A WALL OF LIES IS GOING TO COLLAPSE ONE DAY
Wiesława Lewandowska talks with the Member of Parliament Antoni Macierewicz about a strange shape and arrangement of the debris of the aeroplane Tu 154 M, increasing credibility of hypotheses about an assassination and a risky curiosity of the investigators of the Smoleńsk catastrophe
WIESŁAWA LEWANDOWSKA: - The Act proposed by the Law and Justice Party about the return of the presidential wreckage TU-154M by Russia was rejected by the Seym and disgracefully criticised by politicians of the governmental party. What are other possibilities of making pressure on the Polish government so that it would be working more actively in the matter of explaining the causes of the Smoleńsk catastrophe? What will be next?
MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT ANTONI MACIEREWICZ: - The investigations of the parliamentarian team, which is just finishing its work on the reconstruction of the last seconds of the flight before the catastrophe, will be carried out till the aim is reached. A report of Dr. Eng. Grzegorz Szuladziński was created, an owner of the Australian company Analytical Service appreciated all over the world. The hypothesis presented in the report is very credible, well placed in the evidential material, based on various investigations. It still must be supported and it is known that, for example the results of the chemical-physical investigations of the aeroplane wreckage may turn out essential for it.
- What new is brought by the report of dr. Szuladziński?
- The report supports the thesis that the catastrophe was caused by two jolts and completes the earlier statements of prof. Nowaczyk and prof. Binienda. It settles that the jolts were caused by explosions one of whom took place on the left wing and led to the tearing off of this wing on the length of 8 m. The latter one - at the base of a wing and in the centre-wing it led to the final crash of the plane.
- How is it certain that the cause of the jolts, earlier diagnosed by professors Nowaczyk and Binienda were just explosions?
- I emphasize that it is still a hypothesis but scrupulously and frequently checked in various laboratories and studies and by many scientists...
- ....whose competences will be, as usually, immediately questioned by the so-called genuine authorities.
- Unfortunately, such is the fate of experts of the Seym team. Despite that, we are doing ants' work and are trying to investigate everything literally which must and should be investigated. We will not be surprised when somebody will reject the hypothesis of dr. Szuladziński and the results of the investigations of his company. I will only say that the Analytical Service has been engaged with the analysis of the collapse of big steel constructions for 35 years, and the Smolensk report is 456 in its history. However, if somebody wants to question the thesis of this report we ask for showing and scientific explanation of the mistakes. Because till now, instead of essential accusations we meet only with a slander. We ask for alternative solutions based on reliable investigations.
- In the opinion of many people, proper and correct solutions were given long time ago...
- These ones that a direct cause of the catastrophe is a Smolensk birch, which the aeroplane touched. We proved that the plane had flown a few metres over the tree. Investigations proved that even if it had crashed in it, it would have cut it across without any harm for the wing construction!
- Referring to the report of Szuladziński, can we suppose that the cause of the catastrophe was the action by the third party, that is, assassination? The report may be ridiculed just for these suggestions...
- From the very beginning a lot of people - risking sneers - were inclining towards just this version of events. One can doubt it but a duty of all investigators, the state apparatus, is, first of all, the verification of the thesis about the assassination. It is necessary in such circumstances in which the president and the elite of the country were killed. The whole politics and even the existence of the country depend on the verification of this thesis; whereas the Prime Minister Tusk and President Komorowski ordered the rejection of this version of events. It may mean only one: they think that it just happened so and they immediately capitulated. Therefore, the government started fighting any possibilities of investigating the hypothesis of the assassination...The parliamentary team does not formulate general statements but is trying to investigate fact by fact and step by step come nearer to learn about the truth.
- How is Dr Szuladziński building and justifying the hypothesis of the explosion?
