The mainstream media for the most part has moved on. But there are a few more gleanings to be had, of perhaps the most interesting comes from the Daily Mirror, which labels al-Hilli an extremist on the grounds that he was against the war in Iraq, disapproved of the behaviour of Israel and had doubts over 9/11 – which makes a great deal of the population “extremist”. But the Mirror has the only mainstream mention I can find of the possibility that Mossad carried out the killings. Given Mr al-Hilli’s profession, the fact he is a Shia, the fact he had visited Iran, and the fact that Israel heas been assassinating scientists connected to Iran’s nuclear programme, this has to be a possibility. There are of course other possibilities, but to ignore that one is ludicrous.
Which leads me to the argument of Daily Mail crime reporter, Stephen Wright, that the French police should concentrate on the idea that this was a killing by a random Alpine madman or racist bigot. Perfectly possible, of course, and the anti-Muslim killings in Marseille might be as much a precedent as Mossad killings of scientists. But why the lone madman idea should be the preferred investigation, Mr Wright does not explain. What I did find interesting from a man who has visited many crime scenes are his repeated insinuations that the French authorities are not really trying very hard to find who the killers were, for example:
the crime scene would have been sealed off for a minimum of seven to ten days, to allow detailed forensic searches for DNA, fibres, tyre marks and shoe prints to take place.
Nearby bushes and vegetation would have been searched for any discarded food and cigarette butts left by the killer, not to mention the murder weapon.
But from what I saw at the end of last week, no such searches had taken place and potentially vital evidence could have been missed. House to house inquiries in the local area had yet to be completed and police had not made specific public appeals for information about the crime. No reward had been put up for information about the shootings.
Behind the scenes, what other short cuts have been taken? Have police seized data identifying all mobile phones being used in the vicinity of the murders that day?
The idea that the French authorities – who are quite as capable as any other of solving cases – are not really trying very hard is an interesting one.
Which leads me to this part of a remarkable article from the Daily Telegraph, which if true points us back towards a hit squad and discounts the ides that there was only one gun:
Claims that only one gun was used to kill everybody is likely to be disproved by full ballistics test results which are out in October.
While the 25 spent bullet cartridges found at the scene are all of the same kind, they could in fact have come from a number of weapons of the same make.
This throws up the possibility of a well-equipped, highly-trained gang circling the car and then opening fire.
Both children were left alive by the killers, who had clinically pumped bullets into everybody else, including five into Mr Mollier.
Zainab was found staggering around outside the car by Brett Martin, a British former RAF serviceman who cycled by moments after the attack, but he saw nobody except the schoolgirl.
Her sister, Zeena, was found unscathed and hiding in the car eight hours later.
Both sisters are now back in Britain, and are believed to have been reunited at a secret location near London.
There are of course a number of hit squad options, both governmental and private, which might well involve iraqi or Iranian interests – on both of which the mainstream media have been very happy to speculate while almost unanimously ignoring Israel.
But what interests me is why the Daily Telegraph choose, in the face of all the evidence, to minimise the horrific nature of the attack by stating that “Both children were left alive by the killers”? Zainab was not left alive by design, she was shot in the chest and her skull was stove in, which presumably was a pretty serious attempt to kill a seven year-old child. The other girl might very well have succeeded in hiding from the killers under her mother’s skirts, as she hid from the first rescuers, and then for eight hours from the police.
The Telegraph article claims to be informed by sources close to the investigation. So they believe it was a group of people, and feel motivated to absolve those people from child-killing. Now what could the Daily Telegraph be thinking?
The author Christopher Bollyn weighs in:
[my emphasis,links added]
@Katie
“The aerial search will use infrared technology to scan the ocean surface, Australian Defence Force Group Captain Stuart Bellingham said. “We are not looking underwater at all and we don’t have the capability to pick up black boxes or underwater electronic beacons.””
