Holy Moly! Missing Airline Jet Plane!

  • 180 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by Kevlar101 (6099 posts) -

"They [wormholes] have never sucked up any planes before..."

How would he know??

Bermuda Triangle >__>

#52 Edited by vfibsux (4205 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic said:

You guys jumping on terrorism are late to the party....not terrorism either. The two stolen passports belonged to people seeking asylum. Such a negative world this is.

Shame about the plane....

Dude, terrorism was suspected prior to even knowing who the people were that were using the passports....even before the stolen passports were known of ; circumstances alone warranted it. Like I posted before, people thinking it is absurd to be calling "terrorism" need to check themselves and stop pretending it doesn't happen.

No one is saying it def was terrorism, but dismissing it at all is absurd.

#53 Posted by Kevlar101 (6099 posts) -

@BluRayHiDef said:

I've never been on a plane, and I don't think I ever will be. If a plane crashes midair or falls out of the sky, death is guaranteed, but if a land vehicle or marine vehicle suffers an accident, there's a chance it won't be fatal.

Just so you know, more people die in car crashes every year than the total number of people who have died in plane crashes, in the entire history of flight. Statistically speaking, you are much, much more likely to be killed taking a cross country road trip than to die going across the country on a plane.

Anyway, on topic, and to all the people saying that there's no way it was any kind of mechanical because there was no communication from the pilots... Is it really that hard to believe that an electrical problem could destroy communication methods? Is that impossible? Someone please explain how, if that is, in fact, impossible.

Exactly.

the survival rate of plane crashes is surprisingly high.

#54 Posted by dave123321 (33975 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic: apparently we are anti-USA if we don't think terrorism is likely for some reason.

Why someone would talk about the USA(in a defensive way, not a negative way is beyond me)

What goes on in people's minds is strange

#55 Posted by Motokid6 (5416 posts) -

I have a question.. how is it they know the plane damn near performed a 180?... after the transponder cut out. Radar?

Anyway I heard a compelling argument that it could very well have been a flash fire on the plane. Which could easily burn out the electrical systems. Including the radio.. but WHERE IS THE WREKAGE? If there was a fire the plane would have turned around ( which it did ) and tried to land... but.. wheres the wreckage? They said that plane had a enough fuel to go 3000 miles. So.. wtf 3000 miles in the wrong direction? It could be anywhere.

Something is strange that is for sure. My bet is some sort of failed highjacking. The terrorists flew the plane WAY off course.. farther then the zones there searching in. Where after awhile ( again enough fuel for 7 hours of flight/300miles ) the passengers tried to intervene. And like in 9/11 the highjackers took the plane down. The planes ( or whats left of it ) is out there somewhere. I just think its ALOT farther then where there looking.

Best thing we can hope for is they find a bunch of people floating on seats. ( a lot of the material inside a plane is designed to float for just such an occasion )

#56 Edited by vfibsux (4205 posts) -

@dave123321 said:

@LJS9502_basic: apparently we are anti-USA if we don't think terrorism is likely for some reason.

Why someone would talk about the USA(in a defensive way, not a negative way is beyond me)

What goes on in people's minds is strange

Where are you getting this anti-USA stuff from? This was not even a U.S. airline, why would anyone think you are being anti-U.S. over this? Is my flag avatar intimidating you? Every time I disagree with people it is because I am an American now? lol.

And what facts are you basing terrorism not being likely on? The problem is none of you are basing this theory on any known facts at all. The chances of this being mechanical/structural and terrorism are pretty equal at this point based on the circumstances and the known facts. There is no reason to discount either at this time.

I beg you, please tell me the facts you are basing this "unlikely it is terrorism" on, because I have yet to see one from any of you.

Edit: Just read the two transponders (which give location data) were switched off an hour before the flight vanished. Nah, not suspicious at all.

