Interview with Dr. Waclaw Berczynski, the newly appointed head of the Polish government Smolensk crash investigation committee
SCND: February 5, 2016
“The damage to the wreckage indicates a different course of events than the one presented by the MAK / Miller commissions. However, we begin with a clean slate, and with no presumptions” says Dr. Berczynski, the newly appointed head of the Polish government Smolensk crash Investigation Commission.
wPolityce.pl: You have been appointed to lead the new Polish government sub-committee tasked with investigating the Smolensk crash. What is your experience in investigating aviation accidents?
Dr. Wacław Berczyński, Ph.D.: I worked for two years for Boeing at Corpus Christi Army Depot, which is the world’s largest army equipment maintenance company, based in the United States. I was responsible for investigating aviation accidents and their impact on aircrafts’ construction. My job was to establish how these accidents occurred, what caused them, and why. I did that for two years.
How many aviation accidents have you investigated?
I investigated what was assigned to me; all in all, I think I investigated approximately around a dozen of them.
Did you investigate any specific crashes? Were there any large air-frame jets among them?
I investigated a variety of crashes, including the ones you’ve mentioned. There are a lot of aspects to consider in each case. I was tasked with examination of the aircraft construction after a crash.
Is the schedule of the new Smolensk crash commission ready?
No, it is not ready yet. I am at a stage of familiarizing myself with the existing documentation, which will be followed by the preparation of the plan for our investigation. I will be asking questions that need to be answered. However, at the moment, I need to focus on reading through the existing materials in order to know what approach to take.
You said you have no presumptions, but you previously presented your opinion about the Smolensk crash as an independent expert. You said that the rivets in the Tupolev’s body were forced outwardly as a result of high energy force. Do you keep an open mind to any hypothesis despite the work you have already completed?
Of course. There is no doubt that the rivets were forced out from the aircraft’s body with a considerable force. This was not a presumption, but a simple scientific observation made by me as an engineer. The damage to the wreckage indicates a different course of events than the one presented by the MAK / Miller commissions.
And that’s not a presumption?
No, it is not a presumption. If during my investigation I should, for example, discover that the pilots intentionally forced the aircraft to collide with the ground, I will then state it in my report. I don’t think this will be the case, but it might happen. However, we will thoroughly examine each and every hypothesis. We neither begin with presumptions, nor do we have any.
It might be hard to do for those who are already dealing with the Smolensk crash investigation …
Even if I suspected anything, I would have to include my suspicions in my report. Should it happen that my suggestions, or theories, cannot be supported by the evidence, I will not follow them.
Do you think that Minister Macierewicz supports you, and do you feel pressured to follow a certain direction in this investigation?
As a Minister of Defense, Mr. Macierewicz has totally different objectives and assignments then [me], the Chief of the Smolensk crash investigation commission. I like and respect Minister Macierewicz, but he has no reason to influence me, or to impose on me any views that he might have. I don’t think he assigned me with this task to force his point of view on me.
Source: wpolityce.pl
Translation: JD
Books You May Like:
RED NOTICE
THE MAN WITHOUT A FACE
BLOWING UP RUSSIA
From the Editor's Desk: A real-life political thriller about an American financier in the Wild East of Russia, the murder of his principled young tax attorney, and his dangerous mission to expose the Kremlin’s corruption.
In 2007, a group of law enforcement officers raided Browder’s offices in Moscow and stole $230 million of taxes that his fund’s companies had paid to the Russian government. Browder’s attorney Sergei Magnitsky investigated the incident and uncovered a sprawling criminal enterprise. A month after Sergei testified against the officials involved, he was arrested and thrown into pre-trial detention, where he was tortured for a year. On November 16, 2009, he was led to an isolation chamber, handcuffed to a bedrail, and beaten to death by eight guards in full riot gear.
From the Editor's Desk: A chilling and unflinching portrait of one of the most fearsome figures in world politics.
In 1999, the “Family” surrounding Boris Yeltsin went looking for a successor to the ailing and increasingly unpopular president. Vladimir Putin, with very little governmental or administrative experience - he’d been deputy mayor of St. Petersburg, and briefly, director of the secret police - nevertheless seemed the perfect choice: a “faceless” creature whom Yeltsin and his cronies could mold in their own image. Russia and an infatuated West were determined to see in him the progressive leader of their dreams - even as Putin, with ruthless efficiency, dismantled the country’s media, wrested control and wealth from the business class, and destroyed the fragile mechanisms of democracy.
From the Editor's Desk: "Blowing Up Russia" contains the allegations of ex-spy Alexander Litvinenko against his former spymasters in Moscow which led to his being murdered in London in November 2006. In the book he and historian Yuri Felshtinsky detail how since 1999 the Russian secret service has been hatching a plot to return to the terror that was the hallmark of the KGB.
Vividly written and based on Litvinenko's 20 years of insider knowledge of Russian spy campaigns, Blowing Up Russia describes how the successor of the KGB fabricated terrorist attacks and launched a war. Writing about Litvinenko, the surviving co-author recounts how the banning of the book in Russia led to three earlier deaths.
Already during the first night of the crash, the Russians were removing the most important pieces of evidence from the crash site, that is, the remains of the Polish President’s Tupolev, TU-154M. Parts of the aircraft were transported away without any prior planning, and some of them were purposefully destroyed. Read more here
"Russian Image Management"
The trip to Smolensk was expected to highlight Russia finally admitting culpability in the massacre, after long having blamed it on the Germans, an atrocity they had tried to conceal for over 70 years.
As for the reception committee, it had different ideas. Putin wasn’t looking forward to such an occasion. Into this poisonous reception brew was President Kaczynski’s well-known public criticism of Moscow and Putin, a habit that has ended the lives of others within Russia – and abroad. A few discouraging Russian requirements – that Kaczynski could not attend in any official capacity – did not halt the Poles. Kaczynski would go anyway on non-official, “personal” business. To Russians, such a distinction would be meaningless, not lessening the possible international excoriation of such an event. A problem ripe for a modern, Russian solution: a tragic, ‘natural’ accident.
World-renowned forensic pathologist goes on the record: "I have been doing autopsies for 50 years, and I've investigated more than fifteen, twenty airplane crashes […] I've been in countries all over the world where families think that the government is hiding something. Whether it is Zimbabwe or Israel, or Philippines, the government may not like an outside person checking to make sure they got it right. [But,] they never interfered with that. The family, the next of kin, always has the right to do what the wishes of the family are. In the 21st century, the body of the dead person no longer belongs to the state. It belongs to the family. So, it is unusual - something that I have never experienced before - where the government [of Poland] has not permitted the famil[ies]" to conduct independent forensic examinations of their loved ones' remains [...] I've never heard of a body coming back to a country and the family being unable to open up a casket. I've never heard of the family not being able to get an autopsy… Read more here
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views the SmolenskCrashNews.com. All information is provided on an as-is basis, and all data and information provided on this site is for informational purposes only. The Smolensk Crash News DOT COM makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information on this site and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use.
