It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Possible MH-370 debris found on Reunion Island?

page: 23
44
<< 20  21  22    24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

The fire happened in 2011.




posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: DProgram

And after United 811 happened the airlines wanted 5 years to fix all the 747 cargo doors. What's your point? They go years between heavy checks and depending on how far into the wall they had to go to get to the fasteners it would have required a heavy check to do.

And if the maintenance system was less than honest at Malaysia, as it appears, it could have been signed off without doing the work.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:10 PM
link   
I'd be inclined to say a cargo door is considerably less important than an issue which would/could cause total loss of control of an airplane, thus a shorter time frame issued. Regardless, there are separate fire extinguisher looking oxygen containers that the pilots could have used.

Besides cockpit fire, I don't believe this thread has considered potential pilot suicide? Like the Germanwings plane that was flown into the Alps. That would be "boring" and cruel, but a simple explanation. The pilot may have had a particular place for some spiritual/personal reason that could have caused him to change course for a particular area. Maybe he was turning to fly into the sunset or something. Total speculation of course, but a possibility nonetheless.

I am extremely disinclined to believe this was a problem with one of the most reliable aircraft currently in service.



posted on Aug, 9 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: lamore

You think a cargo door opening in flight is considerably less important? On what was at the time one of the most popular aircraft in service? Really? The crew oxygen problem affected maybe 20 aircraft. The cargo door issue affected every 747 flying.

Just because it's one of the most reliable aircraft flying doesn't rule out a problem with the aircraft. If you look at the pilot suicides they almost all have commonalities. They happened fairly early in the flight, and they dove pretty straight for the ground. They didn't fly way off course before going through with it.

Malaysia had evidence of a corrupt maintenance system in place. Parts showed on the books as having been sent to the OEM for required service, with no record at the OEM as having received them. Their director had little to no experience with maintenance, then a mysterious fire that destroys a bunch of records in the hangar. It's not a far stretch to them pencil whipping required maintenance or work on this aircraft.



edit on 8/9/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 05:35 AM
link   
a reply to:

originally posted by: auroraaus
a reply to: IAmSpock

Welcome IAmSpock!



this is true but would we really hear if a plane part went missing in a shipping mishap? I don't really know to be honest. But, it's just something else to think about and you are right, further examination should prove conclusive it's from a crashed plane.


Belated hanks for the welcome, auroraaus!

I notice the French authorities have now sent out a plane to fly around Reunion to see if they can spot anything else. Also people are looking on the Maldives as well, although that might be an unlikely

www.abc.net.au...

Of course a lot of the supposed wreckage will turn out to be wishful thinking on the part of would be wreckage finders.
edit on 10-8-2015 by IAmSpock because: Wanted to quote what I was responding to.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:58 AM
link   
I have worked along side MAS maintenance, I've seen first hand how they operate. In fact, I've personally seen how the entire airline operates from top to bottom (i.e. from the executive office down to the ramp rats who pump out the blue lav juice). In order to do what we were charged with doing we had to know exactly how every single element of the airline worked. A couple things about MAS maintenance; first, they weren't the worst I've seen (not by a long stretch), at least they had some maintenance personnel. Many SE Asian airlines farm their maintenance out to 3rd parties, and some of those 3rd parties would scare the socks off most people...if they knew. Sure, they had shortcomings, many of them culturally based, but serious maintenance issues did get attention. When I say 'culturally', what I mean is SE Asians in general suffer from an overly optimistic attitude. In short, they're happy people who sometimes believe too strongly in things working perfectly all the time. Problems are not something their culture deals with very well. We've seen examples of this in the handling of the events following the disappearance of MH370. That said, as long as no one can be blamed personally (saving face) then problems were dealt with by the airline. However, when someone had a dog in the fight things could get dicey real fast.

Secondly, this same cultural attitude worked in the other direction too. If there was the potential for someone to be personally blamed for something, whatever that something was, it got all sorts of attention. This had its good and bad sides; the bad being it tended to create a tunnel-vision mentality where people focus only on the things they could be blamed personally for at the expense of potentially larger systemic issues (bigger picture issues).

MAS, among several other critical industries, was one of the flagships of Vision 2020 which was/is a BIG deal for Malaysian national pride. MAS was one of their ambassadors to the world, so from this perspective the entire nation had a dog in the fight when it came to their success or viability as an airline.