#57 Edited by Reaper4278 (337 posts) -

Questioning whether or not this could be terrorism is like questioning whether or not missing money from a bank could be theft. Sure it could have been a mix up and the money could just be somewhere else, but to not bring the possibility of theft up would be irresponsible; criticizing those who brought it up would be outright absurd.

#58 Posted by dave123321 (33975 posts) -
#59 Posted by the_bi99man (11047 posts) -

@vfibsux said:

@dave123321 said:

@LJS9502_basic: apparently we are anti-USA if we don't think terrorism is likely for some reason.

Why someone would talk about the USA(in a defensive way, not a negative way is beyond me)

What goes on in people's minds is strange

Where are you getting this anti-USA stuff from? This was not even a U.S. airline, why would anyone think you are being anti-U.S. over this? Is my flag avatar intimidating you? Every time I disagree with people it is because I am an American now? lol.

And what facts are you basing terrorism not being likely on? The problem is none of you are basing this theory on any known facts at all. The chances of this being mechanical/structural and terrorism are pretty equal at this point based on the circumstances and the known facts. There is no reason to discount either at this time.

I beg you, please tell me the facts you are basing this "unlikely it is terrorism" on, because I have yet to see one from any of you.

Edit: Just read the two transponders (which give location data) were switched off an hour before the flight vanished. Nah, not suspicious at all.

Questioning whether or not this could be terrorism is like questioning whether or not missing money from a bank could be theft. Sure it could have been a mix up and the money could just be somewhere else, but to not bring the possibility of theft up would be irresponsible; criticizing those who brought it up would be outright absurd.

These guys are right. Sure, there's a solid chance that this is something besides terrorism. But acting like terrorism isn't even a possibility is so damn stupid I can't believe any of you guys are actually serious. Pull your heads out of your asses, guys.

#60 Posted by dave123321 (33975 posts) -

I just remember some guy immediately responding by saying how dare we say its terrorism, only the United States is the terror in the world.

Ala the only white people van be racist comments we get when some nonwhite is being racist

#61 Posted by dave123321 (33975 posts) -

Both comments being facetious, mocking those views

The issue being that no one fucking brought up the us, yet people started defending it for no reason

#62 Edited by vfibsux (4205 posts) -

@dave123321 said:

@vfibsux: what

Seriously?

@dave123321 said:

I just remember some guy immediately responding by saying how dare we say its terrorism, only the United States is the terror in the world.

Ala the only white people van be racist comments we get when some nonwhite is being racist

I already explained to you once (different thread too so not sure why you brought it up here) that it was tongue in cheek due to so many anti-U.S. posters on this forum

@dave123321 said:

Both comments being facetious, mocking those views

The issue being that no one fucking brought up the us, yet people started defending it for no reason

Dude...... you are in a different thread, holy derailment Batman. Go back and look at the posts in this thread before someone tells you "go home, you're drunk."

There was no U.S. anything topic being discussed here.

#63 Edited by dave123321 (33975 posts) -

I don't even know what you are getting at. I'm having a convo with lj about how people have talked about this

#64 Posted by vfibsux (4205 posts) -

I don't even know what you are getting at. I'm having a convo with lj about how people have talked about this

No you stated something that flat out is not true and is in no way evident in this thread or any other. You and lj also brought up this whole thinking we are nuts for saying this could be terrorism yet you refuse to post any facts or logic to back it up.

Bullshit has been called.

#65 Posted by Nibroc420 (13567 posts) -

3 passports have been confirmed fake.

sounds like terrorism

#66 Posted by hippiesanta (9836 posts) -

#67 Posted by 67gt500 (4620 posts) -

20 of the missing passengers were employees of a US semiconductor firm... pretty obvious that they were on the threshold of some major tech breakthrough that they weren't supposed to discover just yet and the damned aliens vaporized them in mid flight...

#68 Posted by The_Stand_In (391 posts) -

@67gt500 said:

20 of the missing passengers were employees of a US semiconductor firm... pretty obvious that they were on the threshold of some major tech breakthrough that they weren't supposed to discover just yet and the damned aliens vaporized them in mid flight...

