Ukraine War BREAKING NEWS: Was the Downed Il-76 Carrying POWs?

So, I mean, my claims for what it is worth is that it is practically impossible for this plane to have been a Russian cargo plane carrying Ukrainian prisoners of war.

Hello Team

🎦 00:00-00:18⏩

Jonathan introduces the video, explaining that it was intended to be part two of the Ukraine news update, but will instead focus on debunking claims surrounding the downing of a Russian Il-76 cargo aircraft that morning.

Return to top⤴️

Downing of Russian Il-76

🎦 00:18-05:18⏩

• Russians claim the aircraft was carrying POWs, with varying figures given: 60 POWs and 3 crew, or 60 POWs, 3 crew and 6 additional personnel.
• Jonathan questions the plausibility of these claims, noting the lack of evidence and the implausibility of so few personnel guarding so many prisoners.
• Footage of the plane shows it was definitely hit and the explosion suggests it was carrying more than just fuel.
• Russian MOD confirms crash and claims the plane carried Ukrainian prisoners, while Ukrainian media, citing military sources, claim the plane carried S-300 missiles (likely Iranian).
• Ukrainska Pravda initially reported Ukrainian forces downed the plane but retracted the statement when another source did not confirm it, speculating that there may have been concern about admitting responsibility if POWs were on board.
• Jonathan analyses the claims, highlighting inconsistencies and the lack of logic in the Russian narrative.
• He cites several sources including War Translated, Ilia Ponomarenko and Anton Gerashchenko who also question the Russian claims.
• Jonathan observes that prisoner swaps are complex, highly sensitive operations with meticulous planning, making it unlikely that Ukraine would be unaware of a major air transfer of POWs.
• Geolocation data and local reports suggest the plane was leaving Belgorod, not heading towards it as the Russians claimed.
• The direction the plane was travelling in was not consistent with a flight to Belgorod.
• Anton Gerashchenko observed that there were no fragments of bodies or the plane at the crash site, but the explosion suggests a detonation of munitions. He also notes that civilian services were ordered to leave the crash site, with only Russian MOD personnel remaining, adding to suspicions.
• The Ukrainian Coordination Headquarters on POWs is gathering information but refrains from commenting on the incident, urging media and citizens to refrain from sharing unverified information.
• Anton Gelashenko, quoted by Jonathan, observes that prisoners are not usually transported by air, suggesting a less expensive method like train or vehicle would be more likely.
• The Head of the Defence Committee of the Russian Duma claims the Il-76 was shot down by Patriot or IRIS-T missiles, prompting the Speaker of the Russian Parliament to order an address to US Congress and the German Bundestag. This is considered hypocritical given the lack of official statements regarding the crash of the A-50 aircraft over a week prior.

Return to top⤴️

Analysis of the evidence

🎦 05:18-11:14⏩

• Jonathan analyses the evidence, pointing out the flight path of the Il-76 originating in Moscow, flying to Iran the day before, and stopping overnight, presumably to collect cargo, before returning towards Belgorod.
• This flight path further undermines the Russian claim of a prisoner exchange.
• Tim White is quoted, expressing doubt that Ukrainian POWs were picked up in Tehran.
• Jonathan cites the plane's transponder being switched off intermittently as further evidence supporting the theory that the flight was intended to be clandestine.
• Jonathan reiterates his assertion that the plane was almost certainly carrying munitions, based on the size of the explosion.
• He lists five key reasons why he believes the Russian claims are false:
  • POWs are not usually transferred by plane.
  • The plane was flying in the wrong direction for a Belgorod arrival.
  • The plane had just flown from Iran.
  • The size of the explosion.
  • It is highly unlikely the Ukrainians would not have been aware of the plane's identity and purpose if it were part of a prisoner exchange.
• He concludes that the evidence strongly suggests the plane was carrying munitions, not POWs.
• The only circumstantial evidence supporting the Russian narrative is the fact that a prisoner exchange was due to take place, but the Russians have since paused the exchange, claiming a second plane carrying POWs had to turn back after the first was shot down.
• Jonathan speculates that this second plane may indeed have been carrying POWs and was turned back to avoid being shot down, with the Russians using this as a pretext to claim the first plane was also carrying POWs.
• Jonathan concludes that the Russians are likely spreading disinformation.

Return to top⤴️

Wrap up

🎦 11:14-11:22⏩

Jonathan concludes the video by reiterating his belief that the Russians are spreading disinformation. He expresses hope that further information will come to light but suspects the evidence will prove his conclusions to be correct. He thanks viewers for watching and says goodbye.

Return to top⤴️