Wiesława Lewandowska talks with Antoni Macierewicz about the significance of the Smoleńsk Report, allegations of the team of Maciej Lasek and readiness of the parliamentarian team to an open debate

WIESŁAWA LEWANDOWSKA: - The Law and Justice party is blamed for a political game of the Smoleńsk catastrophe, and recently, in a special way, you have been blamed, because you allegedly want to climb the political party career ladder as high as possible….

ANTONI MACIEREWICZ: - During the last 45 years of my public activity, I was for prison purposes and governmental offices. Today I am not aiming at any offices. Now I have only one purpose: revealing the whole truth about the crime at Smoleńsk.

– And you are getting a good thrashing for your obstinacy about Smoleńsk. Just after the publication of the third Report of Smoleńsk, the whole media discussion was focused only on your pronouncement – which became quite an absurd news – that three people had survived the catastrophe.

– It is an ordinary practice of most mass media which are trying to underestimate difficult issues. But just this issue touches on an extremely important and dramatic problem. Well, the Russians did not give us any information on preparation of rescue services and details of their action, which was supposed to end after 45 minutes! We had only information repeated by among the others, Radosław Sikorski, half an hour after the tragedy, that ‘everybody had been killed’. It is astonishing how possible it was to state it so quickly. After all, it was about 96 people! And then, at that time, on the spot, it was said that three people had survived, because a possibility of surviving the catastrophe by somebody, regardless of its causes, is a situation which is the most probable. The way, in which I am commenting on this issue now, is an attempt of concealing the fact that prosecutors did not fulfill the duty of hearing witnesses and although it had received over 120 Russian testimonies, there is nobody from rescue teams among them. The hysteric reaction of pro-governmental media and prosecutors shows that people responsible for explaining the matter, have impure conscience and are concealing something.

– Something which concerns just these first moments after the catastrophe?

– It is astonishing that report which we have, point to a very restricted action of rescue services, and even to sending back ambulances going with help. Whereas, the Polish prosecutors did not hear any doctor, paramedic, driver of an ambulance. Moreover those who were the first in the place of the tragedy were not heard either, and it concerns functionaries of particular formations, like Specnaz. There were no appeals to the Russian procurators for hearing within the legal help! We have often asked a question before why the prosecutors did not investigate this thread, despite reports of eye-witnesses.

– The team of Maciej Lasek, appointed in the beginning of April, for explaining confusions connected with the Report of Miller to the public opinion, as it turns out, will focus on discrediting ‘alternative theories’ towards official decisions. Do you feel a danger?

– What danger? These thesis of dr. engineer Maciej Lasek presented at the first open press conference – because he had organized a few secret meetings with chosen pro-governmental journalists before – can be included just into alternative theories. For example, the fact that he stubbornly states the presence of gen. Andrzej Błasik in a cockpit although he is not able to point to any evidence. Because there is a clear statement of prosecutors denying it and explicit read-out of record from a black box, where words assigned to the General, are said by another pilot – colonel Robert Grzywna. However, Lasek stubbornly states so, because it had been decided so by Mrs Anodina, and the Report of Miller.

– And – do you think that –the suggestion of the blame of the pilots results from this subordination, and not from the progress of governmental investigations of specialists?

– Yes, I think so. The Russians meant to attack the creator of the modern Polish aviation connected with western Europe, to humiliate Polish Air Forces and to open a road to degradation of this formation. The report of Miller joined this political, anti-Polish game, and Lasek must defend it, because he signed under it himself. Let’s add that the Report with this pack of lies aimed against the General and against Polish military aviation was acknowledged by an employer of Mr. Lasek- the prime minister Donald Tusk. From the very beginning it was meant to lay complete responsibility on Polish pilots and conceal evidences of the Russian fault. There have not been even withdrawals from open lies.

– What particular pack of lies?