No, no, no... This was obviously a plot perpetrated by Major League Baseball to draw attention away from steroid use (that is when Alex Rodriguez finds the plane and all passengers alive and becomes a worldwide hero, thus making baseball popular and relevant again). Duh.

#71 Edited by hippiesanta (9836 posts) -

Pouri Nourmohammadi

From my personnel observation ..... The Iranian guy with fake passport looks innocent and nothing to do with terrorist...... and want to have a new life in German with his mom, although I don't agree him using a fake travel document.

#72 Edited by dave123321 (33975 posts) -

@vfibsux: I just said that it was odd to bring up the US in a thread that wasn't about the us just because you have delt with some knuckleheads that hate on the us to the point of ignoring the wrongness of elsewhere

#73 Edited by dave123321 (33975 posts) -

I should have said you instead of we in my post to lj.

Terrorism is on the table

#74 Edited by o0squishy0o (2754 posts) -

@vfibsux said:
@o0squishy0o said:

3mins into this video and I hate it already. I mean way to jump on to a "its a terrorist" bandwagon. The guy is like "I am not saying terrorist from iran.... but you know.... I mean.. Terrorist"

1 is plausible? I am guessing she means terrorism right. What is this...

@Smashbrossive50 said:

@o0squishy0o: it's crap,I dismiss the term "terrorism and terrorrist" just because there were stowaways aboard,doesn't mean that they are terrorists,there has to be a technical reason for this

How could any tool in 2014 possibly NOT think terrorism could be in the top 3 causes of any crash like this? What the hell are you smoking? Even before we knew about stolen passports terrorism is a possible cause, probable even. You act as though terrorists have never used planes before.

Hell, sometimes GS-Off Topic makes ME feel like I am on the LOST island. This forum escapes all reality at times.

Yea....never happens

I agree that terrorism should be considered but its just the total bias towards it. I mean it just creates a panic about the whole situation. There has actually been reports and investigations that 1 of the 2 two "terrorists" was actually on their way to visit their mother in germany.

Again I won't say that terrorism shouldn't have been ruled out, its just the way it is being discussed in the video and the incredible bias towards it. It would be very much like "british soliders killed in friendly fire...." and the news reporting it as "Yeah I mean I wont say its the americans who did it, but I mean they have done it a lot before and well... it could be someone else but I mean cmon... we all know what they are like!"

It is just sensational nonsense.

#75 Edited by Smashbrossive50 (2884 posts) -

As such biases are present,I dismiss the terrorism one,just because there are Iranians onboard doesn't mean that you would expect them to conduct a Jihad/suicidal bombing in the flight.you want the REAL answer?!

#76 Posted by gamerguru100 (10559 posts) -
#77 Posted by indzman (17532 posts) -

I suspect foul play by terrorists !

#78 Posted by EatShanna (875 posts) -

I'm sure once the aliens are done probing their behinds, they'll send them home sore, but alive and well.

In all seriousness this disappearance has been bugging me, I want answers, dammit.

#79 Posted by LJS9502_basic (150671 posts) -

@vfibsux said:
@o0squishy0o said:

3mins into this video and I hate it already. I mean way to jump on to a "its a terrorist" bandwagon. The guy is like "I am not saying terrorist from iran.... but you know.... I mean.. Terrorist"

1 is plausible? I am guessing she means terrorism right. What is this...

@Smashbrossive50 said:

@o0squishy0o: it's crap,I dismiss the term "terrorism and terrorrist" just because there were stowaways aboard,doesn't mean that they are terrorists,there has to be a technical reason for this

How could any tool in 2014 possibly NOT think terrorism could be in the top 3 causes of any crash like this? What the hell are you smoking? Even before we knew about stolen passports terrorism is a possible cause, probable even. You act as though terrorists have never used planes before.

Hell, sometimes GS-Off Topic makes ME feel like I am on the LOST island. This forum escapes all reality at times.

