MH-17 Mystery- Dr. Igor Sutyagin - Mi5/Russian Double Agent Who Gave Out Misleading Information On MH-17

Overlooked....the mysterious Russian imprisoned US spy who gave the Daily Mail false witness testimony about MH-17 (Rest of post in comments below under name California Stars)
This information is completely verifiable and quite curious for people looking for more information in regards to inconsistencies related to the shoot down of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH-17. The Daily Mail article below, which came out on July 18th, 2014, directly quotes British Royal United Services Institute For Defense And Securities Studies (RUSI) Dr. Igor Sutyagin who is featured in the above attached video. He was a spy who the Russian government imprisoned for over a decade for espionage. He was then traded to the United States in exchange for 10 perceived Russian spies who had been captured. (10 for 1.) Quite obviously, he was seen as a highly valuable asset if the US decided to trade 10 convicted spies for him. Since that time he has worked for the US and UK governments on issues related to foreign policy toward Russia. The fact he provided false info to the Daily Mail in regards to what happened to MH-17 calls for further serious questioning.
Keep in mind that Dr. Sutyagin was also the Whitehall representative that provided the early information regarding the Syrian false flag chemical weapons attack in 2013. The following video from September 8, 2013 is where he, as a representative of the British secret service (RUSI), makes his false claims against the Assad government.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmwjXp45syI
Link to Daily Mail article from July 18, 2014: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2696975/Putin-blames-Ukrain
In regards to MH-17, in his interview with the Daily Mail he makes two statements that do not corroborate with the official Dutch Safety Board preliminary report.
The Daily Mail article provides two very telling statements of Dr. Sutyagins: Dr Igor Sutyagin, Research Fellow in Russian Studies from the Royal United Services Institute, believes that MH17 was shot down by rebels based in the 3rd District of Torez, in eastern Ukraine, after mistaking his plane for a government military transport aircraft. He told MailOnline that information had been leaked from a source he was unwilling to name that the pilot of MH17 'felt bad' about his course over Ukrainian airspace, so he changed direction. Little did he know, according to Dr Sutyagin, that the plane would then be mistaken by rebels who brought it down using a ground-to-air Buk missile system. Malaysia Airlines today denied that the plane was told to alter its course.
Dr Sutyagin said: 'There is a Ukrainian mechanised brigade blocked by separatists near the Russian border.'It's blocked on three sides by separatists and behind the brigade is the Russian border, so they can't get out. The Ukrainians try to resupply them from the air by transport aircraft. 'Now, the pilot of MH17 said that he "felt bad" and wanted to change course south to get out of the danger zone. But several kilometers to the south is a Ukrainian Army heavy transport plane, an IL76, or Candid, which has the same echo as a 777 on a radar screen.
'The two planes came close. They tried to shoot down the transport delivering supplies to the brigade. They believed that they had been firing at a military plane, but they mistakenly shoot down a civilian airliner.'His comments came as Malaysia Airlines said it filed a flight plan requesting to fly at 35,000 feet through Ukraine airspace but was instructed by Ukraine air traffic control to fly at 33,000.



www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2696975/Putin-blames-Ukrain
A natural question to ask is how did Dr. Igor Sutyagin in his capacity at RUSI know that the pilots felt bad? And how did he know it as soon as July 18th? What was his source? A 2nd important question to ask is "why does his statement about a Ukrainian IL-76 transport plane not match with the Kiev spokespersons claim of having no Ukrainian military aircraft aloft on July 17th?" These question are highly relevant due to the fact that his statements do not match the official DSB preliminary report that specifically states the following:
"According to ATC data, at 12:53 hrs the aircraft was flying within the Dnipropetrovs'k FIR, Control Sector 2, at FL 330, controlled by Dnipro Control. At that time, Dnipro Control asked whether MH-17 was able to climb to FL350 in accordance with the flight plan of MH17 and also to clear a potential separation conflict with other traffic in the area, another Boeing 777 flying at FL330 and approaching from behind.
The crew replied they were unable to comply and requested to maintain at FL330. This was agreed by Dnipro Control. As an alternative to solve the separation conflict, the other traffic climbed to FL350. According to ATC data, at 13.00 hrs the crew of flight MH-17 requested to divert the track 20 NM to the left, DUE TO WEATHER. This also was agreed by Dnipro Control, after which the crew requested whether FL340 was available. Dnipro Control informed MH-17 that FL340 was not available at that moment and instructed the flight to maintain FL330 for a while. At 13:07 hrs the flight was transferred to Dnipropetrovs'k CTA 4, also with call sign Dnipro Control.
At 13:19:53 hrs, radar data showed that the aircraft was 3.6 NM north of centreline of airway L980 having deviated left of track, when Dnipro Control directed the crew to alter their route directly to waypoint RND due to other traffic. The crew acknowledged at 13:19:56 hrs. At 13:20:00 hrs, Dnipro Control transmitted an outward ATC clearance to proceed direct to TIKNA after RND, no acknowledgement was received.
Data from the Flight Data Recorder and the Digital Cockpit Voice Recorder both stopped at 13:20:03 hrs. No distress messages were received from the aircraft.