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/18/mh370-26-countries-searching-area-larger-australia
US Navy pilot interviewed said much the same, except added that anti-submarine planes such as the P-8 Poseidon are equipped to detect very small surface objects, specifically submarine periscopes.
The P-8 Poseidon is also be able to drop and monitor sonobuoys, which “might” detect pings from the black boxes, but from how far I don’t know. CNN reports that the pings are very weak and even with a known location hard to detect.
The P-8 also has an external boom to detect submarines by distortions in the magnetic field, but I doubt an aircraft has much magnetic material in its structure.
Another problem is the time spent flying out to the search area (1600Km? off Australia) and back, which limits time available for searching.
Today CNN also reported on the original story about the last contact being with another pilot at the request of Vietnamese ATC. The one that was said to be discredited. Just another mix-up?
“What Really Happened Aboard Air France 447” has the recovered cockpit voice recorder translated into English. Unrelated but an interesting read. 2 pages.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/crashes/what-really-happened-aboard-air-france-447-6611877
Marlin, there’s more on that here,it’s a good summary;
:From Diego Garcia to Where?
If suppose we are to assume that the plane was indeed diverted to Diego Garcia, it is reasonable to assume that the plane and its passengers would not be kept there indefinitely. If we are to follow the logic of some devoted conspiracy theorists who are pursuing this on other forums, the plane and its passengers would be flown to the Eastern mainland of the United States, over the Atlantic Ocean to escape scrutiny (and comparatively less distance than the other way around). Of course, the plane’s livery would be painted over. The plane’s wreckage would later be carefully deposited by (presumably by air) on a location far away from Diego Garcia.
But why are we discussing this here?
‘Because the same devoted conspiracy theorists who are pursuing this on other forums have pointed out that four days after the disappearance of MH370, a curious military exercise took place on the Southern-Eastern part of the United States coastline. Fighter jets were reportedly “escorting” a plane. To quote,
“Members of the South Carolina Air National Guard are conducting an air defense exercise along the coast. Guard Senior Master Sergeant Edward Snyder says people might see fighter jets escorting a civilian aircraft Thursday over the North Charleston and Myrtle Beach areas.
http://www.cabaltimes.com/2014/03/12/ma370-redirected-to-diego-garcia/
However ,my posting
Mar, 2014 – 11:08 am
With the link for the first Maldive sighting , now being taken seriously by the media, is strengthened & possibly confirms where this MH370 went for refuelling & re-flagging,before travelling further.
Morning NR.
Yes I’ve tried to learn more about the Blackbox, I wasn’t aware it could only be found in the most basic way of physically searching, there’s no doubt the system needs an upgrade, to think it can only be found by literally hunting for it in this day & age is ludicrous.
Also after the Air France crash there was a call to extend the lifetime signal from 30 to 90 days,was it ever done I wonder. Why don’t we have a GPS signal sent to computers etc,at the very least it would pin point an area on where to start searching ?
Immediately the box is dislodged ,before it even hits the water, an alarm could be triggered, similar to a car alarm.
Good morning al-Hilli people. Apologies for not visiting you very often. I wonder if you could kindly make MH370 comments on the new thread on that subject, rather than here?
Hello Craig, yes,we have rather deviated from the original topic. Is there anyway these existing comments on MH370 can be transferred to your other blog thread ?
Agreed Craig, and thanks for popping in. I think people just got waylaid by this mystery. Agree with katie, if there was a way of moving comments to the other blog, that’d be great. If not, people could perhaps reproduce their comments, since I think there were several good suggestions made and links brought in.
I did post on the other thread a couple of times, repeating posts here and I know Bluebird gave a good summary of his – ever so excellent – theory (right or wrong, it is creative and no less likely than some of the other suggestions we hear).
Personally, I’m all for getting back to Chevaline and asked to do so before. It’s not like the subject is exhausted or, for that matter, solved.