- This report would not have been created if we did not have the analysis of the recordings of a case of flight parameters which objectively records that in the air there were two big jolts. Dr. Szuladziński, formulating his hypothesis of the explosion, based it on the analysis of the dispersion and shape of the debris. If the debris were scattered on the area of nearly 10 thousands m2, if the plane crashed into a few big and thousands of small parts, the reason for it might have been only an explosion. We know from the investigations of the recordings of the flight parameters carried out by professors Nowaczyk and Binienda that in the last seconds there were two strong jolts. There is also an issue of the shape of the debris, especially the main back part of the hulk which is lying upside down with sides turned outside. And, finally - a fact known little that while the back part of the plane is lying turned by 180 degrees, the front part fell down with wheels downwards. There are also reports and statements; the team has analysed the statements of seventeen 'ear' witnesses of the catastrophe. A pilot of the Polish JAK which landed half an hour earlier said that he heard a characteristic roar of engines after opening a throttle valve which meant departing onto another circle, '...and after a few seconds there were cracks, bangs, detonations and a voice of muted engine, silence...'. There are many evidential materials that the crash of the plane happened in the air due to detonation but not at the moment of crash into the ground. It also was stated by the military procurators in their message on July 2011!
- What data was the dispersion of the plane debris analysed on?
- We have satellite photos, photos taken from a paraglide and photos taken from a departing plane JAK on 10 April. We have thousands of photos. On their basis we can settle a range of the dispersion of debris. As I have already said, we have done what the prosecutors should have done, that is, we reconstructed the shape of the plane wreckage at the moment when it was falling apart. It is an improbably exhausting task - works on it were lasting continuously nearly for a year and a half.
- Can we speculate now what reason of these explosions was?
- It requires further exact investigations, but in order to formulate credible hypothesis, in fact very little time is needed. Initially we think that the wing was torn off due to the outer crash but the explosion in the centre-wing had its inner source.
- It blew with a real fright! The Seym team and people cooperating with it are still mysterious as if they were acting in conspiracy....Why?
- Those who are doing this exhausting work for us must be very discreet from the fear for their own safety. They are also exposed to unscrupulous attacks from the Polish media. This is true. Investigating the catastrophe, especially the inquisitiveness in this issue may be connected with a risk.
- Is the hypothesis of the assassination becoming more and more probable? The Chairman Kaczynski says about this probability openly now.
- The chairman is authorized to formulate such thesis. As far as I am concerned, I am trying, in respect for the function of the manager of the Seym team given to me, not to go beyond the reporting of verified results of the investigations - even when a particular hypothesis is very obvious. However, I can say quite responsibly that there is no other credible hypothesis of events like the explosion in the aeroplane which led it to its destruction. Now its nature must be investigated and we must try to determine perpetrators...For if not the famous birch-tree caused the catastrophe, then what?
- The recent surveys inform that three quarters of Poles do not believe in the assassination, and there is also an opinion that normal people are tired of 'Smolensk' and only abnormal 'Smolensk people' fanatically negate the peace of the government...
- However, still a bigger number of citizens demand that the aeroplane wreckage should come back to Poland as soon as possible. When we consider the belief in the assassination, it is worth talking about it after exact reading the report of Dr. Szuladziński and after the analysis of presented arguments in it. A substantial discussion will possible only when this knowledge reaches the society and when scientists and specialists are familiar with it. Now the society is offered surveys preceded by lava of invectives, sneers and propaganda whose purpose is to reject or depreciate the results of scientific investigations. It is also about discrediting emotionally people engaged in the investigation of the causes of the Smolensk tragedy in the public eyes and excluding them from rationally thinking society. And we want only to get to the truth. And I hope that the vast majority of Poles - despite of schemes of thinking imposed on them - want the same as well.
- Whether we want it or not, the Smolensk catastrophe is a political matter, and everything depends not on the majority of Poles but on the political majority.
- Both yes and no. During the last two years in the Seym there have been two key votings connected with this issue. The first - on the turn of April and May 2010 - in the matter of an appeal to Russia for taking over at least partial explanatory proceeding. As it is known, it was according to the international law and the influence of the Polish party on the process of the investigation was within the range of reach. However, at that moment the Civic Platform was voting: we want Barabash! We do not want this investigation, let Russia do it! There were even opinions about trustfulness in the competence of Russian investigators...Today when it came to voting whether the wreckage and evidences destroyed in our eyes are supposed to come back to Poland, the Civic Platform said its: no! Again. Paraphrasing what Donald Tusk said from the Seym pulpit, it would be better not to have been born than co-participate in such a disgrace. However, on the other hand, if despite these political actions of the Prime Minister Tusk and the government, the society will see the results of the investigations and the authority will still keep to the absurd thesis about the birch-tree - people will turn away from them and a wall of lies will collapse.
- And are we having a Smolensk war? There are strong words and stronger accusations against you...
- My statement during the meeting in Krosno referred to a duty of the chiefs of special services who absolutely and immediately should get engaged with the verification of the hypothesis about the assassination. I cannot understand why many politicians and journalists think such obvious actions as blameworthy and make an accusation from it. In the United States, Great Britain and Israel they would be immediately undertaken and neglects in this matter would disqualify the civil servants and functionaries responsible for the safety of the country. Soon after the first hysterical attacks in the connection with my pronouncement during a press conference in the Seym I quoted a full formulation concerning this matter - quoted sentences about the war by TVN were, certainly, out of context - but neither the Polish Press Agency nor journalists present there quoted a full statement manipulated earlier and did not refer to its real sense. As I have already said, on 10 April 2010 the Polish country, after the loss of the elite connected with the army and the safety system, was in the state of the highest threat. It was the prime minister, who justifying his decision of submitting this investigation into the Russian hands, used a military rhetoric and asked a question in a dramatic voice: 'Is it better to know the truth and not have a war or not know the truth and have a war'. And at the same time he was blaming the Law and Justice that by demanding the honest explanation of the causes of the tragedy, it is aiming at the war with Russia...This argumentation was used in order to reject the Act of the Law and Justice demanding to take over the proceeding; today the same way is used to justify the cowardly refusal of voting in the Seym of the application in the matter of the return of the main evidence still being in Russia - the aeroplane wreckage.
- Why do the works of the parliamentary team raise so much emotion?
- Maybe because the Prime Minister Tusk knows that he has not got any essential arguments against the results of the expertises of the parliamentary team. He is afraid of a substantial discussion which scientists want. It is demanded by Prof. Dr. Hab. Michał Kleiber, the chairman of the Polish Science Academy and Prof. Dr. Hab. Marek Żylicz from the commission of Miller. They think that an international commission should be set up or experts of our team should be included in the state investigations. The Prime Minister Tusk got frightened that he might be alone - so he is multiplying invectives, threatens with a prosecutor and even he identifies aiming at the truth with declaring a war. Communists used to do so in the past that demanding the truth about Katyń exposes Poland to the Soviet invasion...Such propaganda has not been successful for ages and the Prime Minister Tusk, hiding behind Putin, shows only his helplessness...
- Do you hope that the Smolensk wreckage will be returned to Poland and that we will get to know the whole truth about the Smolensk catastrophe?
- Yes, I do. I am convinced about it. The Russian attitude depends on Vladimir Putin and also on the scale of the pressure from the Polish government and the international community. The issue of the Katyń crime is also an example here. When Poland definitely started to demand the revelation of the truth and condemnation of genocide, President Jelcyn did it, and the Prime Minister Czernomyrdin ( which one does not want to remember) as the first Russian prime minister deposited flowers on Katyń graves.
During talks with Vladimir Putin, the Prime Minister Donald Tusk resigned from the requirement of acknowledging the Katyń crime as genocide - the Russians immediately started to disrespect demonstratively all Polish conclusions in the matter of Katyń. This is the same with the matter of Smolensk. During first two, three days after the catastrophe, the Russians were afraid that we would demand the respect of our rights and carrying out the proceeding according to the Agreement of 1993. They accepted nearly everything; they agreed on the common investigation, common investigation of the wreckage and black boxes. When we accepted an annex 13 to the Convention from Chicago - a good willingness disappeared and Russian arrogance came back. So, everything can change during one day. We must remember that a similar tragedy did not have any precedence in the history of the world. And only our determination and uncompromising attitude led to its explanation.