To the INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER in the UK:
ARE YOU FRICKING SERIOUS?
THE SCAM IS THAT PHOTO!
Sack your journalist and your Editor! This is either sheer incompetence and they shouldn’t have a job OR this is sheer propaganda on your part for the purposes of promulgating a narrative which has a dangerous and insidious agenda behind it.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/missing-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370-inquiry-shows-thai-passport-scams-continue-9187928.html There is now, without a doubt, an agenda going on here regarding this MH370 flight. You’d have to be dead from the neck up not to recognise it. We have two separate photos taken of the so called “Iranians” who “boarded the plane with fake European ID passports”. The two photos shown above having one small problem however. The legs and feet of each individual are precisely the same kegs and feet! Now I’ve heard of and seen co-joined twins before but I have never seen two entirely facially different twins who are not co-joined but have precisely the same legs and feet. Whoever this man is holding these photos, he’s a first class plonker! A total moron! However, for a so called Independent journalist to actually write a piece around this photo and he is so incapable to see what is in front of his eyes, he should either be sacked on the spot or shot! This is the height of incompetence or, a deliberate agenda. Take your pick Independent. Ah but you can’t sack him can you? He’s a Freelance. No bloody wonder! He’ll be lucky to sell another article after this!
Skills: Researcher? Have you ever played “Spot the difference” Mark?
You can sack the Editor who accepted this however!
Look, I’m sorry if I cannot quite get across, in a single or even a few blogposts, how this MAJOR TPPA Corporate deal is what this MH370 disappearance is all about. Yes, many people will say “WTF is this guy going on about? How can he connect a Trade agreement with the possible hijacking of a plane and suggest it has been taken to Diego Garcia? He must be nuts!”
But he’s NOT asshole! He’s just read and analysed a whole hell of a lot more shit than you have! Trying to compress that amount of knowledge is bloody difficult! It’s MUCH bigger than a plane disappearance or even the trade agreement itself. You need to cover one hell of a lot of ground to be able to “see” the connections, however subtle they are. You need to look at organisations such as the UN, the IMF, the EU and you need to understand the geopolitical importance and context within which players like China and Malaysia play. You need to understand who is connected to who and why and what their micro agenda is while looking at a macro agenda. You need to study history. You have to analyse trade flows and capital flows and investment and look who (which country and which individuals) are working for who and whose side they are on.
You need to understand the monetary system and how it works (or doesn’t as the case may be). You need to recognise BIG answers to BIG questions such as: How is the world in debt? How can a single entity (the Earth and its inhabitants as one symbiotic whole) be in a net debt? It CANNOT unless there is another organisation it is in debt to! But if that organisation is composed of people (which it is) then they comprise part of the symbiotic whole do they not? Yes and no is the answer to that but the BIG answer is: They have, with respect to the global monetary system, disconnected themselves from the symbiotic whole and it is THEY who the world is in debt to!
There will be some of you who read this who are still living in that “box” where you listen to economists telling you about things like the US buys chinese goods and Russia exports to Brazil and sells gas to the EU etc, thereby causing there to be “creditor nations” and “debtor nations” and that is how the world is in debt! BUT you (and they, purposefully because they damned well know better than that) are missing the point!
IF THERE ARE CREDITOR AND DEBTOR NATIONS – WHICH THERE ARE – THAT IS ONE THING. BY SUCH EXISTING THEN, THE OVERALL RESULT IS THERE IS BALANCE WITHIN THE SYSTEM, I.E. THE AMOUNT OF CREDIT HELD BY THE DEBTOR NATIONS IS BALANCED BY THE PRECISE SAME AMOUNT OF DEBT WHICH THE DEBTOR NATIONS HOLD!
BUT IT DOESN’T BALANCE! THAT IS WHY THERE IS A NET GLOBAL DEBT! WE DO NOT OWE IT TO MARS OR JUPITER AND WE CAN’T OWE IT TO OURSELVES! THE LATTER IDEA IS AS RIDICULOUS AS THE FORMER.
WE OWE IT TO THOSE WHO HAVE DISCONNECTED THEMSELVES FROM THE SYMBIOTIC WHOLE BY, LITERALLY, BECOMING PARASITES! THAT ENTIRE GLOBAL DEBT GOES INTO THEIR POCKETS! AND UNTIL YOU SEE THIS FOR WHAT IT IS THEN NOTHING I SAY WILL EVER MAKE ANY SENSE TO YOU. BUT DON’T BLAME ME FOR THAT, BLAME YOURSELF FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO DEDUCE THE SIMPLEST OF LOGIC!
The TPPA to these people is of fundamental importance to their agenda of achieving the next step toward world government! They want, essentially, 4 or 5 trading blocks. They have one called the EU (now breaking at the seams but they will do whatever it takes to maintain it no matter what and that is what Ukraine is all about). Breaking up the UK also works into the plan because, then, they can pick off each of the individual states within it, each with a more manageable population which, by the way, has been “diluted” by the introduction of masses of immigrants. That dilution reduces the ability of the population to speak as one voice toward government and the EU because it breaks itself into “tribes” and fights among itself based upon whatever “bones” the government/establishment throw it to fight and divide itself over.
NAFTA is another of those trading blocks which will, in time, become an american “EU” and it is why Obama and the american governments before, now and after, are allowing the immigration across its border from Mexico, filling the US with legal and illegal immigrants. They are doing precisely the same as the British, French and German governments are and it IS an agenda!
Next is TPPA. Obama and the globalists he works for, want that TPPA and it has nothing to do with “free trade” for the benefit of PEOPLE (just as the EEC wasn’t to the ultimate benefit of the populations of each European country. Each of these trade blocks, which then become superstates are for the benefit of the “old wealth”. The corrupt banking and monarchical families. Until you get this through your head you will understand NOTHING of the world you live in and you will NEVER be able to analyse events and understand the significance and the purpose of them.
I wrote about this TPPA/Anwar/CIA/Malaysia component/connection to MH370 long before any of it hit the press. Then the press come out with the “political maniac” story re the pilot. A couple of days later (just yesterday?) they then publish the fact that Anwar Ibrahim is actually related to the pilot.
Meanwhile, you have a satellite company (owned by the UK and works with UK and US defence projects) telling you that the search points should be along two arcs – one going as far a Afghanistan (how surprising!) and one going deep south toward the antarctic. Neither of which makes sense because the north arc? Not a hope in hell of a plane not being spotted by radar and the southern arc – which they now seem to be focusing on (and THAT is what worries me re the decided fate of the flight – YES DECIDED!) – leads to nowhere but some story which will suggest the pilot was probably suicidal and not one of the passengers will ever be seen again.
You see, the north arc gave them a story of terrorism if they could make it stick. The south arc is the “safety” one for them if they couldn’t make the terror connection work.
The REAL “arc” is out onto the West/SW Indian Ocean but NO-ONE wishes to “go there” (even if they were allowed to!).
The article goes on to state….
“Only the US and Japan support the proposal, while the rest expressed their objections … but the US has shown no sign of flexibility…”
The summary also revealed the unhappiness of some member states over the insistence of the US to reintroduce a “Transparency Annexe on Medicine” that had been overwhelmingly discarded in previous rounds of negotiations.
“Some countries expressed annoyance for the way [the US, Australia and Japan] resubmitted a text that had been strongly rejected in the past.”
Last month, WikiLeaks published online a secret draft of one of the chapters under negotiation for the TPPA. In it were contained passages that confirmed critics’ fear that the deal would hamper access to generic drugs and cause healthcare costs to rise as a result.
Despite the reported eagerness for the US to see the negotiations wrapped up before the end of the year, the table depicted stalemates across the 14 chapters of the trade deal.
Malaysia also either rejected or is reserving its positions on nearly as many clauses as it has agreed to, illustrating its ambivalence towards the controversial agreement that Putrajaya has so far been supportive of in public.
Trade ministers and representatives are currently gathered in Singapore for the latest round of talks over the TPPA in an attempt to sew things up before the year is out, but analysts believe the possibility was now increasingly remote as some nations rankle over the allegedly “manipulative” tactics employed by the US.
President Barack Obama has hailed the TPP as a centrepiece of renewed US engagement in Asia, saying it contains market-opening commitments that go well beyond those made in other free-trade accords.
But the complexity of the issues has already caused negotiators to miss the original 2012 deadline set by Obama to reach a deal, with the new target also looking unlikely.
The TPPA is a free trade agreement that has been negotiated by the US, Malaysia and nine other nations as part of the larger Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership since 2010.
|Human Rights Annual Report 2008 – Foreign Affairs Committee Contents|
17. Some of our witnesses expressed continuing concerns about US policy. Kate Allen told us that “we still see the ability to use rendition in transitory detention, so although there have been some progressive moves, we have not seen the complete end of rendition and its use in temporary and short-term measures.” Benjamin Ward expressed concern about “the military commissions and proposals for administrative detention”. Clive Stafford Smith told us that there was still much that needed to change:
there is an awful lot that he is not doing. He is one person who has a lot of poisoned chalices to deal with. Let us be clear: rendition is still going on and it will continue to go on. The business of closing CIA prisons is chimerical because the vast majority were not CIA prisons and they still exist. For example, the two people rendered by the British to Afghanistan are still being held in secret detention, and we don’t know what their names are. President Obama is no more likely to make that public than President Bush was. An awful lot of work remains to be done, and a lot of the prisons that we have dealt with—that in Djibouti, for example, and I am sure that we will talk a little about Diego Garcia—still exist. They are not CIA prisons but are very active. We delude ourselves if we think that Obama’s first few pronouncements have solved the problem.
22. It has been alleged that the UK Government has not fulfilled these commitments. In July 2007 the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) reported on rendition in the wake of:
allegations that the UK Government has not done enough to ensure that the UK is not involved in such operations, and, furthermore, that it has not sufficiently investigated these allegations, which might be counter to its obligations under UK and international law […] There have also been allegations of direct involvement in these operations by the UK intelligence and security Agencies and by Her Majesty’s Government more widely.
Clive Stafford Smith was emphatic that “there is zero probability that the British officials did not know about rendition and were not complicit in it.” Kate Allen was less categorical, concluding that:
I think that at a minimum what we see is a complete lack of grip by the British Government in terms of who is passing through British territory. We see a lack of control. We have seen false information given to Parliament on this issue, and we see a rather passive response by the UK Government in asking the American Administration, but not being able to look at their own records, being very minimalist in the questions that they are asking and the definitions of rendition that they are using.”