Marlin & all, this is the new blog post to go to;
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2014/03/disappearing-aircraft/#comment-447037
NR 7.42 ““What Really Happened Aboard Air France 447″ has the recovered cockpit voice recorder translated into English. Unrelated but an interesting read. 2 pages.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/crashes/what-really-happened-aboard-air-france-447-6611877”
Thanks for that. It’s a chilling insight into how a little incident (a captain popping off for forty winks) can have disastrous consequences for a plane and all its occupants. More than anything else, the disaster appears to be down to an inexperienced pilot in control in adverse conditions, pulling up the nose and thus stalling the plane and loosing control of the plane. He could not understand why despite pulling back on the joystick the plane was loosing altitude. The more experienced co-pilot didn’t take control in time and didn’t realise what his colleague had been doing. The captain returned too late and fatefully didn’t take over. Just reading the transcript is an exercise in empathy and far more heart-stopping than a disaster movie.
However I think it is pretty clear we have something quite different in the case of MH370 and the situations are not transferable, the simple reason being that we are told the latter was still being detected over seven hours after it was initially said to have crashed into the sea. As with Chevaline we are forced to make the best of what might be disingenuous information and trying to divine what is true and what is not, but no one seems to have questioned that bit of information so we must assume it is reliable. It means that over 7 hours later it was still flying or powered up on the ground SOMEWHERE. It rules out crash or submersion at least up to that point.
Where the tragic AF447 story is illuminating is the statement that up until the belated retrieval of the black box and consequent flight deck conversation, the only indicative information available was the automatic engine printout sent back to AF HQ. This was enough to determine the plane had crashed and many of the technical parameters but could not divulge the human responses to them.
So the inference for MH370 is two fold. Rolls Royce Boeing have all the information they require to recreate the flight plan. Probably every variation to engines and cockpit controls has been relayed including crucially take-off and landing. They must know where it has gone and where it set down.
The other obvious point is that if the plane had crashed they would know beyond doubt it happened. They would surely have said this if it had happened at least. They are hiding behind “commercial confidentiality” which is questionable enough, but surely would not have done so if their technical feedback had confirmed crash?
Yet again, apros pos Chevaline, we are in the realms of information known to some being with held to all for reasons only known to the “some”. Where so many lives and families are affected the immorality of that is plain to see. (No pun intended) The wider issue with all these things is who has a right to information and who has a right to withhold it for what reason?
…. and on a related point, the reason underwater sonar detection has not been deployed, or at least trumpeted is easy to deduce. Because they know the aircraft is NOT as the American spokesman wanted us to believe, that it was at the bottom of the Indian Ocean. That statement by the way would infer a terrorist event, for why else would it crash?
The problem with that is that no rational explanation has been forwarded for it. No terrorist organisation has come forward (again similar to Chevaline) We would for causation be back in “lone maniac” territory or state organised event. Was the US spokesman suggesting either of these?
As I see it, there are a few alternatives. Maybe you can think of more.
* If valuable cargo was on board it might be convenient to PRETEND it had crashed as cover for theft.
* Alternatively if valuable cargo was stolen beforehand, it may be useful to crash the plane and pretend the cargo was lost as may have happened with that UN fight off Newfoundland (possibly)
* Alternatively if it was necessary to prevent expertise of valuable cargo getting to China, detour or crash might have been considered worthwhile.
* Alternatively as per the Sorensen/Bollyn theory, the operation was just to obtain an aeroplane that could be used in a terror event and blamed on an opponent.
Whatever the reason (and there always must be one) given the fact that it didn’t crash as initially suggested, rather rules out 2 and 3 and points to either 1 or 4.
Tim V, could you please repost your last two comments on Craig’s new thread please (see the link from Katie above). that per Craig’s request above. We should be considerate to our ever patient host here and I too would prefer this thread be reserved for discussing Chevaline and potentially related events, even though MH370 now commands most of our interest. I know there has been nothing new recently, but that did not seem a deterrent before? Thanks.
