Suspicious Death Person Of Interest Malaysian Boeing – Part II

Dear Readers:

Today continuing the Voloshin suicide story by reminding why he was considered a Person of Interest in the MH-17 incident.  Voloshin’s death is being treated as suspicious by the Ukrainian police, but this is normal in the case of a gunshot suicide.  Can one expect an impartial investigation from the Ukrainian police?  Sorry folks, but highly dubious, in such a high-profile case.

Going back to December of 2017, a few months after the MH-17 catastrophe, a Ukrainian pilot/mechanic defected to Russia with a story to tell.  Here, for example, is his interview with Komsomolskaya Pravda (KP), dated December 22, 2014.  Like I said before, this is one narrative, and one theory, but IF this guy was telling the truth, then Captain Voloshin could have actually been THE GUY who did it.  Who actually shot down the airliner.  By mistake, apparently, based on his subsequent reaction.

Donetsk Rebel Elena (the bride) had complained about the Ukrainian fighter jets hiding behind civilian passenger airliners.

Recall that during this period of time, Ukrainian SU jets were conducting routine strafing runs against Donbass towns, in their incessant attempts to hammer at Rebel positions, as well as intimidate the local population.  Rebels were equally busy shooting down these low-flying jets, using shoulder-held rockets.  Rebs themselves complained that the jets were routinely trying to evade them by coordinating their runs with the flights of passenger airlines overhead.  These are factual facts, well established.  But the Ukrainians deny that they had any jets in the sky on that particular day, July 17, 2014.  The witness, “Alexander” contradicts that contention with his testimony that, yes, jets were in the sky that day.  One of them flown by Captain Voloshin.

Prior to the interview, the KP editors verified the identity papers of the witness and established that he was not an actor or imposter.  Beyond that, they were not able to divulge his true identity, as he still had family in the Ukraine.

KP:  Where were you on July 17 2014, on the day when the Malaysian airliner was shot down?

Alexander:  I was on the territory of the Ukraine, in the city of Dnepropetrovsk, the town of Aviatorskoe.  This was a normal airport.  Fighter jets and helicopters were based there.  The planes flew out regularly, conducted bombing runs, the SU-25 jets were bombing Donetsk, Lugansk.  This went on for a long time.

KP:  The planes flew every day?

Alexander:  Every day.

KP:  Why do you believe that these planes had anything to do with the destruction of the Boeing?

A Russian/Ukrainian Sukhoi-25 jet

Alexander:  Several reasons.  Of the eight planes which were based there, only two had “air to air” rockets.  The rockets were strapped on beneath [the pylons].

KP:  Why?  Were there dog fights in the sky?

Alexander:  No, the rockets were there just for self-defense and emergency cases.  The main weapons were for use against the ground:  bombs and Unguided Missiles.

KP:  Tell us what happened on July 17.

Alexander:  The planes flew regularly.  From morning onward they flew regularly, every day.  Around the second half of the day, approximately one hour before the Boeing crash, three fighters went up into the sky.  I don’t recall the exact time.  Of the (three) planes, one was equipped with these [air-to-air] missiles.  This was the SU-25.

KP:  You saw this with your own eyes?

Alexander:  Yes.

KP:  Where was your point of observation?

Alexander:  I can’t tell you exactly [for safety reasons].

KP:  But you had the ability concretely to observe what was strapped to the pylons of the jet?  Perhaps you confused “air-to-air” rockets with “air-to-ground” rockets?

Alexander:  No, it was impossible to confuse them.  They are different sizes, plumage [?], color.  Different warheads.  They are very easy to recognize.  Anyhow, after a short period of time, only one jet returned, the other two had been shot down [by the Rebels].  Somewhere in the East of the Ukraine, as I was told.  Only one plane returned, the one with the [air-to-air] rockets strapped on.

KP:  But it returned without the rockets?

Alexander:  Without the rockets.  The pilot was very frightened.

KP:  Do you know this pilot?  Did you see him?

Alexander:  Yes.

KP:  Can you tell us his name?

Alexander:  His last name is Voloshin.

KP:  Was he alone in the plane?

Alexander:  Yes.  The jet only fits one man.

KP:  Do you know his first name?

Alexander:  I believe it is Vladislav, but I’m not sure.  He is a Captain.

[to be continued]

This entry was posted in Breaking News, Military and War and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Suspicious Death Person Of Interest Malaysian Boeing – Part II

  1. Pavlo Svolochenko says:

    Wary of this, because defectors are a category of person with abundant to motivation to embellish and outright lie – the lab jockey and his stories of deadly super-VX are case in point.


  2. Mark Chapman says:

    By ‘plumage’ he probably meant the fins, which are feathers and are called ‘flights’ on a dart or arrow. The metal or composite fins on the rocket are different for air-to-air and air-to-ground because the AA version has to be able to withstand more violent maneuvering in pursuit of its target.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s