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: 3
44
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6
Lets hope it IS MH-370 and we can finally sit down and watch the Air Crash Investigation episode regarding WTF caused that plane to go down!




posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 05:09 PM
link   



WASHINGTON (AP) — A U.S. official says air safety investigators have a "high degree of confidence" that a photo of aircraft debris found in the Indian Ocean is of a wing component unique to the Boeing 777, the same model as the Malaysia Airlines plane that disappeared last year.

The official says investigators — including a Boeing air safety investigator — have identified the component as a "flaperon" from the trailing edge of a 777 wing.

A French official close to the investigation confirmed Wednesday that French law enforcement is on site to examine a piece of airplane wing found on the French island of Reunion, in the western Indian Ocean.

The U.S. and French officials spoke on condition that they not be named because they aren't authorized to speak publicly.



AP



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 05:46 PM
link   
MAS370 was faked. If they found a plane, they were meant to find it.

Reasons why MAS370 never existed:

The model number for MAS370 doesn't exit. Boeing never built one. And it could not be a reconfiguration of a base model, as that would have to be issued by Boeing under aviation safety. According to Boeing's site. This model WAS NEVER BUILT!!!

If we were to assume that the plane configuration for MAS370, was a base model that IS listed on the Boeing website, then that model NEVER CAME OUT with the engines they claim were on MAS370.

So we have a plane that was never built, with engines that never came out on the base model for that plane.

Good so far.

Next, the flight (route) number designation for that plane was only created 2 days before the flight. The flight route does not exist. There is no official flight data for that flight number prior to days before the flight.

So a plane that was never build, with engines that never came out on the closest model that was built, flying on a flight number and route created days earlier especially for the crash!!!

Lastly, no mention of the fact that if you trace the serial number for this plane back, that it was actually one of two planes involved in an incident where it 'clipped the wing' of another Malaysian Airlines flight whilst taxing on the tarmac at an airport.

Anyone remember this???

Good luck finding anything about it on Google!!! They've all but made it 'vanish'.

They don't want anyone to realise that this is actually one of those two planes that clipped wings.

Why??? Besides it being a different model, with different engines, and different flight number designation and history???

Why indeed???

Why also, was the designation of the plane altered by the media at the time of the incident???

The first initial reports in the media about the plane were about MAS370. (M)ALAYSIAN (A)IRLINES (S)ERVICE, though this has been written up as SYSTEM. *Sigh*

MAS370, was then changed in the way it was written by the media to become MAS/MH370. And they used both for a little bit .. until ...

They then dropped the MAS to being only MH370. What does the H stand for? MH makes absolutely no sense as an acronym. The fact this was altered and adopted, is for the most ridiculous reasons you could ever believe.

MAS/SAM became MH/HM. To try convert SAM (The hidden name of God. Seriously, look up the meaning of the name SAM), to HER MAJESTY.

For one particular bitch, to try 'clip wings' with SAM to make MAS(SAM) ... they LOVE their reflections) into MH (HM).

The really stupid, and amusing thing about them trying to play this perception game, is that HM can also mean HIS MAJESTY, and therefore STILL REFERS TO SAMUEL/SAMAEL.

This was all faked. It never happened.

And any plane they find, was planted to be found or from another plane.

I had a remote viewing of this a week before it happened. There was nobody on-board the plane which flew a decoy flight pattern, and I could see a military jet escort off its left wing. Guess what sort of 'Coalition' jet it looked like???
edit on 29-7-2015 by SONOFTHEMORNING because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: SONOFTHEMORNING

My response would be that I hope Zaph is still around and has a response. That would be interesting to me.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: SONOFTHEMORNING

You better tell the people that operate the 777 that they don't exist, considering it's the most successful commercial aircraft ever built, and has flown millions of passengers over the years. There are 1,313 777s of all models in service.