DETAILS OF THE 2002 RENDITIONS THROUGH DIEGO GARCIA
26. The Government has claimed to have only limited information about the flights that landed on Diego Garcia in 2002 and the individuals in question. When we questioned the Foreign Secretary about why details of the cases had not been published by the Government he answered that “we have no confirmation of their names, and that is why we have not put them into the public domain”. In answer to a Parliamentary Question by Andrew Tyrie MP, the FCO Minister of State, Bill Rammell MP, stated that “We have very limited specific information about these flights and, despite enquiry, have not been able to establish further details that would be essential for purposes of further investigation.” Mr Tyrie told us that “the implication is that the US is withholding information about these flights” and that this information would be essential for investigation of whether criminal offences were committed.
27. From the information provided, Reprieve believe that have identified one of the men rendered through Diego Garcia in 2002 as Mohammed Saad Iqbal Madni. They urge that the Government should clarify further what it knew of his apprehension, transfer and treatment, whether British personnel had contact with him and provide details of assurances sought by the UK regarding his treatment. Clive Stafford Smith told us that evidence for this assertion was “pretty much indisputable” but that the Government had failed to respond to the claim. He believes the second prisoner was Shaikh Ibn Al-Libi but told us that “we are by no means certain.”
28. We conclude that it is unacceptable that the Government has not taken steps to obtain the full details of the two individuals who were rendered through Diego Garcia. We recommend that the Government presses the new US Administration to provide these details, and that it should then either publish them, or explain the reasons why it considers it would not be in the public interest to publish them.
In our 2008 Report on Overseas Territories we noted that the US lease on Diego Garcia is due to expire in 2016. The FCO told us that the 1966 Exchange of Notes which established the agreement would “continue in force for a further twenty years beyond 2016”, unless it was ended by “either government giving notice of termination, in accordance with its terms”. However, at that time, Ministers had not discussed the possibility of terminating the lease or altering the terms of the agreement to increase UK oversight of activities on the Island. Referring to the acknowledge rendition through Diego Garcia, Andrew Tyrie MP has argued that “if the agreements in place were not breached, then they appear inadequate for the purpose of preventing British involvement in extraordinary renditions.” Clive Stafford Smith also told us that
there is no doubt that it violated that agreement, but it violated a lot of other things. British law applies in Diego Garcia, notwithstanding what some other people have said. It has very interesting aspects. In fact, the law provides for a Diego Garcia supreme court that is meant to apply British law, of which there is no such thing. […]The whole process has been one to skirt the law
29. We questioned the Foreign Secretary about whether the use of Diego Garcia for rendition flights would breach the terms of the agreement between the UK and the US on the use of the island. He told us:
In our view there should be consultation. I think there was consultation about a previous case—there were a couple of cases in the 1990s. That is certainly the procedure that now exists […] the US Administration have said that they will consult us if they ever want to use it. So they obviously share that view.
He did not believe that there were grounds to examine the terms of the agreement that govern the use of the island, adding:
If the American Administration were now saying that they did not need to consult us, that would be a prima facie case for reviewing the arrangements. I am sure in 2016 we will want to look at whether they are adequate for the times; there is no limitation on that. In respect of the use of Diego Garcia for rendition there is an absolutely clear position from the British Government and the American Government about the appropriate way to act. In that respect, there is no lack of clarity.
30. We conclude that the use of Diego Garcia for US rendition flights without the knowledge or consent of the British Government raises disquieting questions about the effectiveness of the Government’s exercise of its responsibilities in relation to this territory. We recommend that in its response to this Report, the Government indicates whether it considers that UK law has effect in British Indian Ocean Territory, and whether it considers that either UK law or the agreements between the US and UK over the use of BIOT were broken by the admitted US rendition flights in 2002.
31. The Intelligence and Security Committee’s July 2007 report on rendition commented that:
We are concerned that Government departments have had such difficulty in establishing the facts from their own records in relation to requests to conduct renditions through UK airspace. These are matters of fundamental liberties and the Government should ensure that proper searchable records are kept.
The Government has admitted that flight records from Diego Garcia covering the period during which renditions are known to have occurred through the island have been destroyed. In its submission, Reprieve questioned why accurate records were not kept and argued that the Government should make available details of how, why and by whom records were destroyed. When we asked the Foreign Secretary whether the Government would be willing to do this, he replied: “”I have never been asked that before and there is no proposal to do it.” He stated that on Diego Garcia since 2008 “all flight records are now held by the British representative” and outlined his intention to make improvements in record keeping:
The record-keeping systems that have to be improved are partly a matter of what happens on the base and partly a matter of what happens back in London. In respect of all detainee issues, there is now a central point in the Foreign Office for arranging that, and I think that is the right way forward.
32. Non-commercial, non-state flights do not require permission to land in the UK. Redress has previously suggested that the law covering the use of civil aircraft for rendition and the procedures for authorising the entry of ‘state aircraft’ into UK territory should be assessed. They comment in particular that although many rendition flights are designated as ‘civil’ flights, they might more accurately be described as ‘state’ flights and therefore should require more explicit authorisation. Benjamin Ward was
supportive of the initiative by the all-party parliamentary group on rendition to create a permission system for rendition flights, including for overflights, similar to that which exists already in extradition cases under the European Convention on Extradition. That proposal was put forward to the Government in 2006 and, as far as I am aware, nothing ever came of it. Obviously that would not entirely eliminate the risk of transfers, but effectively requiring a transferring state to certify, in advance, what opportunity the prisoner had had to challenge any risk of human rights abuse that they might be subject to would make it much more difficult and much less attractive to use UK territory and UK airspace for such transfers. It would be a very important and symbolic change and it is not clear to me why that was not taken up.
33. We conclude that, in the light of the controversy over the use of British Indian Ocean Territory for purposes of rendition by the US, it is important that full records of flights through the territory are kept, and retained for an indefinite period. We conclude that it is to be welcomed that the British representative on Diego Garcia now keeps flight records. We recommend that the Government discloses how, why and by whom the records relating to flights through Diego Garcia since the start of 2002 were destroyed. We further recommend that the Government provides, in its response to this Report, full details of its record-keeping and record-disposal policy in relation to flights through British territory, particularly BIOT, and state for how long it now retains such records. We recommend that, in its response, the Government addresses the question of whether it considers that current aviation law and aircraft identification procedures are sufficient to identify flights which may be carrying out rendition both through Diego Garcia or elsewhere through UK airspace.
34. The lack of historical flight data makes it very difficult to test allegations that the two flights in 2002 do not represent the full extent of Diego Garcia’s involvement in the rendition circuit. It is claimed that the island was used by the CIA as a ‘black site’. During our inquiry into Overseas Territories it was further alleged that ships in or near the island’s territorial waters had been used to hold detainees and facilitate rendition. Such allegations include the following:
- US Army General Barry McCaffrey, former head of Southcom, has stated twice in public that Diego Garcia has been used by the US to hold prisoners, stating in a radio interview in May 2004 “We’re probably holding around 3,000 people, you know, Bagram Air Field, Diego Garcia, Guantánamo, 16 camps throughout Iraq.”
- In October 2003 Time magazine reported that the Al-Qaeda operative known as Hambali had been interrogated on the island.
- A former senior American official told Time magazine in July 2008 that “a CIA counterterrorism official twice said that a high-value prisoner or prisoners were being held and interrogated on the island. The identity of the captive or captives was not made clear.”
- In August 2008, the Observer reported that former American intelligence officers “unofficially told senior Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón that Mustafa Setmarian, a Spanish-based Syrian accused of running terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, was taken to Diego Garcia in late 2005 and held there for months.”
- Reprieve allege that Abu Zubaydah and Khaled Skeikh Mohammed, currently held at Guantánamo, were also held on the island.
- The Observer has reported that Manfred Novak, the United Nations special investigator on torture, told the paper that “he had talked to detainees who had been held on the archipelago in 2002, but declined to name them.”
35. In its 2008 Annual Report on Human Rights the FCO stated that:
The US government denies having interrogated any terrorist suspect or terrorism-related detainee on Diego Garcia since 11 September 2001. They have also informed us that no detainees have been held on ships within Diego Garcia’s territorial waters over that period, and that they do not operate detention facilities for terrorist suspects on board ships.
36. We asked the Foreign Secretary whether this assurance extended to the use of Diego Garcia as a victualling point for ships outside its territorial water which may have been used for renditions. He stated that “we have no information, either of vessels inside territorial waters being used for rendition or of supplies from Diego Garcia going to ships outside the territorial waters. The FCO state that such re-victualling would be “highly unlikely to occur” because:
The territorial waters of Diego Garcia extend to 3 nautical miles. Replenishment at Sea […] requires a stable transfer system between the two vessels concerned. This would usually be provided by an auxiliary vessel. No such vessels are currently berthed in Diego Garcia and consequently all vessels have to come into port to be replenished.
The Foreign Secretary undertook to supply us with an assessment of whether, under the US/UK agreements on the use of BIOT, the British Government’s prior consent would be required for the use of the territory as a re-victualling point for vessels outside territorial waters. He later told us that:
Under the UK/US Exchange of Notes which govern the use of the British Indian Ocean Territory for Defence purposes, the US undertakes to inform the UK of intended movements of its ships in BIOT territorial waters in “normal circumstances”.
37. We conclude that it is a matter of concern that many allegations continue to be made that the two acknowledged instances of rendition through British Indian Ocean Territory in 2002 do not represent the limit of the territory’s use for this purpose. We further conclude that it is extremely difficult for the British Government to assess the veracity of these allegations without active and candid co-operation from the US Administration. We recommend that the Government requests the Obama Administration to carry out a further, comprehensive check on its records relating to the use of BIOT with a view to testing the truth of the specific allegations (including those set out in paragraph 34 above) relating to rendition through the territory. We conclude that it is unsatisfactory that the Government is not able to give us a categorical assurance that re-victualling of ships anchored outside BIOT’s territorial waters by any vessel from BIOT, for purpose of assisting rendition, has not occurred. We further conclude that it is unsatisfactory that the US has only undertaken to inform the UK of the movement of ships in Diego Garcia’s territorial waters in normal circumstances but not in all cases. We recommend that the Government requests the US Administration to supply details of any movement of ships in Diego Garcia’s waters since January 2002 that were not notified at the time to the UK authorities, and seek assurances that at no point were these or other vessels used for re-victualling of vessels outside Diego Garcia’s territorial waters which were being used for purposes of rendition.
38. The Government has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to accept US assurances in relation to the use of BIOT for rendition flights. A report from the Council of Europe in 2007 criticised the Government for having accepted these assurances “without ever independently or transparently inquiring into the allegations itself, or accounting to the public in a sufficiently thorough manner”. The 2007 ISC report on rendition exonerated the Government from this charge, but did so before the revelation in February 2008 about the use of BIOT for rendition purposes. In our own Report on the Overseas Territories, published in July 2008, we concluded that “it is deplorable that previous US assurances about rendition flights have turned out to be false.”
39. The Foreign Secretary continues to argue that US assurances, such as those given by former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, can be relied upon:
I have had assurances, as I say, at the highest level that there are no cases beyond those two, and also that if there was any desire on the part of the United States to use Diego Garcia for so-called extraordinary rendition, or for any kind of rendition, the British Government would be consulted.
We can be confident that our closest intelligence and foreign policy ally seeks to honour its trust with us in all respects. The degree of intelligence co-operation that exists between the US and the UK is of a unique standard and standing. It is based on mutual trust. It is not only one-way traffic. The US Government understand the importance of transparency and full openness with us. When the Secretary of State of the United States gives you her word, you take it very seriously. 
40. Mr Miliband argued that:
It was certainly proactive on the part of the US to notify us in the first place of this new evidence that arose in February 2008. That did not emerge because I had been in touch with them about a particular case—they came to us. They were clearly proactive in that instance. I think that they have subsequently looked hard at their own systems, but they have been clear with me, in a way that I have then reported in full to Parliament, about the limits of their use of Diego Garcia. 
The Foreign Secretary assured us that in future the US would seek agreement for use of Diego Garcia for rendition flights:
Just to be clear, the information came out because the Americans found it; they found it and they told us. We said, very clearly, that our understanding of the agreement in respect of Diego Garcia was that there had to be agreement. They subsequently said, “We give you absolute assurance that, in all future cases, there will be; we will see that agreement.” So there is no mystery about that.
41. We reiterate our previous conclusion that it is deplorable that previous US assurances about rendition flights through Diego Garcia have turned out to be false. We further conclude that the basis of trust in subsequent US assurances about the use of BIOT has been undermined. We recommend that the Government outline what practical action it is taking to ensure that it has full sources of information about US rendition activity on BIOT.
I’ve stated it again and again – granted without going into this much detail – but Inmarsat have been talking dross all along AND they will not share the data.
It reminds me of the IPCC Climate Change “Peer reviews”.
Malaysia/China: You are being lied to! The Atlantic and these scientists are no “Conspiracy theorists”. But then neither are those scientists whose voices are suppressed telling you global warming caused by man is crap too!
The following are just some “highlights” of this article. For full understanding of why I choose these highlights, you need to read the whole thing:
Inmarsat concluded that the flight ended in the southern Indian Ocean, and its analysis has become the canonical text of the Flight 370 search. It’s the bit of data from which all other judgments flow—from the conclusive announcement by Malaysia’s prime minister that the plane has been lost with no survivors, to the black-box search area, to the high confidence in the acoustic signals, to the dismissal by Australian authorities of a survey company’s new claim to have detected plane wreckage.
This information is far from perfect. You know how far the plane was for each ping, but the ping could be coming from any direction. And you how fast the plane is moving toward or away from you. It could also be moving right or left, up or down, and the speeds would sound the same. The task of the Inmarsat engineers has been to take these pieces and put them together, working backwards to reconstruct possible flight paths that would fit the data.
So it should be straightforward to make sure that the math is right. That’s just what a group of analysts outside the investigation has been attempting to verify. The major players have been Michael Exner, founder of the American Mobile Satellite Corporation; Duncan Steel, a physicist and visiting scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center; and satellite technology consultant Tim Farrar. They’ve used flight and navigation software like STK, which allows you to chart and make precise calculations about flight scenarios like this one.
When the plane is moving away from the satellite, the radio signal gets stretched out, so the frequency decreases. This means that the frequency shifts should be negative over most of the flight. Although there was an approximately one-hour period starting 40 minutes after takeoff when radar showed the plane moving westward, toward the satellite, the graph shows that no pings were sent during that time—so actually, all of the shifts on the graph should be negative.
But the graph defies these expectations. Taken at face value, the graph shows the plane moving at a significant speed before it even took off, then moving toward the satellite every time it was pinged. This interpretation is completely at odds with the official conclusion, and flatly contradicted by other evidence.
The first problem seems rather straightforward to resolve: the reason the frequency shifts aren’t negative is probably that Inmarsat just graphed them as positive. Plotting absolute values is a common practice among engineers, like stating the distance to the ocean floor as a positive depth value rather than a negative elevation value. (straightforward to resolve IF you make the assumption they are making as stated, However, if you assume they are graphed positively because they WERE positive then that leads you to this conclusion: THE PLANE WAS, IN FACT, TRAVELLING WEST – toward the Satellite – AND WEST LEADS TO (among others) DIEGO GARCIA!)
Inmarsat’s analysis is highly ambiguous about whether the satellite-to-ground transmission contributed to the measured frequency shift. But if it did, a ground station located significantly south of the satellite would have resulted in frequency shifts that could account for the measured shifts being too large at the beginning of the graph and too small at the end. And sure enough, Inmarsat’s analysis states that the ground station receiving the transmission was located in Australia.
It’s possible to check the theory more precisely. Public records of Inmarsat ground stations show just one in Australia: in Perth.
Why Inmarsat’s Analysis Is Probably Wrong
If this interpretation—based on the work of Exner, Steel, Farrar, and myself—is correct, it would allow independent experts to fully review Inmarsat’s analysis, verify its work and check to see if Inmarsat might have missed any important clues that could further narrow down the plane’s whereabouts.
The problem is, although this interpretation matches two basic expectations for the frequency graph, it still doesn’t match Inmarsat’s example flight paths. The new frequency values, calculated by Exner, show the flight’s speed relative to the satellite as only about 144 miles per hour by the last ping, but Inmarsat’s example flight paths show a relative speed of about 272 miles per hour.
Either Inmarsat’s analysis doesn’t totally make sense, or it’s flat-out wrong.
For the last two months, I’ve been trying to get authorities to answer these questions. Malaysia Airlines has not returned multiple requests for comment, nor have officials at the Malaysian Ministry of Transportation. Australia’s Joint Agency Coordination Centre and the UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch, which have been heavily involved in the investigation, both declined to comment.
Until officials provide more information, the claim that Flight 370 went south rests not on the weight of mathematics but on faith in authority. Inmarsat officials and search authorities seem to want it both ways: They release charts, graphics, and statements that give the appearance of being backed by math and science, while refusing to fully explain their methodologies. And over the course of this investigation, those authorities have repeatedly issued confident pronouncements that they’ve later quietly walked back.
The biggest risk to the investigation now is that authorities continue to assume they’ve finally found the area where the plane went down, while failing to explore other possibilities simply because they don’t fit with a mathematical analysis that may not even hold up.
After all, searchers have yet to find any hard evidence—not so much as a shred of debris—to confirm that they’re looking in the right ocean.
So, to those of you who enjoy throwing the nasty comments (which yes I do read but trash soon after because they are not adding anything just simply attempting to have a go at me personally), please determine the location of your anus entrance/exit and, very gently, attempt to remove your cranium from the orifice. You will feel much better I assure you.
Golly gosh!! How timely!
The first American President in decades to visit Malaysia. What a coincidence! And just 7 weeks after MH370 flies off the radar. Enough time, then to let things settle down to a great extent and see where the cards lie.
But also, a US President’s calendar isn’t such that they just decide to pay a “State visit” to Malaysia and book their flights through Thomson holidays a few days before because they got a cheap deal. This visit has been planned and prepared a long time ago. Does no-one else consider that absolutely perfect, coincidental timing of such?
Barack Obama is the first US President to visit Malaysia since Johnson in 1966. How about that?
The article goes on to say:
Malaysia is a growing partner of the United States, which seeks to deepen that relationship, Rhodes said.
Topics of discussion between the two leaders will include trade, security and regional issues, he said.
Trade being the Trans Pacific Partnership and security and regional issues, of course, shall be “Hey Najib my man! Have you found that plane of yours?” with a big beaming Obama smile on his face. “Now let’s discuss our mutual interests shall we? 1. We don’t like this Warcrimes tribunal you had. 2. We don’t like this anti TPPA rhetoric. 3. Your plane COULD be found with passengers and crew alive and you all made into heroes if you just follow the plan. What do you say Najib?”
One of the security detail then whispers into Obama’s ear (a little like that day at the school for George Bush) “Sir, we’ve already shot them all”.
“Strike that” says Obama. “We’ll find the plane but if there are any bodies we’ll just bring up the chinese ones because, as you know, it’s a muslim thing to be buried at sea anyhow. Well that’s what we told the world in relation to us getting rid of the evidence… I mean burying Osama Bin Laden. Best let dead dogs lie right Najib?”
The Malaysian Prime Minister, Najib Razak, is being steered by US and British interests.
While Malaysians and Chinese are throwing their venom at the Malaysian government, they are throwing it all in the wrong direction. Sure the Malaysian government are going along with it but why? Do you think that, politically, the Malaysian government have a strong hand as compared to the British and US governments? Or the Chinese government for that matter?
Here is Najib just a couple of weeks ago:
Here he is on CNN just a day or so ago:
In the first video he’s telling you that he’s relying on Inmarsat and the AAIB in the UK. He’s got no choice. He didn’t have to accept it did he? But then IF he hadn’t informed at the “earliest opportunity” and the media came out and stated that Malaysia had been provided with such analysis but hadn’t accepted it, then he would have to deal with people assuming he and his government were hiding this also. So the man is between a rock and a hard place. He gives a press conference stating the analysis’ results and, to give such results he can hardly then state “But I don’t believe them” can he? So what the hell do you expect him to do? He’s being TOLD to believe them
In the second video, however, while then “couching” his initial disbelief, he is sowing seeds of that disbelief. At the same time it makes no sense whatsoever that we are now told that primary radar picked up an aircraft turning back but they don’t know if it was MH370. If it wasn’t MH370 then they must know which aircraft it was because, if they did not know what type of aircraft and where it was originally heading (therefore have an understanding of the, as yet, unidentified plane’s flight path) then how would they know it had “turned back”? Yes they could say they saw a plane on radar making a 180 degree turn BUT, if they didn’t know the purpose or the destination of that plane, how could they conclude a “turn back”? They also state it wasn’t a threat. How could they know this without first identifying what type of plane it was (civil or military) and how would they not consider something wrong whichever type of civil aircraft it may have been? So they MUST have known what plane it was. If it wasn’t MH370 then which airline was it? And what’s the story behind THAT “turn back”? All of this is ignored.
None of this holds water. So PM Najib is holding back something here but WHY is he? I doubt it’s because he and Malaysia wish to.
However, additionally, in the second video (the most recent with CNN) he will not state outright the plane has been lost (and yet we’re talking about death certificates?) because, as he says, he is considering the families feelings in this. No, he’s not. IF he knew 100% the plane was lost and it was where Inmarsat said it was (forgetting it cannot be found for the moment) then he would be bringing closure to the families (as he already tried to do based on his statement a month ago) then it would be that (and the proof) that would be considerate of the families’ feelings. He’s not stating it’s lost because can’t. The “authorities” have not done a good enough job yet to achieve that level of confirmation needed.
“We are as sure as we can possibly be” says Inmarsat and the “experts” from UK and the US. So that’s a “NO” then. It’s not a yes and when faced with such a direct question “Are you sure?” It’s a yes or no answer. Anything else automatically defaults to “NO”.
There are people who know exactly where that plane is and what happened to it. The rest is a wild goose chase as I’ve said from the beginning. IS it Diego Garcia? Who knows? I don’t. I have only said I have strong suspicions of it being so and why the globalists would carry out such a ‘project’. The ONLY reason why that scenario is deemed “crazy” and not investigated by any “authority” is because the “authority” IS globalist! Why do you think Najib is now submitting his document to the United Nations before releasing it to the people? Why does the United Nations ICAO have to give its “blessing” to the Malaysian government for such a release of information?
Who owns the United Nations? And please don’t say it’s a few countries on the Security Council. Please don’t give me that naivety when it is, with a little research, obvious to anyone who runs that show.
Here’s another thing from Sky News. Notice anything?
It goes on to say:
“A public opinion poll published last week found that more than half of Malaysians believe their scandal-prone government – which has controlled the country for 57 years – is hiding the full truth about the plane’s disappearance.”
A subtle little addition to suggest that the Malaysian government is a “regime” of sorts. Well they all are aren’t they? I’m not making excuses for ANY government. They ALL have their drive for power (and corruption) and the biggest of them are Her Majesty’s government followed closely by the American government (which is just the brawn of Her Majesty and the City of London anyhow).
I have said from the beginning that, at least in part, this whole episode is to destabilise the Malaysian state. I stick to that 100%.
Glad to see, however, that the relatives are not accepting the death certificates. It’s quite obvious that Najib understands why. He IS in between a rock and a hard place and every last word he comes out with while pressured, is going to be twisted by one faction or the other. He can’t win.
And it goes on to state:
“The Malaysian government, which has primary responsibility for the investigation, has been accused of mismanaging the search, concealing information about the tragedy and of being too slow to update families of the missing on developments.”
Every shot is being fired at the Malaysian government but very few at Inmarsat, AAIB, UK and American governments. Yes questions may be being asked of how accurate the analysis has been but NO-ONE is suggesting that the information provided could be being provided for nefarious reasons. And yet, not an ounce of evidence or debris to back it all up. 95% of the search area has now been completed and nothing. And yet, it was based upon Inmarsat’s analysis and Australia talking about one ping after another (having the first “ping” seemingly detected by China). Narrowing down and narrowing down the search zone based on so called “pings” yet, in this narrow searched zone, nothing found. Now some are saying (again unidentified US defence personnel) that the search could take years. If that is the case then these pings were not pings from a black box, so what were they? We will never get the answer to that because answers are NOT what they are looking for.
This is a study in trying to cover up a real story and trying to stitch together an “official story” while wearing down the families and interested parties to a point where the official story is accepted (once more) and years later, when it has all died down, a headline or a 7th page news item or news item at the end of the 6 o’clock news, states that debris and black boxes have eventually been found. The actual black box recordings will never be released but perhaps transcripts will – written by officials of course – and the entire event will, like so many others, continue to be discussed here and there as if the official story was real, correct and anyone questioning it, a nutter.
Wear them down. Just keep wearing them down. Add a great deal of confusion and unidentified, anonymous statements and opinions by “experts” to deflect from fundamentals which the majority view as reality because officialdom says so but which, from day one, were highly questionable.
And once more we have people murdered for an agenda and the perpetrators walk away scot free because they are officialdom. The perpetrators construct the story after all.
As they say “History is written by the winners”.
The international team searching the Indian Ocean for the Boeing 777 are now considering the seemingly impossible scenario of the aircraft having ‘landed’ somewhere, instead of crashing in the southern Indian Ocean.
The Malaysian-led investigation team, along with experts from Inmarsat and the UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch, had to rely on an Inmarsat communications satellite, which did not provide any definite details, including the aircraft’s direction, altitude and speed.
One of the sources told the New Straits Times: ‘A communications satellite is meant for communication…the name is self explanatory.
Hilarious. Absolutely hilarious.
“Inmarsat have done sterling, incredible work and we are certain it crashed into the sea where they said it did……. well, ok maybe not”
And people laughed at me. 🙂
Don’t you love it when what you’ve been saying and showing for weeks proves to be correct? Sorry, I do.
which did not provide any definite details, including the aircraft’s direction, altitude and speed
They really have very few places to go now with this MH370 issue.
Their lack of transparency, lack of logic and scientific honesty, their outright lies and propaganda have all served to put them in a bit of a bind. They’re taking this “search” to the last possible step and they can either come up with a black box (looking more and more unlikely) and/or debris (also unlikely given it would have been found by now floating) or they can say they took the bluefin down as far as it could go and it either malfunctioned or they couldn’t take anymore chances with it.
But here’s where the real story is:
The Malaysian government and the Australian government (think “Her Majesty’ Commonwealth”, the US, Australia and perhaps even Singapore) are now negotiating a contract. A “treaty” in a sense which transfers all (or some) liability for the “story” to Australia.
Haha. The people are offered no involvement in this decision. This is international law at work between two “legal persons” in the form of the Malaysian government (a legal person) and the Australian government (another legal person). The victims families are given no say in this matter because these two “legal person” authorities have decided that their interests outweigh the interests of the people. Malaysia is saying “if you want to go with this story Australia and the west, then we’re happy to allow you to as long as you provide the Malaysian government with legal protection regarding any and all lawsuits which may arise out of this and, if your story unravels, we are in the clear legally.”
Further, the Malaysian government can now say to both, its own citizens and chinese that they do not have authority over any of the found black boxes and plane parts (if ever found which, I would imagine, will be “found” at a much later date). So the chinese cannot hold Malaysia responsible. I wonder if Malaysian Airlines will also be covered by this “insurance”? Somehow, I think not. Just the government. MAS might just be held out to dry on this.
The Australians, British and the US will now simply come up with the story, present whatever they wish to the world in the ongoing weeks, months and years and the whole thing will be wrapped up nice and tightly.
IF there were actual persons lost on that flight, their families will now be told a little story and told to shut up just like the 9/11 families. You weren’t loud enough folks. “Philip Wood’s fiance” did a good job too.
Not much else to say on this topic. It’s transparent as it is.
Globalists 3 World’s population 0
Contact the mobile operator and ask.
So the intelligence services are saying there was a call and the Malaysian authorities saying there wasn’t. This is something they would have known within the first few days of the event.
Which mobile carrier did he use allegedly? Maxis? Telekom Malaysia? DiGi? There’s only a handful of them.
Then if you get a “Yes” then have the carrier publicly state it and also advise which base station in the network it connected to.
Otherwise, be quiet. Whoever are feeding these stories anonymously should be charged with some form of obstruction of an investigation. At best, they are sick little bunnies.
Meanwhile, the media should not even print anonymous sources and information they cannot verify but they do and why? It writes the narrative and causes the confusion wanted.
Why is George Galloway pushing this story?
I once spoke with George Galloway on his radio show and I just had time to mention “The Grand Chessboard” of Zbigniew Brzezinski and he cut me off for being a “Conspiracy theorist”. I simply asked the man if he had read the book – that is all. As soon as I did that, he cut me off and referred to me as a “Conspiracy theorist”.
And YET “Gorgeous George”, who thinks every word that is uttered from his tonsils should be taken as fact, is pushing THIS “theory”. CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT?
Hey George: You’re an ASS! You talk a lot of truth mate but don’t kid a kidder. All your “truth” also has an agenda behind it.
Yes, I have strong suspicions that that plane went to Diego Garcia (if the story is real at all) but I’m a “Conspiracy theorist” George so what do you expect? You’re not! You’re an “upstanding politician and member of the UK Parliament!” You don’t DEAL in conspiracy theory George! You don’t even talk about REAL books!
But here you are pushing Jim Stone’s story of a totally black iphone photo taken somewhere on Diego Garcia by some passenger who STUCK his iphone up his rectum? Excuse the pun George but don’t talk SHIT!
So let’s consider the possible scenarios here:
1. An actual physical hijacking.
What did Philip Wood do George? Put up his hand and ask to go to the toilet then ram his iphone up his ass? Did he ask a stewardess if she had some KY jelly on her?
Or did he just decide to drop his keggs in front of the passengers and hijackers or sat quietly in his seat with a blanket over him and shove a rather hard, unforgiving, quite large rectangular metal phone up his anus? Does Sarah Bajc, his girlfriend know about this George? Have you called her to tell her how real this is? Go on George. Call Ms Bajc and tell her that you are absolutely certain this is what her boyfriend has done and he’s still alive on Diego Garcia!
2. The flight was remotely hijacked and Philip Wood had all the time, patience and consideration that, when they landed, he would have to have his phone stuck up his ass in case he was searched by American forces personnel.
So then what? He’s in a cell by himself? In the pitch black. While these professional American forces hijackers or CIA never thought of using “wands” on the passengers to ensure they had no metal on them? A wand that can pick up a sliver of a piece of cigarette foil paper stuck in the corner of the back pocket of a pair of jeans (I know this because, due to that, I almost received an anal examination at Los Angeles Airport a few years ago until I finally located a tiny sliver of the stuff right in the corner of my jeans pocket).
So then Philip whips out his phone and send a picture message. Ok, so we assume that Diego Garcia is totally open to all and that every telecommunications network operator is on that island. Philip lived in China – about to go to Malaysia but he retained an AT&T mobile line JUST IN CASE he was hijacked right? Or SPRINT or any one of the other American based mobile operators. Ok, let’s assume that too. Because we certainly couldn’t assume China Mobile had a network connection on Diego Garcia could we George?
So then we assume that Philip, in a pitch black (no windows) room was able to get a signal. We then have to consider why he would wait 10 days before sending this pic (dated 18th March) AND, if we assume it was because he was, somehow, never alone out of the sight of his captors, we then have to believe that in those 10 days, his captors (American soldiers or CIA) did not find his iphone on his person or up his ass! He has had to go to the toilet how many times in that time? Let’s say once a day (assuming they’re getting fed) so, each time he goes, he has to shit out the phone and then stick it back up his ass am I right?