Now keep in mind that MH-17 did deviate 14 miles left which is verifiable due to the fact the debris field is off alignment by 45 degrees and north on the original flight path. The DSB report does mention the request for course change, which is odd in itself as it occurred right before shootdown, however, Dnipro Control denied the request and also denied MH-17 moving up to 34,000 feet.
Now notice the DSB report states MH-17 requested to divert track to 20 NM to the left, due to weather. This also makes very little sense as the weather was relatively fine with cumulus patches of clouds on a relatively clear day as seen in video footage taken of the crash site. Even recently released photos supplied by UK social media disinformation site Bellingcat show what appears to be a contrail on a perfectly clear blue day. Dnipro Control agreed to let them make the course change but it did not let them move to 34,000 as requested and instead told them to maintain 33,000. Here we have the DSB claiming the request was due to the weather which is in contrast to Dr. Sutyagins claim that the request was because the pilots "felt bad".
The DSB report makes no mention of the pilots 'feeling bad" as Dr. Sutyagin stipulates and it also makes no mention of a Ukrainian military IL-76 in conflict with the airspace in relation to MH-17.
This begs the question "what was Dr. Igor Sutyagin attempting to do when he provided the false information to the media. After all, he is obviously a high value US/UK official asset operating out of Whitehall. Why did he come out with misleading information that doesn't match the DSB report? How did he attain such information quickly and why was it disseminated the day following the crash? And why did Whitehall choose Dr. Sutyagin for both disseminating information about MH-17 and the 2013 Syrian false flag chemical weapons attack?
One theory being explored is that his information was placed into the public realm to coverup the fact that MH-17 was off course right before it disappeared from radar. The DSB report may also be covering up the off course alignment. After all, it is a very odd coincidence that the plane happened to be off course right before it was shot down. The theory holds that the real reason MH-17 was off course is due to the fact it was hit and damaged, yet continued flying. (Which would also fit the scenario of one passenger managing to place an oxygen mask on their face). Note that the DSB report does not include any mention of the FDRs recording deployment of the oxygen masks.
The theory holds that Sutyagin was acting as a disinformation agent, the same as he did during the Syrian false flag chemical weapons attack and that the DSB is also covering up the real reasons for the deviation from course right before shootdown. This would fit the scenario of why Dnipro Control would not allow moving up to a higher altitude. Note from video of radar presentations taken on the day that the other aircraft are nowhere near MH-17 with the closest trailing behind and not in a cross path.

Even the DSB report clearly states there were no other aircraft in close proximity and provides actual distance of the closest plane to MH-17. DSB excerpt follows:

2.5.3. Other traffic
According to information received from the NBAAI, recorded ATC surveillance information revealed that three other commercial airliners overflew the same restricted airspace as MH-17 around the time of the occurrence. Two of those aircraft were cruising eastbound and one was cruising westbound. All were under control of Dnipro radar. At 13.20 hrs the distance between MH-17 and the closest of the three aircraft was approximately 30 kilometres. Analysis is ongoing.


There is no mention of Dr. Sutyagins IL-76 Candid.


https://www.rusi.org/analysis/authors/ref:B4DD39DA614B84/
Royal United Services Institute
for Defence and Security Studies
Whitehall, London, SW1A 2ET, Great Britain
T: +44 (0)20 7747 2600

And here's what that RUSI page reads: Igor worked at the Institute of US and Canadian Studies for 12 years at the Political-Military Studies Department where he held the position of the Head of Section, the US military-technical and military-economy policy.

Link to his wiki page, it is very informative:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Sutyagin He was a spy who the Russian government imprisoned for espionage. He was then traded to the US in exchange for 10 Russian spies who had been captured. (10 for 1.) He must be a pretty valuable asset if the US gave up 10 spies for him. Since then he has worked for the US and UK governments on issue related to foreign policy and Russia. Obviously his giving info in regards to MH-17 calls for further serious questioning.
To sum up, we have a former Russian who became a spy for the US and UK, who got caught and imprisoned by the Russian government and sentenced to 15 years, who was then swapped for 10 Russian spies and is now working for Whitehall and the US Defense Intelligence Agency ....giving information about the last moments of MH-17 which contradict the official story and leave one to ask "how did he know how the pilots of MH-17 felt?" This is a bombshell and it needs to be explored further.