Michael Bociurkiw was one of the first investigators for Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) at the MH 17 crash site. At 6:06 of the video, Bociurkiw said:
There have been two or three pieces of fuselage that have been really pockmarked. It almost looks like machine gun fire, very very strong machine gun fire, that has left these unique marks that we haven’t seen anywhere else. We’ve also been asked, for example, um, "Have we seen any examples of missile?" No, we haven’t. That’s the answer, and even if it was there, we don’t have those trained eyes to pick that up, but now there are experts here who would be able to.
Bociurkiw reported that the cockpit seemed to have "slammed down into earth" "pretty much in tact" and that on day 2 men in uniform were "hacking into it with a power saw." He said that as the days passed, pieces of the plane were spread out even more.
You can see the pock marks for yourself at 6:16 in the video. Most of the pock marks are the same size and circular in shape, which do look more like bullet holes, not random pieces of shrapnel.
Dutch report says MH17 broke up in air after being hit by ‘high-energy objects’, Washington Post, September 9, 2014.
Unlike Michael Bociurkiw, who was one of the first witnesses on the ground, up close and personal, the Washington Post reports that the "Dutch investigators were not able to freely access the site because of the situation in war-torn eastern Ukraine, so they used satellite imagery, radar and information from the plane’s 'black box' recorders to compile the report."
The 34-page report set out what Dutch aviation investigators think happened, but it did not apportion blame.
The pattern of damage to the aircraft’s fuselage and cockpit is “consistent with that which may be expected from a large number of high-energy objects that penetrated the aircraft from outside,” the report said.
The Washington Post article states: "The Dutch report did not mention a missile, but military analysts said the damage to the plane as described in the report was consistent with the impact from a missile designed to explode near an aircraft and destroy it with shrapnel." Who are these military analysts? What country are they from? That important information is left out of the story.
Unlike the impression the Washpo artcle leaves by inserting the unnamed military analyst's conclusion, the investigators clearly state that this report is a preliminary study and investigators need more information, among other things, the recovery and analysis of the foreign particles that pierced the plane.