Marlin, did do, incidentally before I saw your helpful suggestion. Regards, Tim.
A convenient way of burying the Al Hilli conundrum.
We conspiratorial types are so easily distracted!
Mochyn69, I am with you on that.
It is true I’m afraid – the achiles heel of “conspiracy” types, who are attracted to mysteries pote tially involving nefarious goings on by powerful interests (like state secret agencies) is that they get easily distracted, like you say.
It’s as if the wind blew out of the sails of poor old little Chevaline. Yes, this horse has been beaten much, but I don’t think we have seen the end of the shenanigans, the purpose of which was to bury the ‘story” not to solve the case. Isn’t that why people kept on it for so long? including here and on MZT and now Deadzone (which has also seemed to run out of steam, perhaps for lack of any new information?).
yes, the MH370 is a great mystery involving that many more people, states and who knows what interests. But Chevaline is still there, the victims remain dead, the official story never came together, suspects are as elusive as rainbows on a clear day.
I am afraid that in all the hoopla, the Al-Hillis are indeed becoming forgotten. Well, if it’s any consolation, I forgot no notin’.
Now, were I a true blue conspiracy theorist I might almost conclude that there is intention behind the fogs of re-directions. I think I may go over to the disappearing aircraft thread and see if I can rouse some troops back to the cause, as much as it looks like “old hat”.
I am almost t
I don’t see the al-Hillis as forgotten. I see the MH 370 story, and its handling, as part of a bigger picture. That is, there are certain commonalities in the way both stories were handled by governments and news agencies. Both involve the shifting sand of “what we know”. Do we “know” anything at all, and why does there seem to be no “fact” at all in either story — nothing verifiable from trustworthy sources? Why is it that the very idea of either Saad al-Hilli or Sylvain Mollier being involved in some sort of espionage (corporate or state) was dismissed as nonsense? It doesn’t seem far-fetched in light of the MH 370 story. What about numerous passports belonging to certain people, altered or unaltered, forged in entirety or not, missing and found? Who was grandma, really? Do we even know whose bodies were found, or if the al-Hillis actually ever crossed the channel? The more we “know”, the less we know.
These two stories have that in common. Both have the airline connection, and the connection to satellites. It makes me think that both stories are connected. The only thing that can be certain is that the officials in charge of both investigations know a whole lot more than they will reveal, and that decisions pertaining to these cases are being made at a high (top secret) level. Perhaps it was necessary in the beginning to dismiss the airline and satellite connections to the al-Hilli murders, in order to have no one question either one, nor think of how navigation systems for satellites like the ones made by SSTL may be similar to navigation systems in airplanes. Both work together, and no doubt both can be hacked by people with the right knowledge. Did Saad build airline galleys, or was he involved with the navigation systems for commercial airliners, and getting those navigation systems to communicate with SSTL satellites?
I have not forgotten the al-Hillis. Have you?
Q @ 10:18pm. Good point about the strange ‘equivalences” between Chevaline and MH370. Even though these are not obvious and may be on another level, there are a few “themes” that keeps repeating. Well, you know about my affinity for patterns.
You may also want to check out Tim V’s comment to me on the Disppeapearing Aircraft” thread. He made an interesting point the gist of it is that we may again be looking at a cover-up where the British may be playing a bit of a “spoiler’ role. he brought up the British Inmarsat satellite “pings” that indicated the flight was ongoing for over 7 hours, something the Malaysians did not disclose for several days, even as they must have known the search was in the wrong area all that time. In fact, there are all kind of strange delays from the officials’ side – see my (somewhat convoluted, as usual) reply to Tim V on the same thread.
While you are there, you may wish to call some of the troops back “home”? I don’t want to see this thread close down – I know you, Bluebird, Tim V and others put in lots of effort to keep it up and alive (even as I have to periodically absent myself for various length of times), and new information may pop in any moment. Also james has been an absolute sweetheart in that other place. And Katie wis all too coherent and constructive. NR is his/her usual witty informative self and Tim V is, as always, ever-incorrigibly analytic. Nice to see everyone on best behavior….
Did you say “rally the troops”, Marlin? Okay, what do the “troops” have to say about this development, in light of France’s role:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/463161/Ukraine-French-built-ship-for-Russian-navy-sets-sail-as-leaders-meet-in-Paris
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20140317-711663.html
France tells the UK to do something about Russian oligarchs in London, in order for France to think about doing something about the Mistral contract, maybe, possibly, whatever.
Is this part of a chess game that connects to Chevaline?
Personally speaking, I haven’t given up on Chevaline either, though in the absence of any new developments or revelations, there is not much to say. We are clearly “second-tier” investigators. Were we able to take the role of journalists (of the old school) or even police detectives things might be different. Unfortunately as we have noted many times, the former largely act as as channels for whatever is put out by official sources (did you notice the repetition of that term “credible evidence” that kept cropping up re. MH370 possible debris that I believe results from orchestration) and the latter is firmly under political/security services control.
Rank and secrecy are such fundamental characteristics of British policing, and so much depending on them in pay and pension, that “toeing the line” is integral to quasi-military set up. From Constable to Chief Constable and if he or she know what’s good for them, through Special Branch and MI5 in the Home Office.
There is still the big question hanging? What has that huge British investigation discovered and when will it be revealed? Only Parliament has the necessary tools to enquire if our “free press” is unable or unwilling so to do. Isn’t it time questions were asked of the Home Secretary in the House? Perhaps it is time a public petition was organised?
“In my book”, the only rational explanation for the total silence from the British side (apart from seeded disinformation) can be matters of national security. However to admit such would obviously beg the question and prove collusion and cover up at least on the French side, and by implication the British side also.
So we have this state of scarcely believable theatre and we know all theatre is merely illusion to portray or protect greater truths. It certainly seems we have repeat performance in MH370, a plan perhaps frustrated only by a little oversight on the part of the planners – a “bleeping” transmitter in the “bleeping” tail, which the “bleeping” British chose not to keep “beeping” quiet about!
So in this regard I thought an event from the past illustrates some of the issues we have seen here. The way the British Government works at least. How Parliamentary procedures are by passed when it comes to matters of state security. How figures in the opposition are made to toe the line so that they don’t. How Special Branch is employed to enforce. How the BBC is coerced.
These events link Chevaline, “Zircon” spy satellites, and secret accounting 25 or more years ago. It is old hat when it was still possible to walk up Downing Street without a semi-automatic or gate in sight, so it would naive to things were now much different or better. It is what makes that “Panorama investigation” so significant as a window into British Government thinking and strategy.
If you don’t have time to look at all these references, just look at the last which in some ways brings it altogether.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zircon_affair
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zircon_(satellite)
http://www.duncancampbell.org/PDF/Zircon.pdf
https://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/alpha/zircon.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2519703/Top-secret-government-spy-satellite-launched-space-sinister-cartoon-octopus-logo-boast-Nothing-Is-Beyond-Our-Reach.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1402465/Britains-first-spy-satellite-is-cheap-option.html
http://fantasyfleet.blogspot.co.uk/2010/08/united-kingdom-spy-satellite-topsat.html
“TOPSAT
TopSat (Tactical Operational Satellite) is an Earth observation satellite that was launched on October 27, 2005 alongside the Beijing-1 Disaster Monitoring Constellation satellite by a Cosmos rocket from Plesetsk Cosmodrome in Russia. TopSat carries out imaging with a ground resolution of 2.5m. Much smaller and cheaper than other imaging satellites of similar high resolution, TopSat has been used to demonstrate the feasibility of providing images on demand to portable groundstations, such as might be deployed by the military or by disaster relief organisations.
AND DRAWING IT ALTOGETHER….
http://fantasyfleet.blogspot.co.uk/2010/08/united-kingdom-spy-satellite-topsat.html
TopSat was built in the United Kingdom by Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd, QinetiQ and The Rutherford Appleton Laboratory under the British National Space Centre Mosaic programme. The MOD was the largest single contibutor to the program.
The TopSat program was highly successful technology demonstrator able to return decent imagery for a knock down price of just £15 million. It was hoped that the UK would be able to build a constellation of these satellites however with present budget cuts the appetite for this seems to have diminished.”
Q
22 Mar, 2014 – 1:55 pm your references illustrate the hypocritical and largely fatuous statements that have come out of Brussels and Washington. The fact of the matter they are largely huff and puff. Having inflamed the internal situation in the Ukraine rather than waiting for upcoming elections that would probably have seen the current crook leader voted out, it has effectively come to an accommodation over Crimea with the hope that Putin won’t keep marching West. For him not to, Europe will have to pull back on its demands unless Ukraine is to be split down the middle in a Hitler/Stalin type deal. The reality of the modern world is that countries are so interwoven economically, it is hard even to distinguish “national interest” at all. For a principled stand, France, Britain and Germany all stand to loose vast sums. France would loose its arms deals, Britain its London property market, Germany its export market. Of course these are just examples. Further afield, America is in hock to China to maintain the value of the Dollar. So any “international incident” is multi layered and far from simple. The interpretations and reactions are highly nuanced and may not reflect the understandings behind closed doors. What for example are the Americans saying to the Chinese in secret about MH370?
The same vested interests keep the events at Chevaline hushed?
Indeed Q. That is certainly what I have thought was the only reasonable explanation for the lies and cover-up on the French side and silence on the British. I expect you noted the convoluted issues with just spy satellites in which SSST has such a paradoxically prominent yet inconspicuous role. Britain/America/France/Germany/Italy; co-operation/competition/obstruction/sabotage even.
Did nobody like them?
How U.S. Historians (Schlesinger!) covered up FDR’s Anti-Semitic remarks (David Irving never did: FDR’s talks with Molotov | Michael Beschloss on FDR and the Jews | Famous People write in Private about the Jews)
Linda at Deadzone has posted an update to the prosecution of BFM TV for the pictures showing the crime scene of the killing.
A complaint was filed in early March by family lawyers Sylvain Mollier.
http://actu.orange.fr/une/tuerie-de-chevaline-ouverture-d-une-enquete-pour-violation-du-secret-de-l-instruction-afp-s_2893236.html#
What about reposting a link to that BFM TV report, because I did not catch it at the time, and others — who just enters briefly here — probably also missed out on it.
Bluebird , here’ something for you to investigate. Who and of what ancestry is Mr. Patrick Onel? This is so clever, because the Mint had the right to use these sophisticated machines, because they were also doing legitimate minting.
I don’t know if it’s there anymore Kenneth they got into trouble for publishing photos of the crime scene .
You can try searching here http://www.bfmtv.com/video/bfmtv/
Gone from here as far as I can tell just a message “video does not exist.”
http://actudirect.com/news/exclusivite-bfmtv-les-photos-de-la-scene-du-crime-de-la-tuerie-de-chevaline/
Is that to say that nobody in this digital age we live in, has PVR'ed it? Try to ask at deadzone.
Mine just posted on the other site as it suggests a rationale how the two events might be connected so relevant to both threads.
Kenneth Sorensen
23 Mar, 2014 – 4:39 am I’m glad you liked my little discussion or “rant” as James kindly describes it. Clearly what is meat for one is foul for another. I wonder why? I have seen some early contributions from “James”. He seems a reformed character these days.
My aim, if aim there was, to show how with time the issue of satellite detection has become a hot political potato, that is also used as a bargaining chip as with Britain contributing hundreds of millions to American assets so that it can get access, whilst not being wholly comfortable with the dependence. Falklands was the warning bell that encouraged “Zircon”. It can’t quite go it alone but it is moving that way.
