Crash of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17/Witnesses
- Eye Witnesses of MH17 crash tell their stories published 22 July, 2015
- BBC interview, July 2014
- Witnesses-Paris Match 23 July, 2014
- Max van der Werff interviews a witness (translation) (video) 30 May, 2015
- Malaysian Airlines plane 'shot down' over Ukraine - Al Jazeera English, July 17, 2014
- MH17 - 'JIT witness tortured by Ukraine' -by Stefan Beck (twitter) , Novini.nl, August 10, 2018
- What did you see on the day the MH17 was shot?
- "In the province of Poltava, planes flew from Mirgorod and from Poltava. There are two flying bases. From Poltava and Mirgorod they flew here, to Donetsk, to bomb. Well, I've seen that ... I've served in the Soviet Army in anti-aircraft artillery, so I understand which planes are fighter aircraft, which are ground-attackers, which are bombers. So they flew above the house at a height of 70 to 100 meters. What I saw was that there were weapons under the wings, and when they flew back they were empty. So, they shot everything and then came back. So that's why I know what it is. "
- ...So you saw two Su-25 ' s?
- (It is said that on 23 September, 2015 the man was arrested by Ukraine for warning his 'rebel' friends about incoming Ukrainian planes. He was eventually exchanged in a prisoner swap, and is in Donetsk from December, 2017)
- How did JIT know you had called?
- "Well apparently in the context of the investigation ... On the Ukrainian side the Security Service did research. How I came into the picture: President Poroshenko demanded that everything be investigated more quickly. I was the first to be taken prisoner. I called that day around that time, half an hour before the disaster. According to Ukraine, that would mean that I contributed to the knockdown of the Boeing. "
- (Apparently JIT interview did not prevent his mistreatment in Ukrainian detention, They made me disabled, they struck my teeth, they hit me with my head against the wall. My motor skills are disturbed. I have Parkinson. Do you see? )
- "I want to add something", the man tells me, "The Boeing was shot down on 17 July 2014. They shot him with what I heard from the media with a BUK. But I only looked at Ukrainian media. I know what a BUK is. I was in the army at the anti-aircraft artillery, in the Soviet army. On July 19, remember the dates, the 17th they shot him, and on July 19 I saw on the highway near Polvata from the side of Kharkov that with two trailers two BUKs were transported. They have transported two BUKs. Camouflaged, they were dyed so that they were green-yellow. Such a kind of paint was there, camouflaged. On the 19th, so two days after the tragedy. While they said that there were no BUKs there. This is what I say to you. My wife and I then drove from the work, from Poltava and saw on the 19th, two days after the disaster, two BUKs that were transported with two trailers. And they stood still, stood on the highway. There is a Restaurant, Kiosk. Kapaly, the village Kapaly on the highway near Poltava. There were two BUKs there. "
Цемах: «Ну, здесь Боинг падал, начиная с Петропавловки и до Грабова. Это большой довольно разлёт километров десять. Это он падал – Боинг».
- Tsemakh: “Well, this is where the Boeing fell, starting from Petropavlovka and (all the way) to Grabovo. This is quite a large spread of about ten kilometers. That was it falling - the Boeing.
Журналист: «А то, что ты рассказывал про переезд?»
- Journalist: and what you were telling, about the crossing?
Цемах: «Танки не прошли ни от сюда, с этой дороги, ни с того переезда, что Вы снимали. Ни один танк не прошёл. Пытались долго, нудно, два с половиной месяца тоже держали. Это ж «Малыш», «зушки» мои, это всё держали».
- Tsemakh: “The tanks did not pass, neither from here, nor from this road, nor from that crossing that you have filmed. Not a single tank passed. Tried for a long time, tedious ( нудно --used for something boring/monotonous/unexciting ), we held it too for two and a half months. That's the “Kid” (and) my "Zushki" (ZU-23) held (defended) all that (positions).
- Journalist: illegible.
Цемах: «Не, а чё? Расскажу. Он «сушку» сломал. Ну, это потом да. Он «сушку» поломал, да. А «Сушка» вторая сбила Боинг, это я в курсе. Я этого пацана вытаскивал, я этого «запикивание» (предположительно, было сказано слово «хуя») прятал. Я вам покажу, даже где он стартовал и где я его забирал»
- Tsemakh: “Nah, why not? I'll tell you. He 'broke' (sic.; сломал-Rus. ) the "Sushka" (SU plane). Well, that's later, yeah. (Unclear: possibly meaningless/trying to remember/lost for words, but not definitely so) He broke the "Sushka", yeah. And the second "Sushka" shot the Boeing - I am aware of that (second part of the sentence probably reflects his folksish manner of speech, not some extra bit of information). I pulled out that guy, I hid that prick (laughing)
- этого хуя -Rus (etogo huia -translit.). vulgar/taboo; that part is blipped. Ukrainian source try to sell that he is saying этого Бука (etogo Buka-translit.) =that Buk (the latter grammatically disallowed/quite grossly broken Russian/improbable. But see comment below. )
- I'll show you, even where he started and where I picked him up (it or he/him will be same word in Russian here) . (End of Tsemakh translation here).
Comment: Actually, listening blipped recording myself , and not using transcript (which helps to put it on this page quickly), I am less certain. I can hear, in the crucial bit:
- Ia eto...(blip)
that can, in theory, go as ia etogo huia (that prick) or as ia etot Buk. I cannot hear the ending in eto... well to distinguish etoGO from etoT. Cassad's transcript has etoGO, after which huia is the only grammatically correct. After etoT, Buk goes better, without torturing the sentence; etoT hui is a grammatical possibility but is all but nonsensical. So it is a bit trickier, but there is no Buk anywhere in his story, he is talking about ZU guns (used against tanks), and Buk would be out of place from the context. He is telling us that SU plane is to blame, and that his group is in business of firing ZU guns; why he would have a Buk in the very next sentence? Overall, support is towards the hui word, not the Buk word, --just trickier than I thought --Resup (talk) 22:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
- SBU "cracked" the case of MH17, mixing up "Buk" with the sex organ - and this is not a joke -Mikhail Romanenkov, Rusvesna, July 8, 2019
- Mikhail is telling us that overall, this interview piece is about a battle near Debalstevo (about 50 km NW from Snezhoe. (I am not sure, but clearly they discuss some warfare, not to do with MH17 --Resup (talk) 05:27, 8 July 2019 (UTC))
- Mikhail is telling us that in Donetsk slang to "start" means (as anywhere) to start motion, and apparently is like "to run" (to escape) (slang, of more localized spread). So in his version, Tsemakh is talking here about opolchenie man called 'the Kid', and he jokingly calls him a prick. In other readings of those words, he is talking about rescuing the pilot (Cassad and some of his readers appear to assume that).
- Noted, it is not clear whether Tsemakh was present at the scene of the crash on the day (And if not, he would not be talking about the pilot or the Buk, and with this or otherwise likely talks about 'the Kid' whom he mentions earlier)
- According to his daughter ( BBC) he became head of Snezhnoe air defense in October, 2014. At the time of the crash, he was not a key figure, he was an ordinary opolchenie, manning a checkpoint
- Daniil Bezsonov, DPR press secretary on twitter: 10:03 AM - 6 Jul 2019 (the pilot version) 11:52 AM - 6 Jul 2019 (opolchenie man called the Kid).
- Circumstantial considerations
(1)As one commentator noted, blipping is for taboo words, not for editing cuts. If he talked about something which they felt he should not, that material will not be included in the documentary at all by the authors (who support Russia, not Ukraine). (2) Tsemakh is a Afghanistan war veteran, in late 50s, and is generally well respected; he is not a thug; and he will not be laughing talking about the alleged role in MH17 shoot-down, He would feel heavy guilt instead. With this, it is unlikely he talks about Buk, he rather talks about some rather light-hearted subject, with joking about his pal most likely subject among the above versions. (Somehow, both him and interviewer had mischievous faces, prior to launching into this interview topic; unsure exactly why; that bit on video is clearly part of a longer chat they had).
30 July, 2019 Tsemakh interview is published by Stana.ua transcript and video, with a bit more in the video then the transcript but poor quality of the audio on his side). Tsemakh basically has nothing to say about the Boeing, and it appears that he is not asked to by the Ukrainian prosecution. There is, I would say, little of interest he had to say in this interview. --Resup (talk) 21:12, 30 July 2019 (UTC)