At the end of the day, I don't really believe this came down to a maintenance issue. Did MAS cut corners with maintenance? Sure they did, but so do all airlines in varying degrees. I'm not sticking up for MAS here, I certainly had my issues with them and the attitude described above was principle among them, but I don't think this is what caused MH370 to crash.

In my mind, the disappearance of MH370 distills down to two scenarios...fire or takeover. And honestly, right now, I'm still leaning toward takeover, but my theory is more complicated. I am now starting to think it may have been a combination of both, something like a botched takeover attempt which resulted in a fire (or gas).

So my 'rough' speculative theory at this point goes something like this (keep in mind, this is very rough)...

- Bad guy gets on the flight deck (either by being one of the crew or from outside) and threatens destruction. Whatever happens, the remaining flight crew believes the bad guy and follow his demands.

- Transponder is turned off and last (incorrect) procedural radio call is made (under duress).

- Remaining crew waits for an opportunity to resist. At some point there's a struggle. Bad guy triggers whatever device he's threatened the crew with. (fire, explosive or gas, but I'm thinking some kind of gas device)

- One of the pilots regains enough control to turn the aircraft around before losing consciousness, but not before setting the autopilot.

- Autopilot is set, in haste, into a climbing attitude. MH370 continues to climb until it gets to the "coffin corner" above its service ceiling and stalls.

- Someone, bad guy or incapacitated pilot, arrests the stall at FL230 +/- and resets the autopilot on a course across the Malay / Thai border out into the Andaman. The struggle continues (whether this is someone struggling to fly MH370, or a struggle between the crew).

- Whomever is flying MH370 (in a semi conscious state) realizes their current heading will take them over Indonesia and makes a course correction to the north west.

- Whomever is flying (wakes up, or whatever, and) now realizes they are far enough out over the Andaman now to eliminate an overflight of Indonesia. They make one final autopilot course correction to the south west.

- All remaining crew/bad guys capable of flying the aircraft are now too incapacitated (for whatever reason) and can no longer control MH370. No one is in command, the aircraft is just flying itself.

- MH370 continues to fly on autopilot on the last course setting until she runs out of fuel and crashes into the Indian Ocean west of Australia.


I believe we will ultimately find it was a scenario like this (or very similar to this) which lead to the demise of MH370 and all souls aboard.

edit on 8/10/2015 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:06 AM
link   
The one question that has yet to be answered is why there was an power outage on (a part of) the left AC bus or AC busses for some time.
At 18:25 it was restored and a connection between the aircraft and satellite re established.
The SDU is powered through the left AC bus, if that fails it will be powered through the right AC bus.

This B777 had an AC bus failure, luckely for all the passengers and crew it happened after starting up the engines on the ground.
If this would have happened in the air, it could well have had a similar fate as Swiss air 111.

Is there a possibility to switch off L&R AC busses from the cockpit?



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Good post, there has been a chinese group who claimed responsibility for the disappearance of MH370.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
I have worked along side MAS maintenance, I've seen first hand how they operate. In fact, I've personally seen how the entire airline operates from top to bottom (i.e. from the executive office down to the ramp rats who pump out the blue lav juice). In order to do what we were charged with doing we had to know exactly how every single element of the airline worked. A couple things about MAS maintenance; first, they weren't the worst I've seen (not by a long stretch), at least they had some maintenance personnel. Many SE Asian airlines farm their maintenance out to 3rd parties, and some of those 3rd parties would scare the socks off most people...if they knew. Sure, they had shortcomings, many of them culturally based, but serious maintenance issues did get attention. When I say 'culturally', what I mean is SE Asians in general suffer from an overly optimistic attitude. In short, they're happy people who sometimes believe too strongly in things working perfectly all the time. Problems are not something their culture deals with very well. We've seen examples of this in the handling of the events following the disappearance of MH370. That said, as long as no one can be blamed personally (saving face) then problems were dealt with by the airline. However, when someone had a dog in the fight things could get dicey real fast.

Secondly, this same cultural attitude worked in the other direction too. If there was the potential for someone to be personally blamed for something, whatever that something was, it got all sorts of attention. This had its good and bad sides; the bad being it tended to create a tunnel-vision mentality where people focus only on the things they could be blamed personally for at the expense of potentially larger systemic issues (bigger picture issues).

