Map 6 of Donbas area]
The BUK that brought down MH17
In the night and morning of July 16th to 17th, 2014, Russia drove one BUK-M1 all the way into Ukraine like this yellow route (see this blog):
[Map 7 of Donbas area]
Wow!! What a detour! We know from the leaked telephone calls that they TRIED to bring in TWO, but only one made it. So it was a VERY risky operation.
We also know from these phone calls that the BUK came WITH A CREW.
And what do they do? They POSITION this unit WITHIN the operational
communication range of a radar unit across the Russian border:
[Map 8 of Donbas area]
It means the BUK COULD easily connect with a radar unit there. Then the next question is: why should it NOT connect?
Another question is: WHY would they drive the BUK all the way WITHIN
operational range of a radar unit, while they could easily have a BUK on
Russian territory with approximately the SAME effective coverage of
Ukrainian area along the border?
If the BUK was intended for 'offline' use, why drive it within range?
Why not position it in Donetsk, so there is a lot more area to cover
with air-defense? Like this:
[Map 9 of Donbas area]
The answer is simple: OF COURSE they wanted to connect with the radar and command and control located in Russia...
We know that in the week after MH17 Russia shot down two SU-25 near
Snizhne with a BUK located in Russia approximately on that exact forward
[Kyiv Post on Twitter]
Or read this article.
And in this video the Russian terrorists search for the pilots:
So it is clear the BUK sytem is on Russian soil in that area.
Then we have to ask: why would they put a BUK within operational range
of a radar unit on Russian soil, while there is little to no strategic
advantage to having a BUK next to the radar on Russian soil?
The logical answer is: to OBSCURE the fact that it's RUSSIA being at war
with Ukraine and to PRETEND that it is ‘the rebels’ or ‘the
separatists’. They have been sending messages out of capturing a
Ukrainian BUK for days and weeks, just so they could bring one BUK in
from Russia without alarming the world too much. They have been doing
this with EVERYTHING they brought in: ALL has been ‘captured’, so they
say. It’s a disguise.
So this BUK would be a ‘captured separatists BUK’, but it could be put
in range with the C&C and connect with it for effective operation.
Did the C&C know it was a civilian plane?
Answer: yes they did. They have been located there for weeks already,
monitoring the skies. Civilian airplanes had been crossing over daily.
It was safe, because they fly at an altitude where military planes do
Also they can check the IFF of airplanes and as such identify a plane.
If so: did they deliberately shoot down a civilian airplane?
Answer: yes, they must have known.
Here is the map again, now with path and direction of MH17 and its crash site:
[Map 10 of Donbas area]
The eye-icon might be the
location of the spotter on a high building in Horlivka who called that
he had seen a plane. It is a common practice to put such spotters at the
end of the radar range, to get early warnings/confirmations.
But why would the Russians want to bring down a civilian plane?
Why do these people kill and torture people? Why do they execute people
who fight for them when they get caught looting? Why do they
intentionally target residential areas with the goal to cause civilian
For two reasons: to be able to get awful dramatic footage for Russian TV and next to be able to blame Ukraine for it.
Sometimes they fail to hide that THEY are actually doing it. In that
case, the message is: get out of our way, move aside, don’t bother us,
or we will kill you. They don’t want civilians to harass them or tell
the Ukrainiana army their positions and things like that. So they
threaten and they kill to make people obedient and not bother them.
But how does that explain them shooting down an airliner?
They want a clear sky. They want to be able to shoot down everything
that flies in the sky. AND they want to do this from Russian territory,
so their units cannot be counterattacked. Of course they cannot shoot
down an airliner from Russian territory. So they drove one into Ukraine,
shot it down, drove it back. The INTENTION was to blame Ukraine for it
as they do with everything. And even when that would fail, it would be
very hard or impossible to prove the connection with the C&C across
Was it a mistake that they shot MH17 down?
Did it change anything for them? Did they show respect for the innocent
dead? Did they want to have a ceasefire for three days so the dead could
be removed safely? Or for the responsible ‘rebels’ to be brought to
No, they did everything to obscure, to remove evidence, to slow down, to
remove photos and videos from cellphones from victims, etcetera, in
order to make it as difficult as possible to find out the truth.
They don't care about these (civilian) deaths. It is as simple as that.
They got away with ALL the other incidents they caused. It looks like they get away with this one too...
Now they have the clear sky they want. NOW they can shoot down
everything that flies by without thinking and from safe RUSSIAN
Summary and conclusion
The TELAR/BUK that shot down MH17 was deliberately driven into Ukraine
to a location within range of a Command and Control Radar unit on
There was hardly any strategical gain compared to having a BUK on Russian territory.
The goal to have such a complicated and dangerous operation of bringing
the BUK into Ukraine was to OBSCURE the fact that it would be operated
The BUK came WITH a crew.
The C&C in Russia had been monitoring the skies for weeks already,
if not for months. They have seen civilian planes all the time.
They got an early warning by a spotter.
They knew MH17 was a civilian plane.
Still they gave the order to bring it down.
It does not mean EVERYBODY knew this. In fact NOBODY local knew about
it. The locals ALL thought and were told it was a AN-26, until they
found out. Only the few people in the C&C and maybe the crew in the
TELAR itself knew about it. These people operate in strict discipline
and doctrine. They had orders and ask no questions.
In Russian language other people have come to the same conclusion too: