Briefing by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

News

Russian Defense Ministry was convicted of forging documents on the Buk missile

Igor Konashenkov's statement found a number of "inconsistencies".

A few days ago, the official representative of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation Igor Konashenkov held a press conference in which facts and documents that allegedly confirm the version that the passenger airliner Boeing 777 shot down over the Donbas was destroyed by a missile of the Buk SAM in the arsenal of Ukraine from 1986 year. Specialists drew attention to the fact that there are a number of "inconsistencies" in the submitted materials, which indicates the forgery of documents.

As the newspaper Novaya Gazeta reports, the restored original of the form for the engine under the number number 8869032 is the date of the document creation from 14 January 1986 year, at that time. As the product itself was manufactured 24 December 1986 year, which may indicate forgery of documents. Moreover, experts drew attention to the difference of handwriting in the completed documents, which also causes the masses of doubts in the information provided by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.

Independent analysts believe that the information provided by the Ministry of Defense of Russia has nothing to do with reality, as indicated, at least, by the fact that it took several months to restore the original form, although in reality, the procedure takes no more than a few days.

 

In general, the newspaper would first need to seek advice from specialists of the technical documentation department (bureau) or to the military representative of any manufacturer of military equipment or to look at at least the GOSTs for accounting, storage and delivery of products.

Alexander, profane from the Novaya Gazeta, have no idea of ​​technical documentation, and even more so the principles and order of its conduct. But it's not so scary))) We generally live in the age of PROFANS!

Everything is easily explained. The entry was made in the form, which passed the changes. The order of change in the form is confirmed by vertical recording by the monitoring service. This is in the order of things. There is nothing fake here. Simple practice. Do not print the same new forms because of not significant changes. It is enough to enter from a label on each page in a vertical graph.

Let Ukraine now show where the missile was moving with this number. And if there is no answer, let it prepare money for compensation to relatives who have been shot down by Boeing.

It is also a new newspaper. Something has recently been fond of distorting the facts and not saying something, just like typical "liberal" mass media. And before normal articles were written there. Let these "experts" shove their opinions where far away.

There, in general, the date of restoration is not clear, it looks more like January 14. 1996 (look at the sheets on the left and right). Perhaps the new newspaper gives the number 9 for 8. Or the second possibility: that the engine was made earlier than assembly. But in my opinion, there is generally a restoration date there: 1996. In any case, New Year has not "proved" anything.

In the article in the new newspaper it was a question of the restored form on the ENGINE !!. , which was naturally manufactured before the ROCKET was collected! Something with the logic of the author of the article of the new newspaper is not in order. Or decided to do a throw-in? As for writing the 2 digit in the submitted copy of the document, so many people write it differently, even on one document ...

What is the discrepancy? There is no disobedience, everything is correct. Officials signed the document 24.12.1986, which earlier (14.01.1986) was restored from the original. This is common practice. First, a form is created, and as the product is assembled, all information about the product is recorded in this form. At the end of the assembly - the form is signed.

No, this is not a copy. A copy of this document is not legally binding. This document is recovered from the original.

This is not an original, but a copy.

Who convicted whom, the gossips of the shop? Do not check the mind itself? NG you blown like suckers, and you hung your ears. See for yourself in the original video of the vertical recording completely, from the bottom of the sheet to the top, where the date 14.01.1986 is listed - the original form was compiled in 1984 and all the information about the components was made in the manufacturing process. 24 December 1986 year is the date of acceptance of the finished, assembled product by the representative of the customer (Ministry of Defense)

Well, why are journalists such amateurs ??? Do you really think that if the Ministry of Defense had decided to forge a document, would not it have eliminated these inconsistencies?
"Different handwriting" - because the forms are filled in by different people. You will also say that accounting documents also have different handwriting (hence, fake). Did you cook for a long time? It is necessary to follow all procedures, from the search for papers in the archives, to the declassification of documents related to the state secret. Moreover, the documents are from the Soviet period.

Pages

.

Blog and articles

upstairs