MAS, among several other critical industries, was one of the flagships of Vision 2020 which was/is a BIG deal for Malaysian national pride. MAS was one of their ambassadors to the world, so from this perspective the entire nation had a dog in the fight when it came to their success or viability as an airline.

At the end of the day, I don't really believe this came down to a maintenance issue. Did MAS cut corners with maintenance? Sure they did, but so do all airlines in varying degrees. I'm not sticking up for MAS here, I certainly had my issues with them and the attitude described above was principle among them, but I don't think this is what caused MH370 to crash.

In my mind, the disappearance of MH370 distills down to two scenarios...fire or takeover. And honestly, right now, I'm still leaning toward takeover, but my theory is more complicated. I am now starting to think it may have been a combination of both, something like a botched takeover attempt which resulted in a fire (or gas).

So my 'rough' speculative theory at this point goes something like this (keep in mind, this is very rough)...

- Bad guy gets on the flight deck (either by being one of the crew or from outside) and threatens destruction. Whatever happens, the remaining flight crew believes the bad guy and follow his demands.

- Transponder is turned off and last (incorrect) procedural radio call is made (under duress).

- Remaining crew waits for an opportunity to resist. At some point there's a struggle. Bad guy triggers whatever device he's threatened the crew with. (fire, explosive or gas, but I'm thinking some kind of gas device)

- One of the pilots regains enough control to turn the aircraft around before losing consciousness, but not before setting the autopilot.

- Autopilot is set, in haste, into a climbing attitude. MH370 continues to climb until it gets to the "coffin corner" above its service ceiling and stalls.

- Someone, bad guy or incapacitated pilot, arrests the stall at FL230 +/- and resets the autopilot on a course across the Malay / Thai border out into the Andaman. The struggle continues (whether this is someone struggling to fly MH370, or a struggle between the crew).

- Whomever is flying MH370 (in a semi conscious state) realizes their current heading will take them over Indonesia and makes a course correction to the north west.

- Whomever is flying (wakes up, or whatever, and) now realizes they are far enough out over the Andaman now to eliminate an overflight of Indonesia. They make one final autopilot course correction to the south west.

- All remaining crew/bad guys capable of flying the aircraft are now too incapacitated (for whatever reason) and can no longer control MH370. No one is in command, the aircraft is just flying itself.

- MH370 continues to fly on autopilot on the last course setting until she runs out of fuel and crashes into the Indian Ocean west of Australia.


I believe we will ultimately find it was a scenario like this (or very similar to this) which lead to the demise of MH370 and all souls aboard.


The only real issue I have with that scenario is I keep wondering why not one passenger would have been able to get a message out. Just something that occurs to me.



posted on Aug, 11 2015 @ 07:57 AM
link   
I am still of the opinion that it didn't take 7 hours of disappearance for military services to start looking where it was.
So even if they aren't an all-seeing-eye and it takes time to redirect the view, there must have been some search going on well before the area involved became absurdly big. This doesn't mean they found it, but many posters assume that you need a 24/7, 3mm resolution camera across the entire globe or to search in a 12M square mile area from the disappearance.

These pieces may well be from MH370, but how is any indication that some theory is right? They only discount the possibility of an accident inland, not even that it was forced to land somewhere.
So if we have to go with evidence:

- The "accident" disables the trasponder before it's possible to identify the issue (consistent with both hijacking and fire/fast accidental event)
- The situation does prevent launching a mayday and requires a change of flight path.
- Whatever the situation was, the airplane turned back, probably directed to the closest airport (Sultan Ismail Petra) which is close to the border with Thay. Both fire (get back to the closest airport) and hijacking (get close to the border) are consistent.

Now, if we extend the line from the last known coordinate to the airport, assuming autopilot was turned on, the plane should have been in range of the airport rather soon since it would have been less than 200 miles. Even Kuala Lumpur was not more than 350 miles. In case of a fire it was still too much maybe.

So if the autopilot was set in the small time before losing consiousness, where was it set to go? Closest airport? Back to KL? Another close airport?
Some additional question I have:
Can it just be set to go in a straight direction? What's the procedure for an emergency land, turn autopilot to a destination or a direction? What happens if you get to destination and no additional command is issued?


Then the airplane is reported to be picked up in the Andaman sea suggesting that the plane has flown across the border and at a much northern location, suggesting that it has turned. Inmarsat data seem to confirm the path.