– For example, there was a reference to the report of lieutenant Artur Wosztyl about the process of the tragedy as an evidence that nobody of the witnesses heard the explosion or detonation. Mr. Lasek said literally in the following way: The pilot and a stewardess in public pronouncements told how they had received the last phase of the flight of the airplane TU – 154: the increase of engine rotations, and next a sound of the hit into the ground and silence’. It is worth reminding testimonies of the lieutenant Wosztyl, in order to evaluate the scale of arrogance with which we are being treated. It is visible only then how Mr. Lasek had to change the report of the lieutenant, falsifying the order of events, omitting the sound of cracks, bangs and detonations and forgetting about ‘subsiding sound of the working engine’. Whereas a real report exactly corresponds the analysis of experts of the parliamentarian team, who prove that the explosion happened at the moment when TU-154 was departing onto another circle, that is, while the airplane was going up in order to fly away onto a spare airport. Why is Lasek telling lies and so clumsily?

– From the very beginning it is said that we will never get to know the truth about the Smoleńsk catastrophe…

– It can be so indeed, if we accept the lie about Smoleńsk spread by the government. For example, why is dr. Lasek denying the fact that on the altitude of 17-15m above the ground there was a defect of electric power supply, although it is proven by evidences from FMS (on-board computer)? Anodina admitted it on the page 119 of her report and Miller in his annex published in September 2011, where expert opinions SmallGIS were cited on this issue. Why is he trying to enforce the thesis that there was an explosion of fuel, although even the report of Miller is denying it?
In ‘Summary and conclusions’ of this report, it was written indeed: ‘During inspections of the airplane wreckage, neither signs of explosive materials nor air fuel were proven’ (Annex no 5 to the Report of Miller, p. 25).

– During a conference inaugurating the work of his team, dr. Lasek was trying to prove that a characteristic scatter of debris of the airplane negates the thesis about the explosion. Your team say that it is the other way round.

– It is really difficult to understand why Mr. Lasek negates the thesis about the explosion just on this basis. A month before the conference of Lasek, American scientists from the University of Georgia published a scientific analysis proving that a situation is characteristic just for an explosion, when bigger parts are scattered in a semi-circle outside, and smaller ones remain in the centre of the explosion spot (see the enclosed photo). Anyway, dr. Lasek knows the analysis of the SmallGIS company very well, which was done on the order of prosecutors (and falsified by the Report of Miller), pointing to the explosion spot. He also knows the analysis of Prof. Jan Obrębski and dr. engineer Grzegorz Szuladziński. He also had to admit that the debris of the hull and the left control gear of the airplane went away during the flight on the altitude of 100-150 m before the spot of the hit into the ground. And nobody ever pointed to the obstacles in the area which might have torn the hull during the flight and torn away the control gear because it is obviously an absurd.

– And what about the birch tree?

– Is it the reason why there are debris of the back part of the hull with sides have been turned up outside in a characteristic way for inner explosion? I do not want to make this talk a list of all absurd things said during conferences of Smoleńsk spokesmen of Donald Tusk, but in fact what is typical for them is the phrase: alternative theory. In addition, it is an alternative towards the common sense and scientific knowledge.

– The team of dr. Lasek –according to his declarations – will substantively point out non-scientific character of ‘alternative’ accomplishments of the parliamentary team.

– Today Dr. Lasek makes a ‘scientific’ allegation that our investigations are only 30 pages of the analysis. It is obvious that it is untrue. The present report has 130 pages, the previous one had 100 pages, and the first one had 330 pages of the very documents. Whereas, if summarizing all analysis of our experts, there would surely be more than a thousand pages missing. These 30 pages, about which he says, are a summary of this part of our investigations which already have a character of a conclusion, not of analysis or reflections. This rivalry of Lasek in the number of pages shows what people of Tusk know about investigations and science. Maybe next time he will boast about the significance of the Report of Miller…in kilos! This ignorance and arrogance are characteristic for people of the authority of the Civic Platform party. Maybe this is a reason why they do not want note that our present report, apart from summarizing the knowledge about the very catastrophe, devotes most materials on analyzing the causes of the tragedy and conditions of falsifying the procedure of explanation and the investigation about Smoleńsk.

– And just this analysis touches on the state services of Poland in the most painful way, and conclusions are far-going. Maybe too far?

– We are touching on the peak of the iceberg! Our prominent experts in the counter-intelligence and BOR show that the repair of TU-154 was being controlled by the Russian intelligence from the very beginning, and the Polish counter-intelligence is guilty of a scandalous non-compliance of duties (art.231 KK!). Beside experts from Poland, also a functionary of the technical Intelligence of USA, Eugene Poteat expressed his opinion. Whereas the colonel Pawlikowski and colonel Grudziński from BOR prove that decisions of Marian Janicki (the chief of BOR at that time) might have had a character of acting to the detriment of safety of the President of the Polish Republic and the Polish state elite. Without this knowledge, it is impossible to understand the crime at Smoleńsk, as well as it is impossible to watch teaching of Donald Tusk, Jerzy Miller and Polish prosecutors giving back the investigation and evidences to the Russians.

– However, aren’t these too strong words?

– In comparison to this scale of criminal activity which falsifies the investigation and proceeding, big words are too mild. After all, it is all about the death of the President of the Polish Republic and the Polish elite. Thorough reading of the legal part of our report would specially be helpful just to Mr. Lasek and his comrades, because then we would understand that they do not only focus on a falsified evidence material, but what is more – that they took part in an obvious legal masquerade. Here is the first example: their superiors (including Tusk and Miller) had been proclaiming for two years, that the investigation is taking place according to the Chicago Convention and the Annex 13. And it was a lie, cynically repeated and spread in millions of newspaper copies and media news!

– The most prominent Polish specialists – as they speak about themselves – absolutely and definitely deny an assassination as the cause of the Smoleńsk catastrophe. How can governmental experts be certain about it, in your opinion?

– Surely not from thorough investigations and scientific analysis, because they simply did not carry them out.

– Dr. Lasek states that experts of the Commission for Investigation of Air Accidents in April 2010 carried out sufficient investigations and collected sufficient evidences.

– But he does not show any documentation and does not quote any surnames of authors of these alleged investigations. After all, it is known that the governmental commission has not done any methodological analysis of materials it uses. In fact those people know that they have not investigated either the birch or the wreckage, or originals of the black boxes. All this was done by the Russians, and officials of Tusk only copied from them, how it is honestly admitted by Edmund Klich in his book about Smoleńsk. And Lasek confirmed it himself both in a letter written to among the others, Grabarczyk in 2011, and also during a conference in Kazimierz Dolny at the Vistula in May 2012. There were not even attempts to explain divergences connected with the broken birch. When one of the victims asked prosecutors for photos of the catastrophe – which according to the documentation, after being taken over from the Russians were enclosed to the description of the inspection of the spot of the crash – he found out that the photos were not there….It turns out that the evidence material proving the natural character of the catastrophe and no assassination simply did not exist! The paradox is based in the fact that a few days earlier, the same prosecutors had assured in a letter to the newspaper ‘Gazeta Wyborcza’ that they had these photos and that those photos showed the birch cut down at the height of 9 m above the ground! And key evidences in the form of silicone molds of the ‘armored’ birch do not match one another…

– Is it an ordinary mess, carelessness or neglect of the issue?

– I think that Polish prosecutors are working beyond the law in this issue, and governmental experts are working beyond the science! They are working in a kind of a different reality. Therefore, in this issue I lodged a complaint about the committed crime. I will also submit a complaint about committing a crime by dr. engineer Maciej Lasek, because as a state functionary (he is the chairman of the State Commission for Investigation of Air Accidents, and as an advisor of Tusk, he is employed in the office of the President), giving untruth publicly, falsifies state documents. Finally, it is necessary to finish this festival of absurd, causing a situation when the nation of 40 million people is being pushed aside to some different reality.

– What kind of reality?

– It is a reality of a lie. In my opinion, it was long time ago when a political decision about the fault of Polish pilots was made. It is just a lie of Smoleńsk which is so similar to the lie about Katyń. Especially that the chief of the team of the Investigating Committee of the Russian Federation, gen. Guriewicz, supervising the investigation of Smoleńsk in Russia not long time ago, suggested that the Russian prosecutors can make allegations against Polish pilots…So, maybe, we will have the next process of Moscow in which not only our pilots but also the Polish country will be accused of causing death of their own president. And the evidences will be the Report of Miller and pronouncements of Sikorski about the fault of Polish pilots. And the last conference of experts of Donald Tusk…. There may be a situation that the prime minister and the minister of the government will testify against the Polish country. Accepting the dictate of Putin in 2010, Donald Tusk should be aware of the these consequences. What was the cause that he allowed for being caught into such a terrible trap? What were the facts, information and arguments?