Zircon as you probably saw, was the second time big expenditure was with-held from the Commons watchdog. The first was Chevaline – upgrading with multiple warheads the Polaris missile – in complete secrecy. So rather neatly Chevaline the missile is linked to Chevaline the massacre. Why? Because apart from obvious vocabulary, the direct descendent of Zircon, abandoned on cost grounds, is the latest generation of “Topsat” from 2005 onwards.
It is Topsat that connects in to Saad al Hilli through both the Rutherford Laboratory and SSST for which he worked. Qinetiq (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qinetiq) incorporates multiple links to the US through the Carlyle Group and takeovers. It even had CIA Director George Tenet on the board between 2006 and 8! The firm has had significant security, hacking and personnel issues. Its operating bases were amazingly close to SAH’s at one time, although there is no overt direct link except through SSST.
So now the link with MH370. A topsat satellite gets the “pings” for 5 hrs plus after last radar contact. All those Freescale employees off to China. Is it a CIA imperative to prevent satellite technology getting into “enemy” hands. You bet your bottom dollar it is. Apparently SAH had much more computer work info. than he should have. Yet the laptops were not taken? The only explanation if this was the object of the exercise, is that the attackers were satisfied information could no longer be transferred.
Now we hear (ty BB) B777 had strange problems twice previously whilst coincidentally on the QL route. And that the plane from 2007 had fail-safe anti hi jack but conversely subject to external military over-ride. And that the “crashed into the sea” explanation might have worked were it not for the “pings” and the “military radar”.
Could it be a CIA operation? First if it wasn’t hi jack or suicide, and there’s nothing it appears to support either, then State involvement becomes more likely, and of the possible states, the US most likely on the basis of both capability and motivation. It also has clear previous both on black ops, using aircraft to transfer kidnapped individuals and of intercepting civil aircraft. It also can furnish similar cases of aircraft that ostensibly disappear over its own territory. Nor is it averse, it has proved averse, if it considers it necessary to sacrifice innocent civilians in aerial attacks in Europe in the 80′s and elsewhere since with its drones. 9/11 proved it was capable of literally anything, even against its own.
Globally it is arguably the most advanced in drone and intercept technology. The US Government has intimate connections and control over its main aircraft manufacturers, including Boeing. It has Indian Ocean assets to which a plane could be flown. It has a large naval presence in the Indian and Pacific Oceans with fighter and awacs.
From a strategic point of view China and Russia are holding hands and form a formidable and only opposition to American/Israeli plans in the middle east (Syria/Iran) and eastern Europe (Ukraine). It must therefore be of primary importance to limit the ability of both to control and utilize space. Particularly when military conflict is becoming increasing likely. (Syrian fighter shot down over Turkey today, military manoeuvres on the Russian?Ukrainian border!)
In respect of wreckage photos, and in search, it is noticeable the US appears to have taken a “back seat”. The satellite photos are apparently provided by Australian, French and Chinese equipment NOT US although it must have the means. Further it was reported the US had actively WITH-HELD the information/intelligence that was available to them. They have released no radar information from Garcia that must have registered if a large plane had flown that abnormal route.
Then there are the anomalous sightings and events: the two security men from the Maersk Alabama and its cargo. The removal of Ukrainian gold by plane to the US. Reports of low-flying civil aircraft over Pacific Islands. The announcement of a passenger plane with fighter escort on the eastern seaboard of the united states all in a corresponding timeframe.
All this and a satellite/aircraft related killing in Chevaline that neither the French or the British are prepared to unravel because of the international ramifications and I think you have a pretty strong circumstantial case that this was a CIA organised black op. But then, as James will no doubt tell me in no uncertain terms, what do I know?
or fowl even! (oh dear slip of the brain)