This, honestly, how could be explained in the context of an accident that incapacitates the crew?
- The fire starts, disables the transponder, the crew change path to go to a safe spot in autopilot and no mayday is received.
- The crew is incapacitated and can't do anything while the plane flies over at least 4 airports, but in the middle of the Andaman sea someone is able to get back conscious and turn the plane to a path that seems random, pointing NW.
- Despite the path makes no sense the plane continued to fly for 6 hours probably changing direction again based on Inmarsat data.

The small data we have don't seem to show that the plane flew 6 hours in autopilot with incapacited people on board. The idea of a fire that incapacitates the crew isn't anymore much discussed because does rise more questions then answers regarding the flight path. It's not just a a matter of IF autopilot was turned on, but WHERE was it pointed to and was it changed multiple times during these 6 hours?

We now find a piece of an airplane that stays a month on a beach and then gets reported, confirmed by authorities or by exclusion after few days, and suddenly we have a bunch of people claiming this is kind of a proof that it was an accident and start gatekeeping anyone who begs to differ in opinion. Since we found "pieces" can we at least assume that probability of an intact plane underwater is at least smaller?

Are we even allowed anymore to say that this story stinked since the start, is all but a settled issue and maybe do some questions about real data rather then "the obvious accident that must have been an accident"? How can you discount planted evidence? The "randomly flying in the indian ocean" idea is borderline bull#.
This, of course, ignoring the passengers valued around 5B in patents, the fact that the Malayisin PM has been found with 700M of 'donations' and all the controversial announcement made by every authority in the region. I don't value much the media, but some suspicious activity of the pilot, despite exxagerated, could have been legitimate.

ATS from deny ignorance is going to become ignore denial.


edit on 11 8 2015 by Mastronaut because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2015 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mastronaut
I am still of the opinion that it didn't take 7 hours of disappearance for military services to start looking where it was.
So even if they aren't an all-seeing-eye and it takes time to redirect the view, there must have been some search going on well before the area involved became absurdly big. This doesn't mean they found it, but many posters assume that you need a 24/7, 3mm resolution camera across the entire globe or to search in a 12M square mile area from the disappearance.

These pieces may well be from MH370, but how is any indication that some theory is right? They only discount the possibility of an accident inland, not even that it was forced to land somewhere.
So if we have to go with evidence:

- The "accident" disables the trasponder before it's possible to identify the issue (consistent with both hijacking and fire/fast accidental event)
- The situation does prevent launching a mayday and requires a change of flight path.
- Whatever the situation was, the airplane turned back, probably directed to the closest airport (Sultan Ismail Petra) which is close to the border with Thay. Both fire (get back to the closest airport) and hijacking (get close to the border) are consistent.

Now, if we extend the line from the last known coordinate to the airport, assuming autopilot was turned on, the plane should have been in range of the airport rather soon since it would have been less than 200 miles. Even Kuala Lumpur was not more than 350 miles. In case of a fire it was still too much maybe.

So if the autopilot was set in the small time before losing consiousness, where was it set to go? Closest airport? Back to KL? Another close airport?
Some additional question I have:
Can it just be set to go in a straight direction? What's the procedure for an emergency land, turn autopilot to a destination or a direction? What happens if you get to destination and no additional command is issued?


Then the airplane is reported to be picked up in the Andaman sea suggesting that the plane has flown across the border and at a much northern location, suggesting that it has turned. Inmarsat data seem to confirm the path.

This, honestly, how could be explained in the context of an accident that incapacitates the crew?
- The fire starts, disables the transponder, the crew change path to go to a safe spot in autopilot and no mayday is received.
- The crew is incapacitated and can't do anything while the plane flies over at least 4 airports, but in the middle of the Andaman sea someone is able to get back conscious and turn the plane to a path that seems random, pointing NW.
- Despite the path makes no sense the plane continued to fly for 6 hours probably changing direction again based on Inmarsat data.

The small data we have don't seem to show that the plane flew 6 hours in autopilot with incapacited people on board. The idea of a fire that incapacitates the crew isn't anymore much discussed because does rise more questions then answers regarding the flight path. It's not just a a matter of IF autopilot was turned on, but WHERE was it pointed to and was it changed multiple times during these 6 hours?

We now find a piece of an airplane that stays a month on a beach and then gets reported, confirmed by authorities or by exclusion after few days, and suddenly we have a bunch of people claiming this is kind of a proof that it was an accident and start gatekeeping anyone who begs to differ in opinion. Since we found "pieces" can we at least assume that probability of an intact plane underwater is at least smaller?

Are we even allowed anymore to say that this story stinked since the start, is all but a settled issue and maybe do some questions about real data rather then "the obvious accident that must have been an accident"? How can you discount planted evidence? The "randomly flying in the indian ocean" idea is borderline bull#.
This, of course, ignoring the passengers valued around 5B in patents, the fact that the Malayisin PM has been found with 700M of 'donations' and all the controversial announcement made by every authority in the region. I don't value much the media, but some suspicious activity of the pilot, despite exxagerated, could have been legitimate.

ATS from deny ignorance is going to become ignore denial.



If "THEY" wanted a plane for some nefarious purpose, why in the name of all that's holy would "THEY" need to go through all of this? I mean really, what logical reason would "THEY" have for not just getting any old plane you have never even heard of and just using that one? What? You think all of these governments are wasting all of this time and money looking for something they know full well they aren't going to find? For what?!
edit on 11-8-2015 by jaffo because: Spelling error.



posted on Aug, 11 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: jaffo
If "THEY" wanted a plane for some nefarious purpose, why in the name of all that's holy would "THEY" need to go through all of this? I mean really, what logical reason would "THEY" have for not just getting any old plane you have never even heard of and just using that one? What? You think all of these governments are wasting all of this time and money looking for something they know full well they aren't going to find? For what?!


THEY who? Why do you automatically assume there is a THEY and somebody who wants the plane for doing something like carrying a nuke? Are you implying that I'm talking about YOUR idea for a conspiracy?

There are different things to notice about why this airplane could be victim of one or more big interest (political, strategical, economical).
Look how patents work when there are legal owners disappear rather than die.
Look how much the governments are spending in propaganda, do you think a fruitless research is anything they can't afford? Why do you think there are so many governments involved and do you think they all have perfect relations among each other?
It doesn't even need to be a government; international corporations have enough power to put puppets at major airlines or buy them and cover the mud with the blink of an eye.

It could also be some kind of intentional show of confidential technology, like remote hijacking; in such a case the event would be obviously covered by every single airway or there would be a global collapse of the industry.

Now, at a very peculiar moment of malaysian president, we find pieces of that plane and he's more than happy to join the "it's it" crowd even before confirmation.

Why many chinese families don't believe the official story? What has been told them?
In fact, why anyone should believe ANY official story, given that every part involved will do everything to avoid responsibilities or turn them and possibly fabricate evidence? In the best case what you will get is sensationalism, so you should always take that "truth" with a grain of salt, a big one, and question everything.

So far nothing has been proved and very few things disproved.
edit on 11 8 2015 by Mastronaut because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   
I really would like to see an in depth investigation, seeing how a portion has been sheared off at the end of the flaperon.



00:37 to see the movement of the flaperon, could this be an indication that there has been an attempt to try to save the aircraft while ditching the aircraft in the ocean?
That would be a mayor eye opener about what had happened, by that i mean, not a hijacking or suicide, but a serious incident that initially caused the aircraft to turn back.

Moreover, if you look at the debris tracking in the video below, i wonder if MH370 really has crashed so far south and of the western Australian coast.



And there is of course this find at the beach 125 miles north of Perth.



posted on Aug, 11 2015 @ 01:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mastronaut

originally posted by: jaffo
If "THEY" wanted a plane for some nefarious purpose, why in the name of all that's holy would "THEY" need to go through all of this? I mean really, what logical reason would "THEY" have for not just getting any old plane you have never even heard of and just using that one? What? You think all of these governments are wasting all of this time and money looking for something they know full well they aren't going to find? For what?!


THEY who? Why do you automatically assume there is a THEY and somebody who wants the plane for doing something like carrying a nuke? Are you implying that I'm talking about YOUR idea for a conspiracy?

There are different things to notice about why this airplane could be victim of one or more big interest (political, strategical, economical).
Look how patents work when there are legal owners disappear rather than die.
Look how much the governments are spending in propaganda, do you think a fruitless research is anything they can't afford? Why do you think there are so many governments involved and do you think they all have perfect relations among each other?
It doesn't even need to be a government; international corporations have enough power to put puppets at major airlines or buy them and cover the mud with the blink of an eye.