– Could he avoid the trap in 2010?

– Of course, he could. After all, not only Russia of Putin was at that time which used to say that it was fault of pilots and the Polish president, as well as drunk General Błasik…But there was also this Russia which had sent a letter to marshal Komorowski, that it wanted the common investigation, which had sent procurators to Smoleńsk, so that they would describe events step by step, as well as signs clearly pointing to the fact that the airplane had already been falling apart at the altitude of 100 m above the ground, before the touchdown. And, finally, there was also this Russia which had a film made which would show how the airplane was falling apart in the air, because of an explosion. The ‘latter’ Russia was aiming at honest explanation of the matter. Some inner calculations must have been connected with it, but it is a different matter.

– So, it was this Russia to which the President of the polish Republic was flying…

– One of the most essential purposes of the visit in Katyń by the President of the Polish Republic Lech Kaczyński was rewarding a few dozen of activists of the ‘Memorial’ – the Russians who exposed themselves more than we here, by showing genocide in Katyń. They were to receive the supreme rewards from the president Kaczyński. They had never been rewarded later. Bronisław Komorowski rewarded Russian militia officers creating a cordon around the wreckage of TU-154…

– And does the Polish government intend to finish the matter of Smoleńsk in a peaceful way and first of all – to liquidate the hated parliamentary team?

– How can it be possible to ‘settle peacefully’ the matter of the crime in the Polish elite? In this matter it is possible to search the truth or accept the dictate. Tusk chose the latter one. And Sikorski suggested that the Russians consider the existence of the team as an obstacle in closing the ‘issue of Smoleńsk’. I am not personally surprised. Putin is afraid of the truth much more than Donald Tusk. However I am outraged that Polish ministers and officials are supporting the Russian raison d’etat, instead of defending Poland, President of the Polish Republic and the Polish state elite, which were killed at Smoleńsk.

– The actions about Smoleńsk, called alternative by Maciej Lasek, are quite effectively removed from the Polish public space. There is no place in it for a substantive debate on this issue. What is really an obstacle?

– Aversion and fear of the truth of those who state that they have already explained everything, but they do not even know at what altitude the birch was broken! Those people want to close the matter for the sake of their safety, as soon as possible. And the team of Maciej Lasek might have been appointed for this purpose, which is doing everything, in order to avoid an open discussion with our experts. We are still ready for it, but we are not going to agree on a kind of a ‘round table’ of debates secret from the public opinion, among the ‘insiders’.

– Dr. Lasek demands meeting some conditions, but, first of all, he wants a strictly scientific discussion without the presence of media. He also insists on presenting its whole evidence material by the parliamentary team earlier.

– We have presented evidences many times, but prosecutors and Mr. Lasek have them. However, first of all, we think that science demands openness. In this transparent and public debate, we will be willing to show the whole evidence material concerning a particular issue, but we also reserve a right to insist on evidences from the other side. It must happen publicly just in order not to make false accusations that we did not present evidences. And there cannot be a situation that, for example, Mr Lasek will say that a mystery does not allow him to reveal who was identifying the voice of gen. Błasik and what evidences the Report of Miller had, to state that the General was in a cockpit, was reading out altitudes and was saying that ‘nothing was visible’, etc.

– So, there is going to be a public auction instead of a discussion, about the two monologues about Smoleńsk…

– Please, do not place us on the same level as those people! We have expressed our readiness for a debate for a year and on February 5 we were waiting for experts of the prime minister Tusk for the whole day at the University of Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński. We do not want to bid with anybody. We are simply ready for a scientific debate with everybody who wants an honest investigation in the truth.


"Niedziela" 25/2013

Editor: Tygodnik Katolicki "Niedziela", ul. 3 Maja 12, 42-200 Czestochowa, Polska
Editor-in-chief: Fr Jaroslaw Grabowski • E-mail: