Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Your bluster makes me laugh though.
Ok, good. We've got that, then.
Your bluster makes me laugh though.
Eaglehawk wrote:Yes, Riv, just because we don't have the answers does not mean that there is something sinister at work. Agreed. I also know friends that are pilots. ATP actually. And those ATP pilots told me that it must have been the captain. Plain and simple. A bathroom break for the Co-Pilot and the plane is his. I suspect that this is when things went down. But who knows, as you said, the black box, which is actually orange, may detail something else.
The ex-Malaysian PM is claiming CIA involvement. I take that at face value. I don't know what happened like you Riv. But I am not so quick to dismiss possible malfeasance here especially with a guy as well connected as a former ruler of a country stating the opposite.
What did Reagan say? Trust but verify.
And what did Jefferson say? "Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."
I repeat to you, both of us do not know what happened to this airplane. We are espousing theories.
You choose to believe that this was not sinister.
I think that this could be sinister. My question to you Riv: do you trust our government?
You don't have to answer that if you don't want to. But my answer is, no. Let's see how this plays out my friend.
My question to you Riv: do you trust our government?
kalibane wrote:What's the motive for this massive far reaching conspiracy to erase a Malaysian jet liner? That's what I want to know.
burrrton wrote:My question to you Riv: do you trust our government?
You don't have to implicitly trust the government to seriously doubt their ability or desire to commit pointless, public mass murder and cover it up 100% effectively for decades (especially in situations where other perfectly rational explanations exist).
RiverDog wrote:Eaglehawk wrote:Yes, Riv, just because we don't have the answers does not mean that there is something sinister at work. Agreed. I also know friends that are pilots. ATP actually. And those ATP pilots told me that it must have been the captain. Plain and simple. A bathroom break for the Co-Pilot and the plane is his. I suspect that this is when things went down. But who knows, as you said, the black box, which is actually orange, may detail something else.
The ex-Malaysian PM is claiming CIA involvement. I take that at face value. I don't know what happened like you Riv. But I am not so quick to dismiss possible malfeasance here especially with a guy as well connected as a former ruler of a country stating the opposite.
What did Reagan say? Trust but verify.
And what did Jefferson say? "Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."
I repeat to you, both of us do not know what happened to this airplane. We are espousing theories.
You choose to believe that this was not sinister.
I think that this could be sinister. My question to you Riv: do you trust our government?
You don't have to answer that if you don't want to. But my answer is, no. Let's see how this plays out my friend.
It's not a matter of trust or motivation. It's a matter of means. Does the government in an open society such as ours have the means to pull something like this off and keep it under wraps? I say no, they do not.
It's no different than the JFK assassination. There were numerous organizations and individuals that would have liked to have bumped off Kennedy, as there is with just about every President and head of government. But none of that matters unless you can show that at least one of them had the means and the opportunity to pull it off and keep it quiet for 50 years.
burrrton wrote:My question to you Riv: do you trust our government?
You don't have to implicitly trust the government to seriously doubt their ability or desire to commit pointless, public mass murder and cover it up 100% effectively for decades (especially in situations where other perfectly rational explanations exist).
Eaglehawk wrote:You mention River that our society is open. Sure more than many countries, but I suspect that we have lost a bit of that through the years. I believe a film maker that made an anti-Obama film was brought up on federal charges the other day. They dismissed most of the ridiculous charges and he pled guilty to trying to get around election laws. Of course the DOJ did not selectively choose to prosecute him because he made an anti-Obama film, right?
A lot of this stuff you have to put two and two together. I am sorry, I love my country, but I do not trust my government. (Look at the VA scandal for example).
RiverDog wrote:I don't agree. There are tons more reporters, cameras, recording devices, communication devices, satellites, instant communication, et al. now than there was 30 or 40 years ago. It's a little harder to keep a secret nowadays.
Like I said, it's not a matter of trust, it's a matter of means. I don't trust the government anymore than you do.
Building 7 is my only question about that day.
Same reason as to why you can't fly a 757 into the Pentagon without a debris field. Impossible.
I understand you are still mad at how I exposed you and Kal trying to tag team posters.
burrrton wrote:I understand you are still mad at how I exposed you and Kal trying to tag team posters.
You mean the information I voluntarily provided unprompted. Yeah, nice work, Murder She Wrote.