George Galloway: PISS OFF you idiot!
Go collaborate with Wood’s “fiance” and both of you go on record with that story.
You know this entire MH370 story is bullshit so you’re just playing the game. You don’t care that you’re talking shit because you know the whole story is shit.
Ok. Where do I start?
How do I PROVE to people who do not wish to accept that what I am telling them is absolute fact?
If we really do have families of missing MH370 passengers then do these families just want “closure” (it would increasingly appear so) given by people who are lying to them from start to finish, OR do they want to step up the discussion to find out what TRULY happened to their relatives? Or do they just not care because, perhaps, this entire story has been a hoax from the beginning?
It’s up to the families to prove they are actually REAL families! This may sound crazy to people reading this that I am saying this BUT, ask yourself (I have asked myself): Would you, having a loved one on a flight and being told it just “disappeared”, while then being “guided” by one contradiction after the other and amazingly fortunate occurrences, to a conclusion that your loved one ended up at the bottom of the Indian Ocean and NEVER being given proof of this, accept it? You KNOW (because if you don’t you seriously are really quite inept, I’m sorry) that there has been political turf wars going on and intelligence agencies crawling all over it while these same intelligence agents have been “feeding” the story and conflicting messages (precisely for the required confusion which all leads to people simply saying they want “closure”) since the day it disappeared.
Me? I don’t understand you if you are one of those families. I either don’t understand you and, therefore, can never sympathise with you, or you are actually non existent because, knowing what I know and seeing clearly what I see, I KNOW – if it were my relative – that they did not end their lives at the bottom of the Indian Ocean.
So who ARE you people is what I want to know?
1. Inmarsat: Triangulation from a SINGLE satellite!
This is triangulation –
In trigonometry and geometry, triangulation is the process of determining the location of a point by measuring angles to it from known points at either end of a fixed baseline, rather than measuring distances to the point directly (trilateration). The point can then be fixed as the third point of a triangle with one known side and two known angles.
You need at least TWO reference points – in this case, it would have to be a second satellite OR another plane which spotted MH370 or SOMETHING – a boat at a known set of coordinates. BUT YOU CANNOT TRIANGULATE WITH ONE SATELLITE AND THEN BY ANALYSING OTHER BOEING 777’s FLIGHTPATHS ON COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DAYS AND HAVING NO GEOSPATIAL RELATIONSHIP WITH MH370! If someone did this they should be winning the Nobel prize for physics!
I’d PAY to hear this explanation of how they did it! Even then I wouldn’t believe it!
Watch this IDIOT try and speak to you like a weather forecaster about Inmarsat’s amazing analysis:
2. Black box pings
I wrote about the fact that, to detect such pings, the Haixun or the Ocean Shield would need to be within a mile or two of the position of the plane underneath.
I provided this is back up for my claim:
I further support this statement by the following now…
What does the above tell us?
Quite a few things actually.
1. I mentioned in a previous post re Angus Houston that I did not believe this claim that ocean depth and, therefore, pressure, would have such an impact upon the Black box frequency. What we see now is that it is being said that “older equipment can make the frequency drift”. This is bullshit for one major reason: The manufacturer is suggesting that they have sold a black box to an airline with no “lifetime guarantee” that, throughout the stated lifetime, the frequency will not drift? Then that company should be out of business. It should state in the specification and support agreement that the equipment should be operationally checked at certain intervals. I would then doubt that such servicing checks were not carried out. You DO NOT just casually make a statement like this. Find out who the manufacturer was and ensure Boeing never use them again IF it is, in fact, Boeing who contract out this item. To supply into the airline industry and to people like Boeing, you must go through the most rigorous testing and quality procedures. I know! I can assure you of that!
2. They have introduced the above excuse (no excuse at all as I have just pointed out) along with the pressure excuse AND the battery lifetime excuse (battery lifetime has ZERO effect upon an electronic equipment’s frequency of transmission. It either has enough power to transmit or it dies and doesn’t transmit. It doesn’t act like Robbie the bloody Robot!). Again, they are clouding the issue to cover ever possible way out. BUT they’ve screwed up. You know why? Because, listen to this video once more. It says that the Haixun picked up the signal at 37.5KHz! So, we have a perfectly working 37.5KHz at such ocean depth pressure from chinese analysis but we have a 33KHz signal (a frequency used in ocean echo sounding) from Ocean Shield because the manufacturer has said at such pressure, the frequency would drift! Caught out in a lie once more! This is incredible stuff!
Now I’ve already said the Haixun and the Ocean Shield HAVE to be picking up completely different signals because they were about 500+ kilometres apart – therefore impossible to be the same source. As it says in the last paragraph above: “It is designed to detect signals at a range of (only) 1.12 miles”. IMPOSSIBLE that the two ships can be picking up the same signal. AND YET, Houston and friends have used those two entirely different signals (if signals at all because I 100% believe this entire thing to be a scripted story) to “narrow down” and, once again, “triangulate”. So now we have two reference sources for the black box being two different ships. The PROBLEM being they are suggesting “triangulation” of ONE target when it CANNOT be the same target!! This really is a joke and it is transparent to any scientist on planet earth!
Here is what they have done by using absolutely incorrect and totally misleading CRAP to have people believe they have narrowed down the search corridor for the black box:
Points 1 and 2 are about 400Km apart (in these diagrams although, elsewhere, it was stated the ships were 300 nautical miles apart and about 560Km). The ping locator on Ocean Shield has a range of 1.12 miles and the black box is about 3 or 4 Km under the surface. This means the ship has to be directly above the wreckage to detect. So think about that for just one microsecond.
1. The impossibility the two ships have detected the same source so to then draw a line between the two and suggest this line represents where the black box is, is just pure voodoo junk trash! The black box can ONLY be located directly below where either ship is. Now, if you located a 37.5KHz signal (Haixun) and a 33KHz signal (Ocean Shield) and the black box was known to transmit at 37.5KHz, which one would YOU suggest had picked up the right signal? So WHY are they going with the Ocean Shield one at all and almost ignoring the Haixun?
2. IF the box can only be detected by a ship directly above it (which it can only be) then WHY has Houston suggested this ridiculous, misleading strip between point 1 and point 2? Why has he said they have to get even closer to decide to send down a submarine or UAV or divers?
Not ONE ounce of this makes sense and it doesn’t because we are getting fed total bullshit!
“Honeywell Aerospace, which made the boxes in the missing Malaysia Airlines plane, said the Underwater Acoustic Beacons on both the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder operate at a frequency of 37.5 kilohertz plus or minus 1 kilohertz.” Not 33KHz then! Even so, I am very surprised at the lack of precision of such a device.
Ok, so I can’t stop watching and researching the news. Ok I grant you that. However, what you are about to read is going to blow your mind. (After a short detour). Angus Houston has fcuked up! He’s been FAR too keen to blow his mouth off and far too soon!
Unless, that is YOU can tell ME what “BIG NEWS” means other than something exceptionally significant after all these weeks.
ANGUS HOUSTON KNEW HE WAS GOING TO FIND PINGS FROM THE BLACK BOX BEFORE THEY WERE FOUND.
THE MAN HAS AN INCREDIBLE CRYSTAL BALL!
Ok, on now to the main event of this evening: In the red corner, we have “Angus” Houston, wearing the Queen’s colours and those of the RAAF. A born and bred Scotsman schooled at Strathallan school, no less, in Forgandenny, Perthshire. Elite born and bred then and conditioned through life. He is now a Companion and Officer of the Military division of the Order of Australia. He joined the RAAF in 1970 and has never looked back. Angus says he has some big news to give “tomorrow” (and he said this on Thursday 3rd April). In the blue corner, we have another scotsman who never went to Strathallan, despises the Queen and her entire clan and their hangers on and is willing to call Angus a lying, deceptive bastard. Not lying that he had “big news” but lying in the sense of how he possibly could know he’d have “big news” the next day! We’ll get to it in a moment or two.
Strangely, however, he was also given an award by Malaysia of all countries. Searching out why he got that was rather difficult but I got there. He was stationed in Malaysia in 1999/00 WITH NATO. There is a “Five Power” agreement in place between Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, UK and New Zealand.
Angus Houston was the Commander of IADS (CIADS) during 1999/00. Nothing entirely dramatic about that. Just a fact.
However, it would seem, from the bottom, final paragraph of this rather long (and edited by me) document, Najib wasn’t too happy with the FPDA membership. So ANOTHER western alliance that Malaysia weren’t too interested in, similar to the TPPA. And, ironically, we have Angus – with his previous Malaysian award – now taking charge of the search for the plane while the RAAF and Australians are saying “What we can assure you (to the world audience) is our professionalism”. A dig at Malaysia AND, perhaps, China?
Let’s move on….
Another thing that the western media and western “experts” and “specialists” have been full of, is the suggestion that Malaysia’s radar and airspace defence is piss poor. OH NO IT’S NOT!
If you haven’t heard of Thales (French) and Raytheon (American) – although I’m sure most of you have heard of the latter – they are two of the world’s top suppliers of defence equipment. Malaysia, just last year (February) had upgraded and then completed full system acceptance on a brand new Command and Control centre including new long range radar supplied by Thales/Raytheon. One other thing to note about this is that there is no way, then, that western military and/or intelligence could NOT know the capabilities of Malaysia’s defence radar system! So for the west to suggest that Malaysia was not forthcoming with such data is absolute, utter trash.
“Western arms makers” want to sell! Who do they want to sell to and why? To South East Asian countries in case of a threat by who? China? Russia? Why would the latter wish to attack them? I’ve never seen any suggestion they have thought that way. It’s hardly worth attacking just for the sake of the Spratly Islands for god’s sakes! And these countries are not America. Perhaps they don’t feel the need for arming themselves to the teeth? Ah but they’ve GOT to because the UK and US want to sell arms because that’s just about the only fcuking market they have that they produce for in any great volume and profit! PLUS, they want the South East Asian countries to be on our side in the next war don’t they? And they don’t want them siding with China or getting too close to China economically. But remember, I’m still talking about globalists here.
Oh my god! Malaysia didn’t scramble fighter jets! Well they only had ONE plane in this case. What happened when America had FOUR planes in their airspace and ONE of them heading into the PENTAGON? (so we’re told). America, do us all a favour and shut your big fcuking mouths! (American government that is and Pentagon and intelligence). Because you’re as transparent as single K glass window and full of shit!
Ah! The International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Mr Huxley, jabs his nose in and says “there are other elements” as if to suggest that, while they now have invested in some of the best kit, Malaysians are just not quite as smart as Americans! You condescending, up your arse piece of shit. Your country is DYING Huxley and it’s dying from the inside as you’re getting eaten alive by globalists. Nobody needs to attack you. You’re falling apart because your people can’t quite grasp they’re being invaded by a cancerous growth internally. That’s how good YOUR ‘training and morale” is. America: Falling apart at the seams just like my own country the UK for exactly the same reasons and due to exactly the same people.
Anyhow, let’s get on to Mr Houston shall we?
ANGUS HOUSTON – YOU HAVE A PROBLEM!
You’re caught lad. Red handed!
I happened to have come across this little article:
I thought “What an interesting statement to make”. For a reason which shall become apparent immediately I hope.
So I checked the CNN report referred to:
April 3rd was Thursday. Angus was priming the press for “big” news. Hmmm… what could “big” news be? They had found the plane? Or, at least, they had found a black box? After ALL the “big” leads, what would a “big” man like Houston have which he considered “big” enough to be called “big”? It would just have to be “big” wouldn’t it?
WELL WOULDN’T IT?… B I G…..BIG!!
Note the date of this article: April 4th – Friday.
So, as you can see, on friday, there was no BIG news, no big new clues. The info based on the same kind of analysis etc while Houston, himself says Just “The area of highest probability…. best data…” etc so absolutely nothing new on friday at all…… until!
Now LISTEN closely to the following:
Remember, the “pin-point (but “rough”) accuracy of the satellite “models’ that were done in a week or two when it would normally have been a year’s worth of work and they never had done anything like this before and they called it “triangulation” when it can’t be because you need more than ONE satellite to triangulate to any degree, told us exactly the area where the “plane went down” and it was about 2000 miles off the south west coast of Perth Australia. But NOW, it’s not. NOW, all of a sudden with MORE “analysis”, it’s hundreds of miles further north because the analysis told them the plane was travelling faster therefore took up more fuel quickly. And YET, there is NO WAY they can tell what speed that plane was doing nevermind direction or altitude. You can believe me or not but I’m telling you that is a fact. A doppler analysis would NOT give you direction in the first place. Nearer or further from the satellite yes but not anymore than that.
“37.5KHz” – Houston and the chinese ship and the authorities are now being “CERTAIN” that this is the case. Then IF that IS the case you tell me? Why won’t they say “We’ve found it”? I’m saying IF they are so certain which they are saying they are AND the news is stating “surely this is the strongest lead so far”. Yes he says nothing confirmed as of yet BUT the “authorities” are stating very strongly – almost without a doubt – that it was a 37.5KHz pulse. If so, then, considering we don’t know of ANY other plane which was meant to have crashed down there AND there is no other equipment which pulses at 37.5KHZ because that will be reserved for black boxes, then it can ONLY be the MH370 black box can’t it?
And here is our Queen’s long term RAAF man this morning (Sunday 6th April) giving his “big news”. He is stating the pulses were picked up on saturday and, at earliest, friday.
At this point, I will state categorically, that IF they find a black box it will have been DROPPED there!
“The Haixun icked up the signal yesterday (FRIDAY) lunchtime.” This means the above article was written and published Friday morning BEFORE the signal was picked up.
The chinese reporter then says signals had been picked up over friday and saturday. There were NO signals reported on THURSDAY! Not only that but the Australian reporter then goes on to say that the Haixun wasn’t even meant to have been involved in the underwater search and it was only in the past 24 hours that they found out it had a black box detector onboard. Now COUPLE this with the fact that the now NEW area of search (there are, in fact 3 or 3 new areas) STILL covers a very large region of ocean and, we are aware that a boat needs to be somewhere in the region of just 1 or 2 miles from the black box to pick up its acoustic pulse, that is one HELL of a stroke of luck! Just give it a moment’s thought. That really is one hell of a lucky little tugboat! It MUST have a lucky chinese take away on board.
Take a look at how long it took to find A330’s black box:
Here’s another few articles to fill in blanks:
Now, here’s another little problem. The Haixun is reported to have been 56 miles away from the location (they assume) of the black box. The “Ocean Shield” is saying it picked up a 37.5KHz signal from 300 (THREE HUNDRED) nautical miles away.
[Correction: The above is suggesting the debris was spotted 56 miles away not that the sounds were picked up that far, However, the 300 nautical miles still stands and that is impossible from what I read and what is shown here regarding the range over which such pulses can be detected]
BUT the question then is: Is this person talking shit?
“Only from a distance of a few miles….. Sarah McComb, CHIEF of the recorders division at the NTSB.. ‘I don’t think the range is quite 5 to 10 miles…'”
Is Sarah incompetent? Doesn’t she know what she is talking about? I have read elsewhere that the range is only a couple of miles or so. So HOW 56 miles? And HOW 300 nautical miles?
However, forget all the black box pulse detail for now…..
The BIG question is
HOW DID ANGUS KNOW ON THURSDAY THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE BIG NEWS TO GIVE ON THE OPERATION THE NEXT DAY WHEN NO-ONE WOULD KNOW THAT LITTLE HAIXUN WOULD PICK UP 37.5KHz PULSES ON FRIDAY AND SATURDAY?
I’ll tell you why Angus knew: Because Angus is a part of those “in the club” who are running this “show” and writing the script!
I think Angus got a little excited and ahead of himself. A little like WTC 7 on 9/11.
If you have another theory for what Angus’ “big news” could have been (and KNOW what it was which I’ve missed on friday) then I’m all ears!
Having been pointing to the U.S. (Globalists) and affiliated intelligence agencies since just about day one plus providing the reasons as to why they would stoop to such depths, plus providing information about Boeing’s patent for remote control of planes by CIA and, finally, questioning Diego Garcia, I think I can say I am vindicated for doing so.
This is an unannounced “war”. Wars are for political and economic power. 9/11 commenced a few but this just may be the point at which we begin to see mainstream “light” being shed upon who really is behind all of this from 9/11 to MH370. Because it certainly wasn’t (and isn’t) “Al Qaeda”.
What was the last direction that aircraft was pointing in according to radar? Forget this satellite arc crap! Provided by a British company tied to the British and American governments for its entire existence (contracts). But that last known direction does not reflect what the western globalists want us to consider does it? It says “Whoa! I’m going to Garcia!”
Disappearance of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH 370: The Trillion Dollar Question to the U.S. and Its Intelligence Services
Malaysian media should pose critical questions to the US and its Intelligence Services and not to the Malaysian Government
By Matthias Chang
Global Research, March 29, 2014
Future Fast Forward
Matthias Chang is a prominent Malaysian lawyer and author, who served as political secretary and adviser to former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohammad.
Let me state from the outset that I totally agree with the press statements by Malaysia’s Defence Minister and Acting Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein that “we have conducted ourselves fairly, responsibly and history will judge us for that.”
And to a mischievous and presumptuous question from a correspondent of the Financial Times, Datuk Seri with confidence and integrity rightly said without any fear of contradiction that, “I don’t think we could have done anything different from what we have already done.” Well done!
The Financial Times, CNN and other foreign media ought to pose similar questions to the US and its intelligence services and stop insinuating that Malaysia has not been transparent and/or engaged in a cover-up. Foreign media should stop engaging in dirty politics!
It is my hope that following the publication of this article, Malaysian mass media will focus on questioning the integrity of the US’s assistance to Malaysia in the first three weeks of the SAR mission, notwithstanding its recent offer of more assistance.
I take comfort that my reservations about the US and its intelligence services as well as other intelligence services closely linked to the US, especially British secret service, have been more than vindicated by Reuters in its news report on 28th March, 2014 entitled Geopolitical games handicap hunt for flight MH370 (see below)
The search for flight MH370, the Malaysian Airlines jetliner that vanished over the South China Sea on March 8, has involved more than two dozen countries and 60 aircraft and ships but has been bedevilled by regional rivalries.
… With the United States playing a relatively muted role in the sort of exercise that until recently it would have dominated, experts and officials say there was no real central coordination until the search for the plane was confined to the southern Indian Ocean, when Australia largely took charge.
Part of the problem is that Asia has no NATO-style regional defence structure, though several countries have formal alliances with the United States. Commonwealth members Malaysia, Singapore, New Zealand and Australia also have an arrangement with Britain to discuss defence matters in times of crisis.
As mystery deepened over the fate of the Boeing 777 and its 239 passengers and crew, most of them Chinese, it became clear that highly classified military technology might hold the key.
But the investigation became deadlocked over the reluctance of others to share sensitive data, a reticence that appeared to harden as the search area widened.
“This is turning into a spy novel,” said an envoy from a Southeast Asian country, noting it was turning attention to areas and techniques few countries liked to publicly discuss.
Ultimately, the only country with the technical resources to recover the plane – or at least its black box recorder, which could lie in water several miles deep – may be the United States. Its deep-sea vehicles ultimately hauled up the wreckage of Air France 447 after its 2009 crash into a remote region of the South Atlantic.
While Putrajaya has been forced to reveal some of the limits and ranges of its air defences, the reluctance of Malaysia’s neighbours to release sensitive radar data may have obstructed the investigation for days.
At an ambassadorial meeting in the ad hoc crisis centre at an airport hotel on March 16, Malaysia formally appealed to countries on the jet’s possible path for help, but in part met with polite stonewalling, two people close to the talks said.
Some countries asked Malaysia to put its request in writing, triggering a flurry of diplomatic notes and high-level contacts.
‘It became a game of poker in which Malaysia handed out the cards at the table but couldn’t force others to show their hand,“ a person from another country involved in the talks said.
As in the northern Indian Ocean, where Chinese forces operate alongside other nations to combat Somali piracy, current and former officials say all sides are almost certainly quietly spying on and monitoring each other at the same time. (emphasis added)
The United States has taken advantage of the search for the missing Malaysia Airlines flight to test the capabilities of China’s satellites and judge the threat of Chinese missiles against its aircraft carriers, reports our sister paper Want Daily.
Erich Shih, chief reporter at Chinese-language military news monthly Defense International, said the US has more and better satellites but has not taken part in the search for flight MH370, which disappeared about an hour into its flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing in the early hours of March 8 with 239 people on board. Shih claimed that the US held back because it wanted to see what information China’s satellites would provide.
The above is the reality which we have to confront. Therefore, desist any attempt to label the above mainstream media articles as a “conspiracy theory”. Reuters has let the Genie out of the bottle!
Malaysia’s Minister of Transport Datuk Seri Hishammuddin gave hints of Malaysia’s difficulties (as his hands were tied by intelligence protocols and or refusal by the relevant foreign intelligence services and diplomatic reluctance) but our local media failed to appreciate the nuances of his statements by not directing their questions at those parties that have failed Malaysia as their neighbour and in their duties under various defence treaties and arrangements.
Malaysian media, please read at the minimum three times, the sentences in bold AND WAKE UP TO THE REALITY that our country has been badly treated even though our country put all its national security cards on the table so that countries whose nationals are passengers on flight MH 370 could come forward with sincerity to assist in resolving this unfortunate tragedy which is not Malaysia’s making.
Malaysia is but a victim of this tragedy whose plane, MH 370 was used for a hidden agenda for which only time will reveal.
In my previous article posted to the website on the 27th March, 2014, I exposed how Israel is exploiting the tragedy to create public opinion for a war against Iran, a Muslim country that has close ties with Malaysia.
At the outset of the SAR Mission, all concerned stated categorically that every scenario, no matter how unlikely would be examined critically with no stones left unturned – terrorist hijacking, suicide mission, technical failures, inadequate security, criminal actions of the pilot and or co-pilot etc.
Given the above premise, families of the passengers and the crew of MH 370 have every right to ask the following questions of the US and other countries that have sophisticated technologies to track and monitor airplanes and ships in all circumstances.
Such questions should not be shot down by those who have a hidden agenda that such queries amount to “conspiracy theories”. Far from being conspiracy theories, we assert that the questions tabled below and the rationale for asking them are well founded and must be addressed by the relevant parties, failing which an inference ought to be drawn that they are complicit in the disappearance of MH 370.
Lets us begin.
1) Was the plane ordered to turn back, if so who gave the order?
2) Was the plane turned back manually or by remote control?
3) If the latter, which country or countries have the technologies to execute such an operation?
4) Was MH 370 weaponised before its flight to Beijing?
5) If so, what are the likely methods for such a mission – Biological weapons, dirty bombs?
6) Was Beijing / China the target and if so why?
7) Qui Bono?
8) The time sequence of countries identifying the alleged MH 370 debris in the Indian ocean was first made by Australia followed by France, Thailand, Japan, and Britain via Immarsat. Why did US not offer any satellite intelligence till today?
9) Prior to the switch of focus to the Indian ocean, was the SAR mission in the South China seas, used as a cover for the deployment of undersea equipment to track and monitor naval capabilities of all the nations’ navies competing for ownership of disputed territorial waters? Reuters as quoted above seems to have suggested such an outcome.
10) Why was there been no focus, especially by foreign mass media, on the intelligence and surveillance capabilities of Diego Garcia, the strategic naval and air base of the US?
11) Why no questions were asked whether the flight path of MH 370 (if as alleged it crashed in the Indian Ocean), was within the geographical parameters of the Intelligence capabilities of Diego Garcia? Why were no planes deployed from Diego Garcia to intercept the “Unidentified” plane which obviously would pose a threat to the Diego Gracia military base?
12) The outdated capabilities of the Hexagon satellite system deployed by the US in the 1970s has a ground resolution of 0.6 meters; what’s more, the present and latest technologies boast the ability to identify objects much smaller in size. Why have such satellites not provided any images of the alleged debris in the Indian Ocean? Were they deliberately withheld?
13) On April 6th, 2012, the US launched a mission dubbed “NROL-25” (consisting of a spy satellite) from the Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The NROL-25 satellite was likely rigged with “synthetic aperture radar” a system capable of observing targets around the globe in daylight and darkness, able to penetrate clouds and identify underground structures such as military bunkers. Though the true capabilities of the satellites are not publicly known due to their top-secret classification, some analysts have claimed that the technology allows the authorities to zoom in on items as small as a human fist from hundreds of miles away. How is it that no imagery of MH370 debris was forwarded to Malaysia, as this capability is not classified though other technologies might well remain classified? (Source: Slate.com)
14) Could it be that the above capabilities were not as touted?
15) However, in December, 2013, the USAtlas V rocket was launched carrying the spy satellite NROL-39 for the National Reconnaissance Office, an intelligence agency which is often overshadowed by the notorious National Security Agency (NSA), only it scoops data via spy satellites in outer space. The “NROL-39 emblem” is represented by the Octopus a versatile, adaptive, and highly intelligent creature. Emblematically, enemies of the United States can be reached no matter where they choose to hide. The emblem boldly states “Nothing is beyond our reach”. This virtually means that the tentacles of America’s World Octopus are spreading across the globe to coil around everything within their grasp, which is, well, everything (Source: Voice of Moscow). Yet, the US with such capabilities remained silent. Why?
It cannot be said that it is not within the realm of probabilities that the US may not want the plane MH 370 to be recovered if rogue intelligence operators were responsible for the disappearance of MH 370.
If the above questions have been posed to the US and other intelligence agencies and answers are not forthcoming, I take the view that the Malaysian government ought to declare publicly that our national sovereignty and security have been jeopardized by the disappearance of MH 370 and that the relevant intelligence agencies have been tacitly complicit in the disappearance of MH370.
By coming out openly to explain the predicament faced by our country, Malaysia may prevent a hostile act against a third country.
I therefore call upon Malaysian mass media to be courageous and initiate such queries as only the US and other intelligence agencies can give definitive answers to the above 15 questions.
It is futile to demand answers from Malaysia as we are not in any position to supply the information as we do not have the capabilities of the global and regional military powers.
Malaysians must unite behind the government so that our leaders need not feel that they are alone shouldering this enormous burden.
The Reuters article:
(Reuters) – The search for flight MH370, the Malaysian jetliner that vanished over the South China Sea on March 8, has involved more than two dozen countries and 60 aircraft and ships but been bedevilled by regional rivalries.
While Malaysia has been accused of a muddled response and poor communications, China has showcased its growing military clout and reach, while some involved in the operation say other countries have dragged their feet on disclosing details that might give away sensitive defence data.
That has highlighted growing tensions in a region where the rise of China is fuelling an arms race, and where several countries including China, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines are engaged in territorial disputes, with the control of shipping lanes, fishing and potential hydrocarbon reserves at stake.
The Malaysian Airline jet, which disappeared en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, was last officially detected hundreds of miles off course on the wrong side of the Malaysian peninsula.
As mystery deepened over the fate of the Boeing 777 and its 239 passengers and crew, most of them Chinese, it became clear that highly classified military technology might hold the key.
A reluctance to share sensitive data appeared to harden as the search area widened.
“This is turning into a spy novel,” said an envoy from a Southeast Asian country, noting it was turning attention to areas and techniques few countries liked to publicly discuss.
With the United States playing a relatively muted role in the sort of exercise that until recently it would have dominated, experts and officials say there was no real central coordination until the search for the plane was confined to the southern Indian Ocean, when Australia largely took charge.
Part of the problem is that Asia has no NATO-style regional defence structure, though several countries have formal alliances with the United States. Commonwealth members Malaysia, Singapore, New Zealand and Australia also have an arrangement with Britain to discuss defence matters in times of crisis.
“There is … a pressing need for regional security structures to take a few leaps forward,” said Air Vice Marshal Michael Harwood, a retired Royal Air Force pilot and former British defence attaché in Washington.
The risk, he said, was that the search instead became seen as a national “test of manhood” and driver of rivalry.
Already, several governments have been openly competing in announcing findings and satellite images.
Malaysia’s acting transport minister Hishammuddin Hussein, who is also the country’s defence minister, has defended the international effort to find the jet.
“All countries involved are displaying unprecedented levels of cooperation, and that has not changed,” he said.
But while Kuala Lumpur has been forced to reveal some of the limits and ranges of its air defences, the reluctance of Malaysia’s neighbours to release sensitive radar data may have obstructed the investigation for days.
At an ambassadorial meeting in the ad hoc crisis centre at an airport hotel on March 16, Malaysia formally appealed to countries on the jet’s possible path for help, but in part met with polite stonewalling, two people close to the talks said.
Some countries asked Malaysia to put its request in writing, triggering a flurry of diplomatic notes and high-level contacts.
“It became a game of poker in which Malaysia handed out the cards at the table but couldn’t force others to show their hand,” a person from another country involved in the talks said.
It was not until a week later that Malaysia announced a list of nations that had checked their archives.
Beijing, meanwhile, was dramatically upping its game.
Its ability to deploy forces deep into the southern hemisphere is particularly striking. Beijing has sent several deployments into southern waters in recent months, including warship visits to New Zealand and South America, while its icebreaker “Snow Dragon” helped rescue personnel from a trapped Russian icebreaker in the Antarctic late last year.
“China are deploying because that’s what great powers do, and there must be a political expectation for them to (do so),” said one former Western military officer. “How well they do it, only the USA will currently know (through surveillance and signals intelligence), and time will tell.”
With five Chinese ships heading to a new search area in the Indian Ocean on Friday, experts say China is revealing military capabilities it lacked just a handful of years ago.
Chinese officials have also spoken of the growing number of satellites it has put to the task, a sensitive topic nations rarely disclose.
“A decade ago, China wouldn’t even have been in this game at all,” says Christopher Harmer, a former U.S. naval aviator and search-and-rescue pilot, now senior fellow at the Institute for the Study of War in Washington DC. “It really shows how far they have come, much, much faster than most people expected.”
Ultimately, the only country with the technical resources to recover the plane – or at least its black box recorder, which could lie in water several miles deep – may be the United States. Its deep-sea vehicles ultimately hauled up the wreckage of Air France 447 after its 2009 crash in the South Atlantic.
So far, Washington has sent two Poseidon maritime reconnaissance aircraft to the southern Indian Ocean search as well as an underwater drone and its Towed Pinger Locator, specifically designed to detect the signals from black boxes.
As in the northern Indian Ocean, where Chinese forces operate alongside other nations to combat Somali piracy, current and former officials say all sides are almost certainly quietly spying on and monitoring each other at the same time.
Military secrets, meanwhile, remain the last thing on the minds of those still hoping for news of missing relatives.
“I don’t care about the secrets. I just want my son to return,” Liu Guiqiu, mother of missing passenger Li Le, told China Central Television.
(Reporting by Peter Apps in London, Tim Hepher in Kuala Lumpur/Paris, Additional reporting by A. Ananthalakshmi; Editing by Will Waterman)
Have you been left behind Sarah? 😉
No, I am not suggesting this happened. No it is not another theory and I’m losing my marbles. There is just something I wish to focus some attention on.
Is there an element of a sub, sub plot going on in all of this? Why do we keep getting fed emotionally dyslexic “christian” people in all of these events? While it couldn’t have escaped anyone’s notice that, in this MH370 instance, they’re almost playing a “Left Behind” card. If you haven’t heard of the “Left Behind” series of books, they are a christian fundamentalist view of the rapture and have sold millions across the world. I’ve known people (intelligent people and very nice people, even friends) who believe this stuff. There are quite a few of them. We’re not used to such so much in the UK as you know but, in America and around the world, there are a great many people who do. Why do you think the christian televangelists do so well?
Has anyone noticed that Sandy Hook was filled with “Christian believers”. None of them cried and they were all very philosophical about their losses? Another example of this “christian” lack of emotional turmoil in such circumstances is that of the recent murder of Breck Bednar in the UK – the 14 year old allegedly stabbed by his 18 year old video game “friend”. The parents of whom’s first thoughts were to set up a fundraising campaign JUST LIKE the Sandy Hook family victims. The parents of whom also described themselves as “christians” and happen to be Americans.
Now we have Philip Wood and his girlfriend of 2 years, Sarah Bajc, the latter having been on many news-reports now and who shows just about zero emotion (I’ve seen none – perhaps I’ve missed a few) but, again, is very considered, expresses herself well in the midst of this – what you would believe to be – very emotionally upsetting time and she makes subtle, but strong, suggestions of mishandling and the possibility of the authorities knowing more than they divulge. She’s calm, considered and makes sure she just hits some buttons.
Meanwhile, Philip is described thus:
In a prepared statement to the media, the Wood family described Philip Wood as “incredibly generous, creative and intelligent.”
“Phil cared about people, his family, and above all, Christ,” they said in the statement. “Though our hearts are hurting, we know so many families around the world are affected just as much as us by this terrible tragedy. We ask for your prayers, not only for ourselves, but for all involved during this difficult time.”
Have a listen to Sarah Bajc:
“Oops! That’s the wrong place.”
Then “It’s just like a magician playing tricks on the audience”
Then “That must be incredibly difficult for you emotionally?” and watch our Sarah – can she put on the teary act all of a sudden? No. That would just be a little too “prompted” and obvious and the question has thrown her a bit of a curve ball.
“Ah..it..it..it’s frustrating!” Frustrating? Not “Yes it is….” as she let’s by a little smile as if her real knowledge of her lack of a need to be emotionally affected has dawned on her and she let’s her guard slip.
Watch Danica Weeks (as she speaks about that wonderful, heart-wrenching story – perfect drama) hold onto her prop (her wedding ring) displaying it to the world. “amazing…amazing” she says – I was a father like she describes and it never made me amazing. He’s ex army (notice she then trips over her words just after this as if she thought “damn it, I never meant to say that”) but while there is the squeaky, croaky voice and the pained expression and sniffs, there is not a single tear. Eyes as dry as a kangaroo on a barbie on a Brisbane midsummer’s day.
A family member simply stating what he does but does not want his face shown? Yes there can be various reasons for this I suppose but…..
Add all of this to the two South African girls’s story about sharing the cockpit with the co-pilot 2 years ago and the fact that that is now a proven lie and add the innumerable “leads” and “leaked information” given by a score of “unnamed sources” which then go dead but do the job of confusing the entire picture. Add the photos of the “stolen passports Iranians” with the same legs.
Meanwhile, watch this footage of the chinese protestors:
Look at their placards. A good number of them all, obviously, having been made/designed by a single source. This is managed. Think about any large protest in the UK (or anywhere) where it has been honestly grassroots. There are very few I admit but there have been some. They tend not to have a “brand design” of placard or flags or whatever. The Trade Union managed protests and “official type” protests do however. These people protesting the Malaysian embassy in Beijing have been put together by a controlling element. No doubt about it.
There is a whole lot more as you know but, with all of it, it is quite clear that this entire event is another “Sandy Hook”. It is stage managed from start to finish. These people can snigger at fooling so many but sorry, it ain’t working on me. It’s another “9/11” while now we’re being told they may never find the wreckage and there may never be an answer. The PERFECT place for them to say the plane went down is where they say it did and that is for their purpose. Just like Bin Laden and his “watery grave”.
And finally, just found this. Icing on the cake for me re this “Sarah Bajc”.
Oh just one absolutely final thing though: How is it that, in any of these stories, there is never the following –
“He was a bastard who, while we lived as a family, happily in Singapore and his big expat contract, he went around cheating on me with all these 19 year old Thai girls and ended up leaving me and our three kids in Singapore to shack up with one in Jakarta!”
I only say that because it happened fairly regularly and, in this instance, specifically, to an American woman friend of ours who turned out to be a complete bitch after stupid me actually took pity on her. Ah you live and learn Tammy don’t ya? 😉
The whole event of MH370 however: What a narrative! It’ll make a great blockbuster movie in a few years. I am now of a mind that there are two possible scenarios: 1. The flight never existed and 2. Diego Garcia (but not “Philip Wood sticking a phone up his ass. THAT, to me is pure disinfo perhaps to use as a “hook” to say “People that suggest DG are crazy”). This “independent journalist, “Jim Stone” is total disinfo in my view. One thing: I had never heard of him until now and another, he’s proffering this total crap.
This blog could just as well be entitled “Who’s that girl?”
I happened to look at a previous blog of mine called “MH370 found in Antarctica!” and I admit, I totally missed what I had been looking at before without noticing something which now appears very obvious.
Do you remember the Co-Pilot stories about having two South African girls (one by the name of Jonti Roos) in the cockpit on a trip back to KL from Phuket?
I suggest you look again at those photos.
The bottom photo here of the two, is the one I used in my blog. It had been consistently published in the world’s media as being the photo of Fariq and the girl(s) in the cockpit. The problem is IT IS NOT FARIQ!
This girl, Jonti Roos, requires questioning and investigation by the Malaysian authorities because she has most definitely been a plant to fraudulently attempt to bring Fariq’s name and the name of Malaysia Airlines into disrepute.
I had my doubts about this story from the beginning, as I mentioned in a previously blog, but I hadn’t even picked this issue up at the time. Like many, I guess I gave the photos somewhat of a cursory glance. This is fraudulent misrepresentation and it has been used to harm reputations.
Look at the following photos:
Yes both photos are the same but they are from just two of the myriad of newspapers across the globe running this story and they are “Selling” them as photos of the girls with Fariq, the co-pilot on MH370. IT IS NOT FARIQ!
The following photo has Fariq in it (on the right) BUT it is NOT in the cockpit and you may also wish to notice Fariq’s stance with his hands placed behind his back. In no way is it suggesting he was being anything other than courteous for posing in the shot.
This story is entirely fabricated and I, for one, would like to know more about who this woman, Jonti Roos, is! And how come, it just so happens so coincidently, that she has photos of herself with one of the very pilots of MH370 and also felt the need to then be part of a worldwide story sold to the public that the pilot in these photos in the cockpit was Fariq Abdul Hamid?
Meanwhile, we have this statement made by a MAS Executive:
And, from the very beginning, I have doubted it too.
Who is “running” this show? These two men’s reputations are being destroyed on the back of a globalist, political agenda!
Meanwhile: Oh look! Two Military pilots in the cockpit flying to Diego Garcia, top secret naval base, not even watching the “road” ahead and they have two NFL babes in there with them! But no. Sure, that’s different right? It’s America! Hypocritical bastards.
Ever get the feeling that those scam “letters” you get through your email promising you substantial amounts of money are, somehow, targeted at you for some apparent reason?
They’re normally from Nigeria aren’t they? Well, I hadn’t seen one of them for a long long time come through to my personal email until now. I had never, however, received one from Malaysia (and I doubt this one actually is generated from Malaysia) but isn’t it just a coincidence?
Do they assume I’m just stupid enough to accept because they think “this guy likes Malaysia and Malaysians so we’ll try this”? However, what I’d like to know is how they have connected my blog with my personal email.
Just the other day, I received two comments on here (I forget to which posts but one of them was the “Malaycia Airlines” one I think (I need to check). The two comments came in not quite simultaneously but within minutes of each other certainly. I very rarely get such comments and I tend to ignore them but there was something about these two coming in quick succession and also the “referral” addresses which they came from which piqued my interest. The referral addresses were peculiar “private networks” with localhost numbers. Normally, referral addresses will come from either specific websites like Rense or Davidicke.com or search engines etc.
However, the “letter” I receive to my personal email was this:
From: Abdul Rahim Bin Md Yusuf (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Sent: 26 March 2014 14:57:56
With appropriate greatest respect, I desire your pleasure knowing that this
Proposal is a surprise to you. My name is Abdul Rahim Bin Md Yusuf, an
Attorney at law. A deceased client of mine (Jason x), who hereinafter
shall be referred to as my client died as a result of heart failure on
the 11th February, 2009.
I have contacted you to assist in distributing the money left behind by my
late client to escape confiscation by the bank in which the Thirteen Million,
Four Hundred and Twenty Five Thousand United States Dollars
[USD$13,425,000.00] is deposited. The bank in which this huge amount
is lodged has issued me a notice to contact the next-of-kin to this funds
otherwise the account will be confiscated.
My proposition to you is to seek your consent to present you as the
Next-of-kin and beneficiary of my above named client. Besides, you
have the same last name as my late client, the proceeds of this account
can be paid to you. Then we can share the amount on mutual agreed
percentages. All Legal documents to back up your claim as my late
client’s next of kin will be gradually provided.
All I require is your honest co-operation to enable us see this transaction
through. This will be executed under a legitimate arrangement that will
protect you from any breach of the law. If this business proposition offends
your moral values, do accept my apology. I must use this opportunity to
implore you to exercise the utmost indulgence to keep this matter
extra-ordinary confidential whatever your decision while I await your
prompt response. Please contact me at once to indicate your interest.
I will like you to acknowledge the receipt of this message as soon
as possible via email.
This transaction will be treated private with absolute confidentiality
and sincerity. Please, do not contact me through my company details
for confidential reason. I look forward to your quick indication. Do
confirm the receipt of this email.
Abdul Rahim Bin Md Yusuf.
No. 156, Tingkat Satu
Jalan Kelab Cinta Sayang
NOTE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and solely
for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended
the person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, be advised
that you have received this email in error and that any dissemination,
distribution, copying or use is strictly prohibited. If you received this
e-mail in error or without authorization, please notify me immediately by a
reply e-mail and delete the email from your system. For confirmation,
please send a message to (email@example.com)
Now, Sungai Petani is north of Kuala Lumpur up on the northeast of Malaysia. Interestingly, I spent some time around that particular area and Penang a few years back doing some conceptual planning of a wireless network.
A very enjoyable experience and great people. Perhaps I should take the money and run eh? 😉 lol
Sorry “Abdul”. Do you really get people to fall for this crap?
Send me another one just with an acknowledgement that you read this and the next time I’m in Malaysia, we’ll have a beer! 😉