Smolensk plane crash 2010, Polish President "dead"

All things 9/11
User avatar
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 996 times
Been thanked: 1360 times

Re: Smolensk plane crash 2010 - Andrei Mendierej video

Unread post by rachel »

Okay, when I was posting up Lech Kaczynski and his wife boarding the Tu-154M 101 grab in the last post, I seemed to remember I'd seen another clip of him in a coat. Here it is, and officially dated April 10, 2010. So this is the "official proof" he took the flight to Smolensk.

last-trip-Smolensk.gif (5.27 MiB) Viewed 518 times

But the same difference applies, we only see three people on the steps, there isn't video evidence of anyone else boarding the flight, and there isn't evidence of Lech Kaczynski actually being on the flight when and if it took off for Smolensk. We don't know if the plane wing is that of Tu-154M 101 or Tu-154M 102. The only real thing we can say with all likelihood, if it's a scam, Lech Kaczynski and his wife are in on it because they turned up to be filmed boarding that flight that day.

Remember this?


I was forgetting, it's film not digital. Film is additive, so you always have a problem of seeing background through any film you lay over the top. The way round this is for the thing you are overlaying to be black, that way you having got the issue of seeing anything from a layer underneath showing through. The goat is black... But more likely, having a look at the frames, the two boys are following the goat, they stop at a specific point, wait for a signal that the goat is out of shot, then continue with the act. The bit the director doesn't want us to see is simply cut out. And that is exactly what these guys do with all their false-flag events. Just snip out Mr Inconvenient.


Another look at the apparent locations of corpses. In the Andrei Mendierej video, he comes into the crash scene from the bottom of the plan, the two whitish rectangles bottom left relate to these two pieces of the wreckage.


We see the fire in the distance towards where the back of the plane is. Remember, this is minutes after the crash, no firefighters are on the scene yet, if there are bodies, there should be some evidence in the video. So looking towards the runway side...


There is something else white that doesn't appear on the map, so the image they are using cannot be trusted to be an accurate representation of the crash debris. Continuing, do we think they are saying the object on the ground to the right of it is a body? Another frame, no, it looks like more wood.

Polish president plane crash. 10 April 2010, Smolensk, Russia7.jpg

Looking through the Andrei Mendierej video, I very much suspect they retrospectively picked the locations of the bodies so they could say, well you see that video, he just didn't walk far enough in to see all the bodies that were lying behind that white wreckage, and the rest of them were on fire in the background.


See the line of sight, it's always the same convenient bullshit. What the wreckage doesn't block the tree does.

Polish president plane crash. 10 April 2010, Smolensk, Russia9.jpg

The thing with it, for all of these bodies to have been placed on the map, this tells us they claim to have photographic evidence to prove the bodies were in said locations. These pictures are never discussed, neither autopsy photos. This is important because they admit none of the Polish people there that day saw any bodies, their whole story about the crash hangs on the supplied written, photographic and video evidence of people outside the legal jurisdiction of Polish law. This is really all we need to know about this crash, because if this story unravels, no Polish person is going to prison for fraud, they did everything their end "in good faith".

One final thing, as Andrei Mendierej enters the scene of the crash, we see something interesting that tells its own story. A well walked trail leading to the crash site before anyone has arrived to put out the fires. Another nice coincidence, the Tupolev Tu-154M crashing where a trail just happens to already culminate.

Polish president plane crash. 10 April 2010, Smolensk, Russia10.jpg
User avatar
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 996 times
Been thanked: 1360 times

Re: Smolensk plane crash 2010 - Tu-154M 101

Unread post by rachel »

I'm thinking it was the Tu-154M 101 that was destroyed, it was a year older than the 102; but there appears to be a definite gap for the Poles to have scheduled the 102 for an overhaul at the Aviakor aviation plant in Samara, Russia, while actually sending the 101 on its final flight there. Meanwhile the 102 takes on the identity of the 101 and flies out to Smolensk on April 10, 2010. By this time the real 101 is in pieces at the crash site. After flying to an agreed location in Russian airspace, there is a switcheroo, a Russian military plane continues on to Smolensk spoofing the callsign of the Tu-154M 101 while the 102 heads for Samara where it has apparently been all the time.

I'll stop at this point, you know I like proofs of concept, well where I get this concept from is the Russian Aviation Authority itself and the apparent bombing of the MH17. The following is a compilation video with everything relating to MH17. It is the Radar footage starting about 16:30 minutes where I'm taking the above theory from. If Russia did the same in 2010 with the Tu-154M over Smolensk, this might be why they are so adamant the MH17 crash in 2014 was a false-flag.


As I say, the above is a compilation video; towards the end is the video where a Ukrainian/Russian woman apparently reached the MH17 crash 20 minutes after it was downed, she says there was a smell of formaldehyde and the bodies were Asian and had no blood. Previously I believed what she was presenting, but that was before I started researching FX studios.

Remember this?


An artist being commissioned to make something fake that looks authentic, that's the world we live in. The woman showing the dead bodies at one point says, they looked like mannequins, and, yellow plastic. Maybe that's code and she's telling us exactly what they are. Maybe she was commissioned to create a set of bodies that looked like they had been tortured. Or maybe they were created by students at an FX studio training college and were purchased cheap and reused as crash victims. What I'm saying, we live in a world where there is no boundaries on what is acceptable in fooling people. If they are silicon, then it explains why there is no blood.

And how real can they go? The second silicon body is from BBC 'Waking the Dead', which ran 2000–2011.

waking the dead 2.jpg

And since MH370 was mentioned, here's a video that talks about some of the mysteries surrounding it. One of the more interesting ones involves graphene; now where have we heard about that substance lately?

MH370: 10 Weird Facts about Flight MH370
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2022 2:09 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 70 times

Re: What is the proposed WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty?

Unread post by Marfer »

At 2:19 of the video the chapter about debris the tags cataloguing the debris are 9,6,5,3 - 9 11 3
User avatar
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 996 times
Been thanked: 1360 times

Re: Smolensk plane crash 2010 - Tu-154M 101

Unread post by rachel »

Thanks. It's amazing how sudden something that we never noticed before, how once you get it, straight away as a video runs, it's like, "TICK". - I've skimmed a fair few videos where Polish academics discuss the crash debris and what they think it shows. How much Polish taxpayer money thus-far has been burned on their computer models of the crash? And here, which piece of wreckage do we think is the main focus of this lecture?


I thought the graphene link was interesting, but having just looked it up, I remember then Chancellor George Osborne was big on it, graphene is a Russian invention. A Times report, 4 October 2011 - "By George, he has the answer: It’s graphene" - and not behind a paywall, 12 September 2014...

George Osborne Confirms New £60m MCR Graphene Centre ... ene-centre
Russian-born University of Manchester Professors, Sir Andre Geim and Sir Kostya Novoselov, isolated the material for the first time at the University in 2004. It won them the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2010, knighthoods in 2012 and the Freedom of Manchester (the highest honour the city can bestow) earlier this year.

I checked to see if the MH370 had been found, a couple of articles saying no, this the most interesting with regards to the numbers...

Does The Wreckage Of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 Been Found?
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 was a passenger flight operated by Malaysia Airlines. The plane vanished from the radar on March 8, 2014. As it was enroute from Kuala Lumpur International Airport in Malaysia to Beijing Capital International Airport in China. The plane never landed at its intended destination. The last time ATC heard from MH370 was about 38 minutes after takeoff, when the aircraft entered Vietnamese airspace in the early hours of March 8. The pilot, Zaharie Ahmad Shah, bid air traffic control “good night” at that time.

The plane then vanished from radar screens. At the time, Najib Razak, the country’s prime minister, declared that an investigation and analysis had revealed that the flight had likely ended up in a remote area of the southern Indian Ocean.

Debris from MH370 has washed up at multiple locations. The first piece of the wreckage was discovered in 2015 on the island of Réunion in the Indian Ocean. Since then, other pieces have been found in Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa, Madagascar, and Mauritius.

A total of 33 pieces of debris had been discovered as of December 2016. However, according to reports, only three have been confirmed to be from MH370. Many theories have been put forth to explain what might have happened the day it vanished. Although MH370’s fate is still unknown.


Finally, a couple of videos I was toying with posting in my last post. I found them fascinating regarding Diego Garcia. Would the U.S. mimic a trick performed by the Russians in 2010?

What Really Happened To Malaysian Airlines MH370 - 27 March 2014

Why Has Malaysian Airlines MH370 Still Not Been Found? - 4 Nov 2014

I think I'll discuss what I think the Russians did next post.
User avatar
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 996 times
Been thanked: 1360 times

Re: Smolensk plane crash 2010 - Dr Chris Cieszewski

Unread post by rachel »

I was thinking maybe the reason the Micro-Detail Comparative Forest Site Analysis presentation had so few views, less than 400 in nine years, was because it was presented in English.

Dr. Chris Cieszewski is an expert in forestry related study, and while he is a Polish national, at the time of the crash and subsequent investigation, he was working at the University of Alberta in Canada. Luckily for us, because of technical terminology he uses, he gave his presentation in English so he didn't mistranslate English terms in Polish and give the wrong impression. Clearly that would cut down the views, but there is another video on the same site where Dr. Chris Cieszewski is interviewed more generally, and that is a little older, but has 6,226 views.

Now granted it's embedded from a Polish Canadian Youtube channel, but was this a barrier to me finding both videos even though I have no Polish? I was very interested in what Dr. Chris Cieszewski's research showed, so I wanted to see if there was anything else under his name. I've found a handful of videos, unfortunately, most are in Polish with no captions, the one mentioned above, however, is in English, and there are some fascinating insights.

Smolensk Crash Investigation Expert Profiles
Dr. Chris Cieszewski, Ph.D. ... xpert.html

Prof. Dr inż. Chris J. Cieszewski, University of Georgia, Athens, USA
TVNiezaleznaPolonia Canada
Published: 21 May 2013

The interview with Ph.D., P.Eng., Chris Cieszewski, Faculty Professor - Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources - University of Georgia.
Professor Cieszewski was a member of the Organizing Committee of the Smolensk Conference ( Konferencja Smolenska ) that took place in Poland, Warsaw on 22 October 2012.

This is the site with a link to his report: ... alysis.pdf

Micro-detail comparative forest site analysis using high-resolution satellite imagery
By Chris J Cieszewski, Roger C Lowe, Pete Bettinger, Arun Kumar ... lysis.html
Abstract: This study presents comparative analysis of high-resolution satellite imagery taken on different dates around a detected incident of interest. Under an assumption of a micro-detail land monitoring and disturbance detection interests we compared the patterns of image captured disturbances on the analyzed site and leveraged their interpretation with knowledge base published on relevant subjects.

The incident of interest was the Polish Air Force One TU-154M plane destruction on Apr. 10, 2010. We analyzed the image changes on micro-detail level tracked over time and considered with respect to the patterns of destruction and the plane debris size distribution in space against a broad engineering literature describing destruction patterns of thin walled structures, such as planes and cars. Then, we compared the spatial distribution of the debris between the pictures taken on different dates. Finally, we also considered on ground changes in soil moisture and landscape features between different images.

The main conclusions from the study were that:
  1. the pattern of the plane destruction debris and their spatial distribution found on the ground following the catastrophe was not consistent with expectations associated with a plane crash but rather was suggestive of a plane explosion;
  2. the scene and the plane debris were manipulated over time during the very initial period after the destruction;
  3. surprisingly the numerous heavy equipment vehicles present on the site, which were much larger than the image spatial resolution, were not recorded on any of the satellite images from Apr. 11, 12, or 14, 2010;
  4. the frequency of the high resolution satellite imagery captured around this airport on the dates of Apr. 5, 9, 11, 12, and 14, 2010, is intriguing given that the last captured image of this type prior to April 5, 2010, took place only in 2007; and
  5. a large amount of snow-like high reflectivity coverage in the middle of the crash scene was followed by low reflectivity (suggestive of dry ground) areas following the crash despite generally swampy surroundings of the site and no reported explosion of the plane, which could imply a fast drying out of the melting snow large amounts of water.
  • Contrary to our earlier assumption, the white patches reported earlier as snow were some kind of man-made constructs that were placed in locations historically impervious to snow retainer.
  • The remarkable resemblance of some of the spacial arrangements of the white patches with the spatial arrangement of the plane debris remains a mystery, or perhaps a technological riddle, that is practically impossible to be a coincidence; and therefore, it should be investigated.
  • Given the facts that the Russian military carried out during the same timeframe some kind of maneuvers at the airport, and the fact that Russia is one of the most restrictive Police states in the world, these man-made white patches had to be constructed with the knowledge and consent of the Russian authorities and specifically the present military authorities.

Now from the interview above, we get some fascinating insights. Dr. Chris Cieszewski is an independent researcher, as in, he does his research from the University of Georgia, but the scope of his research is dependent on him and what he can get University funding for. This is the whole crux of the problem with "FOLLOW THE SCIENCE", scientists only follow the science paved by funding, I'm guessing that's the YELLOW BRICK ROAD. He got funding for tree study, but I suspect, once he presented his conclusions, no more funding for this particular topic came his way. And probably, because he knows what his conclusions mean, and that no one else is prepared to pick up his research in their expert areas, there are more productive things to do with his career, this is not his hill to die on.

I liked this following quote from him, and know this is my primary motivation. I asked myself one question, and looking it up I saw the beginning of a pattern I have seen before, so I couldn't help but follow it a long a bit.
In terms of scientific levels and competence, everyone who is involved in this group, are people who are doing things that are expected of them, if not explicitly in geographic place and time. In the spirit and scope of the knowledge, there is actually nothing I can think of more stimulating than working with difficult problems, and having very little data, very little access to the problem, and trying to solve this situation. Estimating the parameters from a very small sample, I think was a very stimulating and fruitful, and good for everybody problem.

I'll use his report and put my other research finding spin on it. Because he's a professional, he's only prepared to comment on forestry, he indicates white man-made structures in his report, but he will not make any claims about what they are. He needs another expert in that area to pick up the batten and run with it. There are no takers, therefore his evidence has gone nowhere in nine years. This is 'THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD' in a nutshell.
User avatar
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 996 times
Been thanked: 1360 times

Re: WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty - Swine Flu

Unread post by rachel »

I'm going to spend a little time setting the scene. I'm not a forensic scientist, I don't aim to find as many proofs as possible to carpet-bomb other theories. I just set up assumptions and I look for evidence to prove them wrong. If I can prove them wrong, I cross off that particular line of reasoning. What I have found, and why some of my theories seem so outlandish, is I've not been able to cross them off. And the more times I come up with something and think, 'well this will surely prove it wrong', and I find a gap, then the more the coincidences point to it not being "coincidence" at all. Rather I have found the back door used to pull off the trick.

So, a year before the crash...

In 2009, if we suggest the Swine flu pandemic was supposed to look something like the COVID-19 pandemic. Mass vaccination of the whole world, or at least the whole of the European Union. But until they put it into operation in the EU, they didn't know fully the strength of opposition of the people in prominent positions who would tell the WHO to take a running jump when it came to an untested vaccine; - could I be getting back to the WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty by chance?

This makes sense with regards to the UK and the endless harping on about it by the BBC, at that point in time most people were going, it the bloody flu for crying out loud... I wasn't watching much tv at the time, but I was doing a fair bit of intercity train travel, In coming to a UK train station, they usually have rolling news visuals next to train departures, you can't escape, and you know when you watch with the sound off, it takes on a more keystone cops air about it.

Now on wiki, check out the cases/death numbers, so they were using that metric then it would appear. Apparently Italy had over 3 million cases, and France 2 million; Russia 25,339. So we can deduce the actual trigger point for robbing the world through the purchase of vaccines is likely Rome.

Wiki: 2009 swine flu pandemic by country ... by_country

The whole yarn about keeping countries in lockdowns during COVID-19 was mutating variants, exactly like "confirmed mutation of H1N1 virus". Again, this map indicates where the complete corruption was in 2009. It clearly surpassed the rest of the world in the intervening decade; commonwealth countries thanks to King Charles III's click, he announced the CORONA VIRUS after all.

Confirmed mutation of H1N1 virus
Confirmed mutation of H1N1 virus

We can see why under Jo Biden there is no border between North America and South America, and yet Canadians had to get a vaccine to get in. Look at that map, Rome declaring its territory. Italy, of course... Out of interest, which European country locked down its citizens first for COVID-19? Italy wasn't it... Fancy that. And France, oh yes, you're no longer a citizen if you don't get vaccinated. And besides Brazil, we have China and Ukraine. COVID-19 was like the Swine Flu college reunion, crack out the TAMIFLU injections all around. ... big-pharma
...The battle over Tamiflu perfectly illustrates the need for full transparency around clinical trials, the importance of access to obscure documentation, and the failure of the regulatory system. Crucially, it is also an illustration of how science, at its best, is built on transparency and openness to criticism, because the saga of the Cochrane Tamiflu review began with a simple online comment.

In 2009, there was widespread concern about a new flu pandemic, and billions were being spent stockpiling Tamiflu around the world. Because of this, the UK and Australian governments specifically asked the Cochrane Collaboration to update its earlier reviews on the drug. Cochrane reviews are the gold-standard in medicine: they summarise all the data on a given treatment, and they are in a constant review cycle, because evidence changes over time as new trials are published. This should have been a pretty everyday piece of work: the previous review, in 2008, had found some evidence that Tamiflu does, indeed, reduce the rate of complications such as pneumonia. But then a Japanese paediatrician called Keiji Hayashi left a comment that would trigger a revolution in our understanding of how evidence-based medicine should work. This wasn't in a publication, or even a letter: it was a simple online comment, posted informally underneath the Tamiflu review on the Cochrane website, almost like a blog comment.

but its positive conclusion was driven by data from just one of the papers it cited: an industry-funded summary of 10 previous trials, led by an author called Kaiser. From these 10 trials, only two had ever been published in the scientific literature. For the remaining eight, the only available information on the methods used came from the brief summary in this secondary source, created by industry. That's not reliable enough.

This is science at its best. The Cochrane review is readily accessible online; it explains transparently the methods by which it looked for trials, and then analysed them, so any informed reader can pull the review apart, and understand where the conclusions came from. Cochrane provides an easy way for readers to raise criticisms. And, crucially, these criticisms did not fall on deaf ears. Dr Tom Jefferson is the head of the Cochrane respiratory group, and the lead author on the 2008 review. He realised immediately that he had made a mistake in blindly trusting the Kaiser data. He said so, without defensiveness, and then set about getting the information needed.

First, the Cochrane researchers wrote to the authors of the Kaiser paper. By reply, they were told that this team no longer had the files: they should contact Roche. Here the problems began. Roche said it would hand over some information, but the Cochrane reviewers would need to sign a confidentiality agreement. This was tricky: Cochrane reviews are built around showing their working, but Roche's proposed contract would require them to keep the information behind their reasoning secret from readers. More than this, the contract said they were not allowed to discuss the terms of their secrecy agreement, or publicly acknowledge that it even existed. Roche was demanding a secret contract, with secret terms, requiring secrecy about the methods and results of trials, in a discussion about the safety and efficacy of a drug that has been taken by hundreds of thousands of people around the world, and on which governments had spent billions. Roche's demand, worryingly, is not unusual. At this point, many in medicine would either acquiesce, or give up. Jefferson asked Roche for clarification about why the contract was necessary. He never received a reply...

What has this got to do with the Polish crash of 96 victims in 2010? Well, I suspect very much this...

Poland's internal swine flu fight
December 6, 2009 ... -flu-fight
WARSAW, Poland — Poland is standing alone against the swine flu, as one of the only European Union member states to refuse to place orders for the H1N1 virus vaccine because of the health minister's concerns about its safety.

But now the country’s human rights ombudsman is threatening the health minister, Ewa Kopacz, with prosecution unless she moves on the vaccine.

Kopacz, who is also a doctor, is worried about the vaccine and is refusing to act until the pharmaceutical companies making the vaccine accept responsibility for any side effects, something they have been excused from by the World Health Organization’s declaration of a pandemic.

“If I had a 100 percent certainty that the vaccine was a panacea for the swine flu, I would certainly buy it,” Kopacz said in an interview with radio station Tok FM, adding that she felt drug companies were “covering up” some information about the vaccines.

“I feel that the research on the vaccines lasted too short a time,” she said.

Kopacz’s stand is very different from most of her European counterparts. Mass vaccination programs have begun in France, Germany and Scandinavia, as well as in central European countries like Hungary.

Her position has put her at odds with Janusz Kochanowski, who heads Poland’s human rights office, and worries that Poland is completely unprepared for dealing with a potential swine flu epidemic. He is toying with the idea of filing charges against Kopacz.

“What is the ombudsman supposed to do when he is powerless and ignored?” Kochanowski asked in a Tok FM interview. “I wake up with this issue and go to sleep with it, because my back is up against the wall and I don’t see any other answer.”

Despite Kopacz' medical background, there are concerns that she is taking a potential risk if the current influenza season gets much worse. Kochanowski has said that he doesn’t know how many people’s deaths Kopacz will have on her conscience. He has called on Poles to inoculate themselves in other European countries where the vaccination is available.

A deputy health minister, in turn, has threatened to refer Kochanowski to the prosecutor’s office for complicating the ministry’s work.

As of Saturday, health authorities have said that 38 people have died in Poland from the swine flu and about 750 have been infected. However, the true level of infections is impossible to determine, both because people with milder cases tend not to report them, and because Poland has very few tests to confirm the presence of the H1N1 virus. Most of the tests have to be performed in neighboring Germany.

As well as lacking tests, the Polish health care system also needs more equipment like artificial lungs, to keep patients with severe influenza cases breathing.

The Polish media has been consumed with the swine flu story, reporting every death and serious case. So far there has been no panic like in neighboring Ukraine, where the country was paralyzed with fear a couple of weeks ago, with schools being shut down and thousands donning generally ineffective face masks to protect themselves against the virus.

Although there is something of the hypochondriac in the Polish character — garlic cures and energy treatments are popular – it is more than balanced by a conspiratorial worldview which would subscribe to the idea of pharmaceutical companies keeping knowledge of the side effects of vaccines to themselves, as well as a suspicion of bureaucracy, including the health ministry.

But if the disease takes a turn for the worse, then Kopacz’s stand could have political ramifications. She is a minister in the center-right government of Donald Tusk, and Kochanowski is a political ally of Lech Kaczynski, Poland’s right-wing president and Tusk’s likely rival in next year’s presidential elections.

On his web page, Kochanowski’s office has a note for every patient killed by the swine flu virus.

So, the health minister, Ewa Kopacz, was part of the centre-right government of Donald Tusk, and the human rights ombudsman, Janusz Kochanowski, was a political ally of the late Lech Kaczynski. Isn't this the wrong way around? I would suggest, Poland, like most other countries has a Uni-party pretending to be left and right. It was suggest, in the upcoming elections in 2010, Lech Kaczynski was likely to loose power. So in creating a distraction with one hand, the actual trick can be performed with the other. And we discover via part three of the Grzegorz Braun documentary, Ewa Kopacz is the same health minister who claimed to have personally supervised the identification of the bodies in Smolensk, when later it was revealed, no Polish specialists saw the bodies.

And what do you know...

In 2009 Kopacz gained some degree of international fame by requesting pharmaceutical companies to present the advantages of swine flu vaccines, and demanding they take full responsibility for the side effects. She advised the Polish government to wait until proper testing had been done on the vaccine before investing in it, citing the fact that seasonal flu exceeds the current WHO criteria for pandemic every year but there has been no declaration of a pandemic of this much more dangerous seasonal flu. The Polish government refused to purchase the vaccine in question.

On 22 September 2014 Ewa Kopacz was sworn in as Prime Minister, after Donald Tusk resigned to take office as President of the European Council, and formed a cabinet. On 8 November 2014 she was sworn in as leader of the Civic Platform.

In her first major policy speech as prime minister, Kopacz promised more continuity in Poland's foreign policy. She said her government would not stand for a break-up of neighboring Ukraine and would push for a greater U.S. military presence in Poland as a deterrent to possible Russian aggression. For domestic political reasons she decided to replace Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski with her party rival Grzegorz Schetyna. Instead, she made Sikorski the speaker of the parliament.

At her first EU summit in October 2014, Kopacz managed to persuade the other Member States that Poland deserved lucrative concessions as part of a deal to cut European carbon emissions. After the European Commission opened infringement proceedings against Poland for violating particle pollution levels and was investigating reports that it has also exceeded limits on nitrogen oxides, Kopacz's government declared 2015 to be the Year of Improving Air Quality and backed a proposal to empower regional authorities to clamp down on pollution from vehicles and from the burning of coal and wood in homes.

She has a bit of a man look, but I think it is more likely that's because part of her face is plastic. The hair, forehead and eyebrows, and the troweled on eye makeup to hide it. Only fake persons become Prime Ministers.
User avatar
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 996 times
Been thanked: 1360 times

Re: Smolensk plane crash 2010 - Tu-154M 101

Unread post by rachel »

Returning to the crash, let's start with the plane swap theory. One of Chris Cieszewski's conclusions was that the white patches seen on an aerial image dated April 5 were man-made constructs in the areas the subsequent plane wreckage would be. If this indeed is the pre-sectioned Tupolev Tu-154M 101 ready for staging, then if a Tupolev Tu-154M took off from Warsaw on April 10, it would have to have been the Tu-154M 102 instead.

So looking at the Final Report of the crash, we see some interesting admissions that apparently have no good reason except for incompetence or hiding something.

English translation of the Final Report on the accident on 10 April 2010, on Smolensk "Severny" airdrome ... f/1433.pdf

From page 132 of the report:
The Tu-154M t/n 101, MSN 90А837 was manufactured in June 1990. By the time of the accident the aircraft was in service for 5150 hours and about 140 hours after last overhaul. The last overhaul was done in December 2009 at Aviakor Aviation Plant. On the basis of the accident site examination as well as analysis: of the wreckage plot, wreckage layout, the instrument examination and flight recorders information, the investigation team did not detect any failures of the aircraft systems and engines. Despite the fact that the Polish side did not provide the Certificate of Airworthiness for the aircraft, the investigation came to a general conclusion that the accident was not connected with the aircraft technical service or maintenance.

At the accident site the investigation team found an Airworthiness Certificate for the Tu-154M aircraft tail number 101 that had expired on May 20, 2009 as well as a current Airworthiness Certificate issued for another aircraft (tail number 102) that was under overhaul at the time of the accident. According to the Russian AIP GEN 1.5-2 section 4 Airworthiness Certificate shall be onboard a foreign aircraft carrying out international flight.

The aircraft was not insured. The crew members did not have insurance policies. In violation of Para 2.2 of Section GEN 1.6 of the Russian AIP the flight was conducted without compulsory insurance or other kinds of securing the responsibility of the owners of the aircraft for damage caused to third parties.

On April 10, 2010, what's the 101 doing with the current Airworthiness Certificate of the 102? Particularly if the regulations state, the aircraft must have it on board when carrying out international flights in Russia.

In the plane-swap theory, the Tu-154M 102 is booked in for its overhaul at Samara specifically as an excuse to get the 101 to Russia unnoticed so it can be cut up and arranged at the crash site prior to the staged crash. So when the 102 apparently flew out for its overhaul, it was actually the 101 carrying the 102's documentation, all except the Airworthiness Certificate, this was actually correct for the plane that was flying that day, and in accordance with the stated Russian regulations. Likewise, when the 102 flew out on April 10, it had the 101's documentation, all except for the Airworthiness Certificate, and this was also correct and identified the plane that was actually flying that day, again in accordance with stated Russian regulations.

When the documentation was produced after the crash, the investigators were given the 101's documentation, and for some reason the Airworthiness Certificate wasn't switched back. It might have been an oversight, or it might have been done purposely to prove the 102 was in fit working order on April 10 when it flew to Russia. One other reason, it is probably good practice to leave enough evidence to unpicked the story of the crash at a later date if necessary. What I mean, if you are going to fake a plane crash where 96 important foreign nationals die, it is as well to be able to prove you did actually fake the crash and that no one actually died at the scene, lest the other side later decides to double-cross you and starts insinuating you shot down the plane and murdered all the passengers.

On to insurance, "The aircraft was not insured." - the 101 wasn't insured because it was the 102 that was flying that day, and the 101's insurance was likely cancelled once it was cut up. Also, "The crew members did not have insurance policies." - this could be for a few reasons. 1. The identities of the crew were fake, so no insurance could be sort for the fake names, instead the crew were insured under their real names. 2. The crew had insurance for the 102 that day and not the 101. 3. The flight crew were actually Russian military pilots, and as such they don't use civil insurance authorities at all. I favour 3 personally.

I suspect something like the above then takes place on April 10 when the Tu-154M 102 reaches Russian airspace and is under Russian Air-traffic Control. But instead of instantly dropping chaff to create a crash site, the PLF 101 callsign is spoofed by a military craft, which then continues on to Smolensk. I suggest this because of the low flying requirements and the smokescreen/fog that is being setup at the location.

This is the Yak-40 (PLF 031 flight), tail number 044 - the death number.


Yak-40 (PLF 031 flight), tail number 44
Yak-40 (PLF 031 flight), tail number 44

This is weird, and I think proof that everything above, if you can follow it, is correct. From page 10 of the final report.
On March 2010 the Third European Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Russian Federation was sent Letter PdS 10-14-2010 from the Embassy of the Republic of Poland with two requests attached to conduct non-scheduled (single) flights in the Russian airspace on April 10, 2010.

According to the requests two flights were planned for April 10, 2010 from Warsaw (EPWA) to Smolensk "Severny" airdrome (XUBS) and back to Warsaw (EPWA) on Tu-154M (tail number 101, flight PLF 101) and Yak-40 (tail number 044, flight PLF 031). The flight objective was specified as “the visit of Polish delegation headed by the President of the Republic to Katyn and participation in the celebrations in the Memorial Complex”.

The letter of the Embassy of the Republic of Poland in the Russian Federation contained a request to provide handling at Smolensk airdrome as well as “up-to-date airport charts and procedures”. The Polish side requested to provide a navigator on board the aircraft. The request in question was agreed upon by the Department of Management and Control of the VIP flights of the Russian CAA on March 31, 2010. The PLF 101 flight was assigned Category A and the PLF 031 was assigned Category K.

In accordance with Para 3.13 GEN 1.2-9 of the Aeronautical Information Publication of the Russian Federation and countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (Russian AIP) on April 9 the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Russian Federation sent Letter 176CD/10 to the Polish Embassy in the Russian Federation with a flight permission for Flight PLF 101 and Letter 177CD/10 with a flight permission for Flight PLF 031.

On March 30, 2010 the Third European Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Russian Federation was sent one more letter PdS 10-19-2010 from the Embassy of the Republic of Poland with three requests to conduct non-scheduled (single) flights in the Russian airspace on April 7, 2010.

