The conclusions of the security Council of the Netherlands to the warhead of the missile that hit Malaysian Boeing in July last year in Ukraine, questioned, said on Thursday an independent professional investigator Max van der Werff.
"A big question remains the type of warhead used in the rocket. The security Council of the Netherlands declares That the story is about the battle of NM. However, in this case, where holes in the fuselage from the elements with the profile of the " girders "?" ? the specialist said the news Agency. As an example van der Werff led the experiment conducted by the air defense concern "Almaz-Antey" on July 31. In the process it has been proven That the use of anti-aircraft missile complex " Buk "with the combat part NM with striking elements with the profile of the" tee "on the fuselage Malaysian Boeing would be left numerous openings in the form of" butterflies ". However, on the wreckage of the Boeing -777, crashed in Ukraine, there is not one such hole.
As for the elements detected in the bodies (pilots), they are quite likely had to be " tampered with, or planted in the chain of transmission and storage of physical evidence ", says the independent investigator. On Thursday, the Russian concern "Almaz-Antey" was subjected to prosecution international Commission of inquiry disaster Malaysian Boeing in the unscrupulous use of the data provided." The emergence of a report released by the Dutch side on October 13, maps of the area, as if calculated by concern "Almaz-Antey" in the form of a possible launch area of the rocket (liner), is a Prime example of unfair application of the international Commission provided us materials ", ? it is reported in the report of the concern. Remember, on Tuesday, the head of the security Council of the Netherlands, Tjibbe Joustra, introducing the report on the causes of the disaster Malaysian Boeing in Ukraine, said That the plane was shot down by a missile Buk missile system, equipped with combat part NM. Additionally, the said warhead equipped missiles only modification MM. These Findings do not coincide with the presented expert report " Almaz-Antey ", as saying That the plane was shot down over the old variant missiles, which is not in service with the Russian army. Joustra Also said That Kiev was not able to adequately assess risks for civil aviation. Also, according to his statement, the Boeing rocket was fired from Eastern Ukraine, While he showed who controlled this territory. In the comments of Russia to the document indicates That the report of the security Council of the Netherlands on the collapse of the Malaysian Boeing not to say That the plane was shot out of controlled militia district. In the leadership of the Russian Federation has told That the report of the Netherlands on the crash of Boeing MH17 in Ukraine cannot be called objective, since the Russian side was not involved in the investigation. Deputy head of Federal air transport Agency, Oleg Storchevoy on Wednesday said That the Russian Federation fundamentally disagrees with the conclusions of the report of the security Council of the Netherlands on the crash of Boeing in Ukraine, the level of irrationality in the report outrageous.