Was MH17 Shot Down? Why No Fireball Or Smoke Trail? Why No Missile Trail? Why No Plane?

Was MH17 Shot Down? Why No Fireball Or Smoke Trail? Why No Missile Trail? Why No Plane?

The more that AUN-TV looks into this, the less likely the official explanation makes sense. How could the Malaysian MH17 777 be “blown out of the sky”, as Vice President Biden has put it, with no fire or smoke trail in the sky?

All photos and videos that have been released so far show no fire or smoke before there is an explosion on the ground,  30,000′ below.   In fact there is no serious photo/video evidence of the airliner in the air, so far.

Lets look at what has been reported.  First it has been asserted that debris are spread over miles, this article being an example http://www.3news.co.nz/Photos-Malaysia-Airlines-plane-crash-Spread Over Miles

Yet the photos in that article show very concentrated wreckage as one would expect in an air to ground accident.  Their photos contradict their headline.

As AUN-TV has already reported, a video shows the sky before the plane crashed and started burning, with Ukrainians in their language (if the translation is correct) stating it was shot down.  But there is no missile trail, no fire and no smoke, until after the ground explosion.

The best evidence of a missile shoot down is that people are looking in the sky and filming before the ground explosion.

Can airliners with thousands of gallons of fuel be blown out of the sky with a large missile, without a fire?

We have not been able to find a case of that happening.  Here are examples of actual footage of missiles hitting planes:


Actual Missile Strike causes fire and smoke


Below is a video of a MIG-23 shoot down at very low altitude and not by missile, it was bullet fire instead, no explosive warhead involved.  It still caught fire.

Below is another Surface to Air demo.  Even though the drones are tiny, there are fireballs and smoke.

The below video shows at least 10 shoot downs via missiles and every missile left an exhaust trail and every hit created a fireball and black smoke. At 1:48 to 2:10 is a real combat shoot down of jet plane. This results in a huge fireball and the plane being blown into multiple large burning pieces, followed by black smoke, similar to what all witnesses saw happen to TWA800.


At 2:25 a large ground based missile similar to what we are being told was used on MH17 leaves a massive exhaust trail.

Forbes, normally a reliable source of news, said on 7-18 “The Malaysian Airliner Flight MH17 was brought down in eastern Ukraine. Local resident who witnessed the disaster described seeing a huge explosion and dead bodies falling from the sky. It appears the plane was “shot” by a surface to air missile.The Ukrainian government blames separatist fighters with circumstantial evidence.”

This is the standard report on the incidence, but lets examine the implications of it? A huge explosion and bodies falling from the sky is indeed what is likley in a large missile strike on an airliner. It would  blow the fuselage apart into pieces, so the bodies escape the cabin and fall separately. It would also catch the thousands of gallons of fuel on fire (fuel capacity is 47,000 gallons). 

But that completely contradicts the videos before and after the ground explosion.  There are no flames, and no smoke trails.  An intact, not on fire 777,  plummeting in one piece to earth, matches the videos better, except one video that shows mostly paper debris.

AUN-TV has found one video that does show small debris falling after the ground explosion.  This is the best evidence so far that a missile strike took place. It is from this article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/We-warned

This is the closest in video we have found, to the ground explosion.  It does show non-burning and non-smoking debris falling.  Some looks like papers fluttering.  There are four white streamers that look to be about 100 or 200 feet long, maintaining the same length, as they come down.  Could they be toilet rolls?   This evidence is most helpful and it is the only evidence of any breach of the cabin we have seen so far.  Yet it still does not indicate a high altitude breakup and fire.  In fact that article says the rebels are boasting about the smoke the initial missile impact caused ‘Igor the Terrible’ – announces: ‘The plane was hit!’ He adds: ‘Look at those black spots, these are the parts, flying … it was a blast … look, look, black smoke!’

But there is no black smoke on way down, only from the ground up.     Being that paper would come down minutes, if not possibly an hour later, from 32,000 feet, this indicates that a breach of the cabin or cargo area might have happened near the ground.  If MH17 was headed straight down and intact, that could happen as the airspeed would go supersonic and exceed what the plane could handle.  Planes do breakup from exceeding their design speed limitations.

Is there any prior video evidence that matches what we see in the MH17 videos?  Yes there is.   It is a 747 crash at Bagram, Afghanistan.  It was an accidental stall on takeoff.   The ground fireball and smoke is very much like Malaysian MH17 crash videos.

Is MH17 a false flag operation, or is this just poor reporting causing this rush to judgement?

And we need to remember that the same airline is still missing the same model plane, a Boeing 777, MH-370,  an amazing coincidence.  AUN-TV is not saying that it was not shot down by a missile, it may have been.  We are saying the video evidence of a large missile strike at 32,000′ is weak.  Wars are often started after sensationally reported incidents like this one.  The likley accidental coal dust explosion on the USS Maine is a good example of that.  It ended up starting the Spanish American War.  Today it is generally agreed it was a coal dust accident, even the US Navy, which said it was a mine at the time of the war,  today admits that it was likley coal dust.   http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq71-1.htm


  1. I really like the article and the I will call them “missing witnesses”, especially to your point there is no evidence the plane was even in the air! Very good emphasis on missile explosions and plane crashes. Looking critically at this alleged tragedy, (Australian woman whose son was killed on MH-370 and her daughter was on MH-17.) I am strongly leaning to false flag.

  2. […] strike? I have seen none, but this article indicates the videos show only a ground explosion. Was MH17 Shot Down? Why No Fireball Or Smoke Trail? Why No Missile Trail? | AUN-TV It is strange, very strange. the videos and pics indicate a completely intact plane not on fire […]

  3. Never forget … a former MI5 female whistleblower mentioned years ago (1990’s onwards) that “false flags” are the “norm” not the exception.

    Putin is involved with BRIC (i.e. Brazil-Russia-India-China) nations, who recently setup their own banking system in competition with IMF and would allow business with non-BRIC entities (BRIC nations account for ~40% of global population),
    Putin recently offerred debt-relief for Cuba (probably for access to former Soviet bases). Russia is energy supply for portions of Europe.

    With the above and more, Russian is a “player” in the global scene. What would be the strategic advantage in Russia purposely downing a civilian aircraft ?

    About the same time as the MH-17 incident, about 200 Palestinians were killed due to bombing of Gaza from Israeli military actions ordered by the Israeli government.

    Could it be possible that the former incident, i.e. MH-17, offers a distraction for the latter incident (Israeli attack of Palestinians) while at the same time the “rebellious” (patriotic) Putin is targeted by the “powers that be” ?
    “Two bird with one stone …”

    Stay tuned ….

  4. The BUK 1 has a proximity fuze, not impact. in all these pics, no evidence of missile exhaust, no plane, no falling burning debris, just a wreck site. one can only wonder WHEN all these photos were taken. the condition of most of the bodies largely unmolested . this entire debacle smells to high heaven, and amerika.

    • Ted, the ground evidence seems to match the official story. The air evidence does not, yet. With over 60 million cell phones in Ukraine how is it no one caught any flames, smoke or debris? It is a mystery. It was during the day and fairly clear, people said they heard the explosion then all sorts of things fell out of the sky on this town. Things should have rained down for minutes, heavy first. We are just looking for the truth at AUN, and it is not easy to figure out on this one. Thank you for your comment.

  5. Not only do all of the comments so far raise suspicion, but how did the cameraman know where to shoot? Sound travels much slower than light. By the time you hear an explosion, the fireball would already be in fall swing so to speak. We see the video start from an empty horizon, we see the fire-ball and we see the smoke. So, the only way the cameraman could be waiting camera in hand ready to shoot that explosion was from knowing where the MH17 was BEFORE it blew up.

    • Lance, you are absolutely correct. AUN-TV has written many articles on MH-17 and some of them have mentioned that. The cameraman/woman was anticipating the ground explosion. The camera action, of pointing up and down normally means trying to acquire the target. But in this case it could be a ruse, a magicians distraction method to make it look as if they see something in sky and are trying to acquire it in the viewfinder, when the real reason is there is nothing in the sky, but they know the ground explosion is coming. Video is very good today, its all digital. We have about 120 frames of video stills to look at (4 seconds). If something was coming down, even pieces smaller than ones found on ground, it defies digital imaging science if we can not see it on those 120 frames. And we can not.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.