It could also be some kind of intentional show of confidential technology, like remote hijacking; in such a case the event would be obviously covered by every single airway or there would be a global collapse of the industry.

Now, at a very peculiar moment of malaysian president, we find pieces of that plane and he's more than happy to join the "it's it" crowd even before confirmation.

Why many chinese families don't believe the official story? What has been told them?
In fact, why anyone should believe ANY official story, given that every part involved will do everything to avoid responsibilities or turn them and possibly fabricate evidence? In the best case what you will get is sensationalism, so you should always take that "truth" with a grain of salt, a big one, and question everything.

So far nothing has been proved and very few things disproved.


That is all extremely broad, completely nebulous, and utterly devoid of anything even vaguely resembling an actual theory. What you have said in effect is "Well, ANYTHING could have happened!" and then just kind of leave it there as though everyone else has to disprove every and any potential theory before going with the obvious "the plane crashed into the ocean for some mundane but eventually explainable reason" path. If someone wanted to use some covert weapon, what would be the point of doing so if no one knows you are doing it? Sorry, this is just a lot of hand waving, in my opinion.



posted on Aug, 11 2015 @ 09:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: jaffo
That is all extremely broad, completely nebulous, and utterly devoid of anything even vaguely resembling an actual theory. What you have said in effect is "Well, ANYTHING could have happened!" and then just kind of leave it there as though everyone else has to disprove every and any potential theory before going with the obvious "the plane crashed into the ocean for some mundane but eventually explainable reason" path. If someone wanted to use some covert weapon, what would be the point of doing so if no one knows you are doing it? Sorry, this is just a lot of hand waving, in my opinion.


Ye, many thing could happen, but it's really difficult that a "simple" accident happened because there are many coincidences: "heavy" passengers list, strange flight path that avoids the radars, fly for 6 hours after disappearing from every detector and then reappearing in multiple places, none of which produced a result.

You are comfortable with thinking about a mundane explaination? Fine, accidents happen, they generally don't disable transponders, then pilots, then fly to avoid detection and then go in the opposite direction of what was planned. Were the pilot unconscius? They passed over 4 airports in close range, they were in a shallow sea, why turn back and go for the border doing at least 2 turns during a time these pilots should have been unconscious?

I'll pick one theory which I like.
There are 5 people on the passenger lists who share a patent with an important high tech american firm. The patent seems to be worth a lot, and the 5 co-owners are chinese flying in a plane with another 20 colleagues. These people could be bribed or blackmailed by their own country to share the reserved infos. This should give a context about WHY this plane.

At this point there could be multiple players involved so we're dealing with the WHO has both the interests and the capabilities:
a) there is a defense contractor who co-owns a high valued patent and a country who does have strategic interests in keeping things from the possible opponents. Since both parties need the airplane gone, but one party needs the researchers "missing" there you go, you have a deal.

b) enemies/competitors of the USA wants to have the tech in question, China or Russia or both, they know it's an opportunity to make key people disappear. They might have been able to land the plane and secure the scientists.

I don't think the airplane was kept for its content, despite it's possible if there was some form of prototype in the cargo, or important documents regarding the tech. I think the US would have less reason to keep the plane if not to keep the plane from being found. Russia/China instead would have multiple reasons to keep the plane.

How? Bribe or blackmail the pilot, or hijack the controls before the take off, or use some unknown device to override autopilot. We have no evidence until we find the plane so it's useless to speculate additionally on this.

However having to use this plane for any kind of false flag would not be particularly clever, so I don't think that's a reason to do such a thing and that's why I am more inclined in thinking that IF it's not a very big patchwork of coincidences thus an accident, it's probably its passengers list the clue.

p.s. if you use a covert weapon, high level officials of many countries will know it, but do you think it would be revealed to the public? Do you think covert weapons have neever been tested on civilian subjects?



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 04:26 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 05:02 AM
link   
a reply to: aorAki

Really, I got a star for that?
What a sad state of affairs.



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Now this is interesting. Too bad we have to wait until November.



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That sure is interesting



posted on Aug, 12 2015 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

How ironic this shows up just mere days after the flapperon is found.

I am dubious of a search conspiracy related to MH370, but things like this make me wonder.

It's almost as if the message is "don't look over there...keep looking over here! "




top topics



 
44
<< 20  21  22    24 >>

log in

join