According to the requests for April 7, 2010 three flights were planned with route Warsaw (EPWA)-Smolensk "Severny" (XUBS)-Warsaw (EPWA) on Tu-154M (tail number 101, flight PLF 102) and two Yak-40 (tail number 044*, flight PLF 034 and tail number 044, flight 035) with a Polish delegation headed by the Chairman of the Minister Council of the Republic of Poland.

*Two identical tail numbers were mentioned in the requests.

Do you see it, maybe they hoped no one would actually read the report. So Tusk and Putin attend the official Katyn Forrest anniversary memorial on April 7. But earlier in March Lech Kaczynski had arranged to attend a Mass in the Katyn Forrest on April 10, pictured earlier in this thread.

PLF is the radar callsign designation for Polish flights. So you'll notice above, from the 7th to the 10th apparently the plane with the tail number 101 switched its call sign from PLF 102 to PLF 101. Now add this together with the fact this Tu-154M, that apparently has the tail number 101, is also carrying the required current Certificate of Airworthiness for the 102, and repeat, on April 7, its radar call sign was PLF 102. Which is more likely, it's the 102 or the 101? And if it's the 102, the 101 didn't fly to Smolensk on April 10, because one of these two planes was already in Samara, Russia, having an overhaul.

And then finally we have the two tail numbers of 044... Is this a distraction, a signal, is it designed to point out there can be two Polish planes using the same tail number. It's got to be on purpose because it's the number 44.
User avatar
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 996 times
Been thanked: 1360 times

Re: Smolensk plane crash 2010 - Yak-40

Unread post by rachel »

On page 10 of the final report quoted in the last post, it is stated a letter was sent in March 2010 requesting a landing at Smolensk for a Tu-154M and Yak-40 on April 10. And this was agreed to also by letter. These letters apparently exist.

But then we have the following video where one of the widows, still in black three years after the crash, appears to also have worked for the government as she's giving the reason why they thought it was a good idea to put all the most important people in Poland from one political persuasion on the same plane, when they had two planes booked and they'd never done that before. The journalists always flew with the president, yet on this one trip, the journalist travelled ahead in the Yak-40, I'm guessing so they could be on the spot to film the unfolding trauma as it happened.

Why was the Polish government delegation flying to Smolensk onboard a single aircraft?
Wykleci channel, Published: 4 Feb 2013

On April 10, 2010, Polish Government military aircraft, Tupolev Tu-154M crashed under mysterious circumstances near Smolensk Russia. One of the most puzzling questions surrounding this mysterious crash, concerns the reasons why the entire Polish government delegation flew to Smolensk onboard a single aircraft? Magdalena Merta, the "Smolensk Widow" explains the reasons why.

Synopsis: January 12, 2013, Toronto, Canada. The wife of the late Deputy-Minister of Culture Tomasz Merta: "What I am about to tell you now, are suspicions - and not even my own - but, rather the (suspicions of the) individuals in the inner-circles of the Polish military... I heard a statement that was made - but, I am not taking any responsibility for how credible, or not credible it is. (I heard that) had the generals and journalists' not been re-assigned to different aircraft, it wouldn't have been the Tupolev Tu-154M, but rather the Casa transport aircraft that would have been taken out.

Because the Generals were no longer onboard the Casa, there was no reason for it to get airborne. And for this reason it was the Yak-40 that flew off to Smolensk. This Casa transport aircraft was never examined in any way. It was not subject to any examination. Aside from a single note in the deposition given to the military, no one was interested why this aircraft didn't fly to Smolensk. Perhaps, this is someones crazy phantasy, but perhaps it isn't.

Some Polish military personnel had suggested, that the Casa had to stay behind at the Okecie military tarmack, so that the explosives could be removed from it - because they were no longer needed. I am only repeating what I was told."

I'm not expecting anyone to watch it, but she's talking about a plane switch, and promoting the idea of a bomb on a Casa transport aircraft that was meant to fly on the day, but was switched out for the Yak-40 last minute, the one that according to the final report had official permission granted by a letter in March to land in Smolensk where as the Casa didn't.


So either she's lying, or the report is lying, or they are both lying.
User avatar
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 996 times
Been thanked: 1360 times

Re: Smolensk plane crash 2010

Unread post by rachel »

I wonder how far to go with this. I don't think this story is over, thirteen years and counting. It's a funding pit like Ukraine and climate change, and the people promoting the 'bombs on board' theory released a new report in 2022.

Gif-VideoID-J0W74f-5FsQ.gif (2.64 MiB) Viewed 650 times

That's the Scooby-Doo science they are currently promoting, they have to cover the door being blown out with the light of the explosion because it still looks fake. What they are trying to do is build a model to explain this.

(text translation by Google Translate)

Apparently the passenger boarding door was buried in the ground vertically and was totally covered by soil. So they say this means it can't be a simple crash, it must be an explosion that blew the door out.


I don't think you can explain that door other than there is some reason they wanted to bury it that way. Like the Russians created the challenge, "explain this with computer models", but the model they have to create is a crash scenario, not reality. The ground over the door was levelled, which points to it being purposely staged, just like "drywall rubble pile" by Rena Leinberger.
User avatar
Posts: 3311
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 996 times
Been thanked: 1360 times

Re: Smolensk plane crash 2010

Unread post by rachel »

Grzegorz Braun, in part two of his documentary, makes a big thing about Donald Tusk's meetings with Vladimir Putin prior to the 2010 crash. I've not looked into Polish politics, but on the face of it, it seems to have the same setup as Russia, and France for that matter. The country has a President and a Prime Minister, and where as prior to Tusk the Kaczynski twins held both Polish posts, Vladimir Putin plays swapsee with another bloke. So once Boris Yeltsin disappeared, Putin took over both jobs. Or maybe the Prime Minister's post was created on May 7, 2000 and Wiki just back dates it to Putin's rule. Putin starts off as acting-president on the last day of 1999, and thereafter switches between President and Prime Minister and back.

Acting President & Prime Minister: 31 December 1999 – 7 May 2000
President: 7 May 2000 – 7 May 2008
Prime Minister: 8 May 2008 – 7 May 2012
President: 7 May 2012 - Incumbent

At the time of the Smolensk plane crash in 2010, Putin was Prime Minister, and therefore he held the same office as Donald Tusk; so it makes sense why it would be him, with Tusk, appearing at the Smolensk crash to pay his respects.

Interestingly enough, they only turned up in the evening of April 10, so we have some eerie visuals of them visiting the crash site in the dark. The flowers, white lilies and red roses.


And the Mass earlier in the day at Katyn Forrest...


Just a little factoid; perhaps why red and white flowers got their tradition:
Red and white flowers
  1. Red and white flowers together not allowed, represent blood and tears. Never take red and white flowers to anyone in hospital. Very unlucky. London, 1960s [Lambeth Horticultural Society, London, November 2015].
  2. Clackmannanshire in the 1950s and Caithness in the 1960s … Mum never liked red and white flowers put together – Wars of the Roses? blood and peace? [Thurso, Caithness, January 2012].
  3. When my mother was in hospital they went really potty when someone brought in red and white flowers. That was Hants in 1974 [Westminster Quaker Meeting House, London, October 2009].
  4. They say red and white [flowers] together are unlucky; I don’t know why [Maida Hill, London, November 2008].
  5. I grew up in the Cotswolds … My mother was very superstitious … She wouldn’t put red and white flowers in the same vase as she said it was like blood and bandages! [Crewkerne, Somerset, January 2007].
  6. [Newcastle-on-Clun area, Shropshire] red and white flowers should never be put together, this foretells death [Sandiway, Cheshire, October 2004].
  7. In church decorations … red flowers with white gypsophila at Whitsun to symbolise fire and smoke [Harrow-on-the-Hill, Middlesex, October 2004].
  8. Red and white flowers together: unlucky, represent blood and bandages [Barking, Essex, August 2004].
  9. A man from Australia … said that when he had had to go into hospital he had had some red and white flowers brought in by a visitor, but the nurse would not allow it [Natural History Museum, London, September 1998].
  10. I have just retired but I started nursing during the War. I found that red and white flowers in the same vase made some patients uneasy; they would mutter ‘Red and whte, someone will die’. If the colours were separated into a vase of red blossoms and one of white this was acceptable [Penicuik, Midlothian, April 1982].

This is interesting; it's part of the above footage the media took of the scene, apparently on the night of April 10th. Do you notice anything?

Polish president plane crash. 10 April 2010, Smolensk, Russia2.jpg

If you were putting them in order regarding which photo you thought was taken first. Which would it be? The ground looks wet in the second one, and that goes with the distinct Andrei Mendierej video's walking sound. I just don't think you could get from the second to the first photo on the same day given there was supposedly lots of activity around the area checking for, and moving corpses.

Donald Tusk and Vladimir Putin attended a ceremony at Katyn Forest on April 7, 2010... ... /a-5440981
Katyn massacre

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and his Polish counterpart Donald Tusk on Wednesday mourned the 22,000 people murdered by Russian forces in the Katyn Forest in World War II. It was the first joint commemoration.

Reconciliation between Russia and Poland.jpg
Reconciliation between Russia and Poland.jpg (16.26 KiB) Viewed 618 times

The Russian and Polish prime ministers marked a turning point in diplomatic relations as they stood side by side to honor the 22,000 people killed by Soviet forces in Katyn Forest in 1940.

Russia's Vladimir Putin and Poland's Donald Tusk attended a joint ceremony to commemorate the victims of the World War II massacre ordered by Josef Stalin 70 years ago.

Both leaders laid wreaths at a memorial for the Polish officers and intellectuals that were killed. They also shook hands as a gesture of reconciliation...

You don't think they would have been sneaky enough to arrive at Smolensk in the early hours of the morning on April 7th, I mean like 3 AM, and filmed their sequence laying flowers at the crash site which is less than half a mile from where the plane lands and within the same Russian airbase compound. Then after doing all their media stuff there, they proceed on to the above ceremony in Katyn Forrest for the main event...killing two birds with one stone.

Movie producer Grzegorz Braun, and others, talk about a piece of radar equipment that was specifically installed and used on the Wednesday to aid the landing of Putin's and Tusk's planes, and was then removed after they left. Let's guess the equipment was installed to specifically aid landing in the dead of night. I think this is a goer, and exactly why its filmed in the dark. Do it when everyone is asleep and it's like it never happened. It also cuts down on the ability to timestamp the video. I wonder when Jaroslaw Kaczynski made his appearance?

The Grzegorz Braun film seeks to link all these oddities up in a coherent, but totally fictional way. No wonder he is now an elected Polish politician.
Post Reply