All airlines have a two letter IATA designation. They have a three letter ICAO designation. Malaysia uses MAS for the ICAO designation and MH for the IATA designation. Both are correct.

aviation-safety.net...

m.firstpost.com...

www.dailymail.co.uk...

And a picture of it.

i.dailymail.co.uk...

So everything you just said is wrong and easily proven to be wrong.

Let me guess, the "escort" you imagined is one of the incredibly common fighters used the world over by many countries.
edit on 7/29/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 7/29/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 06:20 PM
link   
It was planted!



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   
I'm curious. Can someone explain how such a heavy piece that apparently "washed up" appears to be a good 100 metres in land nowhere near a shore, judging by a couple of the pics, somewhat up a gradient.

Of course I want them to be able to offer the families closure, but these pics have "planted" all over it to me? At the very least, I think "washed up" is flimsy.


No sign of sea or shore line here



That looks like a lake in the distance, and it hardly looks turbulent enough to wash things up 100 metres away from it...?

Maybe it's a flood-plain or, if the cameraman turned round there would be an ocean right there, but ugh, something doesn't seem right...
edit on 29-7-2015 by markymint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: nelloh62

Where the hell is Zaph??

I would think (but am not at all an aviation expert) that any large parts would have a serial number that can be traced from fabrication to installation on an aircraft. That could be traced...maybe?


The piece I saw in photos looked like part of a wing control surface called, on Boeings, a flaperon, but on Airbus called a drooping aileron. That part would not necessarily have a serial number. It is not a part that would be routinely be changed, where part history would be important. It may possibly be attached to an actuator which is more likely to have a serial number.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: markymint

People carried it up there to look at it. I've found pieces on the beach and carried them inland where there was no danger of the water coming in while I looked them over.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 06:46 PM
link   
That makes sense, cheers. Shame it got disturbed/moved from original location before it was photographed. Not that that would affect the analysis, just makes it a bit confusing in the reports (that I didn't see mention that it was moved from the shore line).



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 06:54 PM
link   


MAS370 never existed




I had a remote viewing of this a week before it happened.


Remote viewed something that didn't exist. Yes, I can believe that.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: markymint

They were probably trying to keep it safe, and were more worried about that than preserving it for investigators to get pictures of in the location they found it in.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: markymint

Depending on the tide tables there, if they found it at low tide, they would have to move it or the ocean would reclaim it.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 08:46 PM
link   
well it could be left overs from Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961.

It could be planted.. what better way to hide a state sponsored hijacking by throwing a few components out the back of a cargo plane and waiting for them to be discovered

then again it could be MH370.

either way, the case will never be solved



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
well it could be left overs from Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961.

It could be planted.. what better way to hide a state sponsored hijacking by throwing a few components out the back of a cargo plane and waiting for them to be discovered

then again it could be MH370.

either way, the case will never be solved


THIS



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: weavty1

The really disturbing part is everyone seems to think the government knows more than they are telling - why?

So our enemies don't know that norad lacks the actual capabilities to track all airborne threats globally as has been suggested?

The failure of every military in the region and the secrecy surrounding this is the real problem with this case.



posted on Jul, 29 2015 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: circuitsports

They've known NORAD can't track objects everywhere. That's why it's the North American Aerospace Defense Command. It's never been a secret that their mission is only North America.



posted on Jul, 30 2015 @ 01:35 AM
link   
Just one piece? Could have been planted....seriously.



posted on Jul, 30 2015 @ 01:52 AM
link   


Xavier Tytelman, a former military pilot who now specialises in aviation security, was contacted on Wednesday morning by a man living on the island of Reunion, in the Indian Ocean.


So, a man who living on the Island contact directly a former military pilot and specialist in aviation security and NOT the official authorities (Police, coast guard, navy etc...)?

Smell fishy...



posted on Jul, 30 2015 @ 02:39 AM
link   
a reply to: HUGOH

Maybe he thought he'd get recognition if he contacted him first. There are several reasons to do it that way that aren't nefarious.



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join