Eric Zuesse – The Netherlands ‘Justice’ Is Totally Corrupt: MH17 Case as Example

13 juli 2020Businessplan, Home, Locatie, Media, Zuesse0

We never forget you (foto Twitter)
Judge Steenhuis hiding evidence (foto John Helmer)

MH17 (foto AFP)

The Netherlands ‘Justice’ Is Totally Corrupt: MH17 Case as Example

On Friday, July 3rd, the judge in the Netherlands court case against RUssia as having fired A BUK missile that brought down the Malaysian Airlines plane that Ukrainian Air Trafic Control had instructed to fly over Ukraine S Civil War zone on 17 July 2014 ruled out any consideration of evidence from RUssia (http://JohnHelmer.net/MH17–trial-hits-Ukrainian-wall–Judge–Steenhuis-rejects-Major–General–Konashenkov-for-evidence-of-the-Ukrainian-army–S–BUK–missile-which-shot–down–MH17/).

Judge Hendrik Steenhuis “refused to allow RUssian Military Intelligence to reveal where the missile was located between 1987 and July 17, 2014, when the Dutch prosecution claims the missile was fired by A RUssian Military crew at MH17,” as John Helmer reported on Friday. The Dutch prosecutor says that that BUK missile was fired by RUssia S Government, not by Ukraine S Government, and that it was owned by RUssia and had been maintained by RUssia ever since having been manufactured in RUssia in 1986, and the Dutch judge announced that he refuses to consider RUssia S evidence to the contrary.

RUssia S Government alleges that it can provide evidence that that missile did not, in fact, bring the airliner down, and that, instead, it was brought down by two Ukrainian Air Force jets that fired directly at and into the airliner S pilot, but previously the Dutch court had ruled out any consideration of such evidence, though even the Dutch Government S own investigation included and buried the following information, as I reported just A few days ago on June 24th.

The Dutch Government S 279 page investigative findings on the “Crash of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17” (http://web.archive.org/web/20151013141325/http://CDN.Onderzoeksraad.nl/documents/report-MH17-crash-en.pdf) were published in October 2015, and reported, on page 84, (under 2.13.2 “Crew autopsy”) that “First Officer Team A (…) During the body scan of the First Officer S body, over 120 objects (mostly metal fragments) were detected. The majority of the fragments were found in left side of the upper torso.”
Then, it reported, on page 85 (under 2.13.3) “the First Officer, from Team A, who was operating the aeroplane at the time of the crash.”
Note that they buried this crucial information, instead of saying clearly that “The pilot S upper left torso, immediately to the left of the area of the fuselage that had been shot out (http://archive.is/8un5s), had 120 objects that were mostly metal fragments.” Here (https://www.AnderWeltOnline.com/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF/Cockpit–MH017.PDF) is A closer picture of that side panel on the left side of the fuselage, to the pilot S immediate left, and here is that side panel shown back on the airliner (https://archive.is/02MjL), so that one can see that this firing had to have been done from below, shooting upward into the pilot.
This crucial physical finding, that the pilot S corpse had been loaded with “over 120 objects (mostly metal fragments),” is entirely consistent with the side panel S having been shot through by bullets, which would have been coming from a Ukrainian Militaryjet and aimed upward, directly at the pilot. That marksman had to have been highly proficient in order to hit the pilot so accurately with so many bullets.
Nothing else was found to be shot through with anything like such an intensity of “mostly metal fragments,” but only the pilot S upper left torso. This, alone, is virtually conclusive proof that A Ukrainian Military jet plane had fired directly at the pilot in order to bring down this civilian plane (more will be cited here, in #2 below).
All of this evidence was entirely buried and ignored by the Dutch Government, revealed deep in the report, and only in sub clauses, instead of in any direct sentences.
Furthermore (https://archive.is/nleRq) “There have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really pockmarked with what almost looks like machine gun fire, very very strong machine gun fire.” This remarkable statement comes not from Haisenko, but from one of the first OSCE investigators who arrived at the scene of the disaster. Go to https://www.YouTube.com/watch?v=7ze9BNGDyk4 and you will see it. But, now, it has been removed. Here is the information on that video http://archive.is/8un5s. That video was titled “OSCE monitor mentions bullet holes in MH17”.
That evidence is consistent with the Dutch Government S having found (but buried) that the pilot S corpse had been riddled with “metal fragments.”

The matter which was being addressed on July 3rd was strictly concerning which Government owned and operated that BUK missile (which RUssia has always contended did not bring down that plane).

Previously, when Ukraine S Government authorized Holland S Government to investigate and rule on what caused the MH17 to be shot down, Holland S Governmentsigned onto A secret agreement with Ukraine S Government that included A provision allowing Ukraine S Government to block and prevent any finding from being issued that would implicate Ukraine S Government in having shot it down. Holland S Government violates its own Freedom of Information law by refusing to make public what that secret agreement says. However, at the time when the existence of the agreement slipped through into mention by A Ukrainian news site on 8 August 2014, that news report said (http://web.archive.org/web/20180110155354/www.WashingtonsBlog.com/2014/08/MH17–investigation–secret-august-8th-agreement-seeps.html) “As part of the fourparty agreement signed on August 8 between Ukraine, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia [all of which nations are allies of the United States and are cooperating with its new Cold War against RUssia (http://web.archive.org/web/20180104031027/http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/06/really-need-re-start-Cold–War.html)], information on the investigation into the disasterMalaysian ‘Boeing 777’ will not be disclosed.”