Now tell us all more about the impossibility of minimal debris fields and fire melting steel.
burrrton wrote:Eag, I PM'd Kal to comment on what a bizarre thread this was, then thought that was poor form so came in here and said the same, and volunteered that I had sent a PM and felt it was the wrong way to go about it.
You did no "busting".
You *have*, however, reinforced in spectacular fashion virtually every criticism I've made of you.
And instead of focusing on YOOTOOB videos as "research", may I suggest you go read the 9/11 Commission report (or the Popular Mechanics book)? Even if your impulse is to concoct yet another conspiracy about them being "in on it" or something, I think you'll find them well-sourced enough to convince even you if you take the time to do the considerable reading required.
Maybe you are a Communist as well?
And yes I busted you. Trying to rewrite history eh?
burrrton wrote:Maybe you are a Communist as well?
LOL. More good detective work from our own Dick Tracy.And yes I busted you. Trying to rewrite history eh?
Everybody can read back and see when it was mentioned, Eag. Sorry.
(and I have no proof of that)
RiverDog wrote:Maybe they ought to start searching in the Bermuda Triangle.
RiverDog wrote:Maybe they ought to start searching in the Bermuda Triangle.
burrrton wrote:Eag, I'm not trying to be all that insulting except to imply that seeing conspiracy in just about every complex situation is kinda nutty.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.Your bluster makes me laugh though.
Ok, good. We've got that, then.
My answer is not everything is a conspiracy. I definitely agree with you Burr.
My theory is that as people see more and more of the USA going downhill(attack on 2nd Amendment(why?), VA hospital care, illegals being all of a sudden welcomed to the US, IRS debacle, release of 5 terrorists for arguably a deserter, support for Syrian rebels to the tune of millions, troops now going to Europe to be stationed in near Ukraine, etc.), they will search out for themselves what the heck is going on and make their own conclusion.
Of course you realize that there is a real possibility that we will see Jeb Bush against Hillary Clinton this time around.
Will that prove to some that the game is rigged? For me I already know its rigged.
A tipping point will come, maybe in 4 years or so, maybe 6 years. You will see lots more crap happen unfortunately before people understand that the temperature is rising and yet the frog ain't moving. (Just yet).
Hawktawk wrote:This may have already been said but how in the hell is it possible to turn off a transponder 13 years after 911? Incredible. A former general stated on Fox News shortly after the disappearance that he believed the plane had been hijacked by Islamic fundamentalists to be used at a later date and that he had anonymous sources. At the time Israel had issued a dire warning regarding any plane attempting to enter its airspace without proper identification. That general has absolutely been silent for 3 months and we have no plane, no debris, no clue what happened. At a minimum it is an amazing saga....
RiverDog wrote:Hawktawk wrote:This may have already been said but how in the hell is it possible to turn off a transponder 13 years after 911? Incredible. A former general stated on Fox News shortly after the disappearance that he believed the plane had been hijacked by Islamic fundamentalists to be used at a later date and that he had anonymous sources. At the time Israel had issued a dire warning regarding any plane attempting to enter its airspace without proper identification. That general has absolutely been silent for 3 months and we have no plane, no debris, no clue what happened. At a minimum it is an amazing saga....
That's a good point about being able to turn off a transponder.
But as to the rest of the conspiracy theory I don't buy. I can't see flying that plane to a land based runway big enough to accommodate a 777 and keep it off land based radar. It is not unprecedented for an aircraft that crashed at sea to not have any of the wreckage discovered.
But you're right about one thing: It is an amazing saga, and perhaps one of the greatest unsolved crimes in the past 50 years.
Seahawks4Ever wrote:OK, after months of nothing new to read in the saga of the missing plane two new facts have been reported in the last week. The first is that the FBI did indeed find files on the pilots computer where he had been practicing landing on small islands in the Indian Ocean. He had deleted these files so it took some time for the computer experts to piece them altogether again. Now, that doesn't prove anything but is interesting. A person would have to believe that any island that had an airstrip of any size in the Indian Ocean was searched, and I don't mean just flown over but I mean boots on the ground searched. The plane could have skidded off the end of a too short runway and the wreckage could by hidden by the jungle canopy. That would answer the question as to why many of the passengers cell phone incoming calls were still going to voice mail for a few days.
While it is incomprehensible that these islands haven't been searched nothing would surprise me with how badly the search was botched from the start.
The second thing to come out is that the pilot's wife has confirmed that it was her husband's voice that signed off in the last transmission to the tower.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests