File:MH17 preliminary report.pdf
The report does not apportion blame and publishes little that can easily be harnessed to the "Putin did it" meme'.
The physical evidence it describes is in fact more consistent with a fighter attack firing cannon from the port-side rear of the airliner since the cockpit area damage it describes and illustrates with images is also consistent with damage which - tellingly - it neither describes nor posts images of, but which is readily available to view online - see image right.
None of this has prevented the western MSM again trying desperately to keep alive the "Putin did it" meme, though in a more subdued form. This for example from the New York Times:
The finding is consistent with theories that the jetliner was brought down by a missile designed to detonate before reaching its intended target, spraying it with sharp metal fragments.
The objects struck the cockpit and front fuselage of the eastbound plane, investigators for the Dutch Safety Board reported, strongly suggesting that they were fired from eastern Ukraine or western Russia. The investigators did not identify the source of the fragments that struck the aircraft or who was responsible for launching them. 
However, since the 'Buk' missile alleged by the "Putin did it" meme to have been used, is designed to explode above the target aircraft and the direction of missile fire is largely immaterial to whether it detonates slightly ahead of or behind, the statement that it supports a missile having come from 'eastern Ukraine or western Russia is factually incorrect.
- Malaysian Jet Over Ukraine Was Downed by ‘High-Energy Objects,’ Dutch Investigators Say - New York Times 9 September 2014
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
|current||08:35, 9 September 2014||(4.39 MB)||Two Dogs||from http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/uploads/phase-docs/701/b3923acad0ceprem-rapport-mh-17-en-interactief.pdf|
- You cannot overwrite this file.