Yea....never happens

I agree that terrorism should be considered but its just the total bias towards it. I mean it just creates a panic about the whole situation. There has actually been reports and investigations that 1 of the 2 two "terrorists" was actually on their way to visit their mother in germany.

Again I won't say that terrorism shouldn't have been ruled out, its just the way it is being discussed in the video and the incredible bias towards it. It would be very much like "british soliders killed in friendly fire...." and the news reporting it as "Yeah I mean I wont say its the americans who did it, but I mean they have done it a lot before and well... it could be someone else but I mean cmon... we all know what they are like!"

It is just sensational nonsense.

I think it's silly to immediately assume anything. Facts....so much better then imaginations running wild. But hey...if reality isn't your thing....or the other dudes....so be it. Not going to talk sense to you then.

#80 Edited by vfibsux (4205 posts) -

@vfibsux: I just said that it was odd to bring up the US in a thread that wasn't about the us just because you have delt with some knuckleheads that hate on the us to the point of ignoring the wrongness of elsewhere

And I said you are in the wrong thread talking about it.

As such biases are present,I dismiss the terrorism one,just because there are Iranians onboard doesn't mean that you would expect them to conduct a Jihad/suicidal bombing in the flight.you want the REAL answer?!

Holy hell there is nothing bias in talking possible terrorism. Wtf is wrong with you people? I feel like I am in the Twilight Zone here. Terrorism was being talked about before we even knew about the passports, much less the fact Iranians had them. The Iranians were seeking asylum, we know, they have been ruled out as being suspects. Just because they didn't do that means no one else could have? Fucking use your head, you are the one being bias here.

@o0squishy0o said:

@vfibsux said:
@o0squishy0o said:

3mins into this video and I hate it already. I mean way to jump on to a "its a terrorist" bandwagon. The guy is like "I am not saying terrorist from iran.... but you know.... I mean.. Terrorist"

1 is plausible? I am guessing she means terrorism right. What is this...

@Smashbrossive50 said:

@o0squishy0o: it's crap,I dismiss the term "terrorism and terrorrist" just because there were stowaways aboard,doesn't mean that they are terrorists,there has to be a technical reason for this

How could any tool in 2014 possibly NOT think terrorism could be in the top 3 causes of any crash like this? What the hell are you smoking? Even before we knew about stolen passports terrorism is a possible cause, probable even. You act as though terrorists have never used planes before.

Hell, sometimes GS-Off Topic makes ME feel like I am on the LOST island. This forum escapes all reality at times.

Yea....never happens

I agree that terrorism should be considered but its just the total bias towards it. I mean it just creates a panic about the whole situation. There has actually been reports and investigations that 1 of the 2 two "terrorists" was actually on their way to visit their mother in germany.

Again I won't say that terrorism shouldn't have been ruled out, its just the way it is being discussed in the video and the incredible bias towards it. It would be very much like "british soliders killed in friendly fire...." and the news reporting it as "Yeah I mean I wont say its the americans who did it, but I mean they have done it a lot before and well... it could be someone else but I mean cmon... we all know what they are like!"

It is just sensational nonsense.

I think it's silly to immediately assume anything. Facts....so much better then imaginations running wild. But hey...if reality isn't your thing....or the other dudes....so be it. Not going to talk sense to you then.

Assuming? Imaginations running wild? ROFL. I got some facts for you.......a missing plane with origins from a part of the world ripe with Islamic extremism, lost contact at max altitude where it is extremely rare to encounter emergencies, no pilot distress calls made, transponders turned off 1 hour prior to vanishing, a mysterious turn off course made without any contact from pilots, and a history of using commercial aviation to commit terrorist acts...........OR it could have been a simple catastrophic explosion/breakup caused by mechanical/structural issues which is FAR more rare than the former

.......and you call this assumptions and imaginations running wild? No one is even saying 100% terrorism, just throwing it on the table as being possible. Do you people have an ounce of critical thinking skill? This is absolutely absurd.

#81 Posted by LJS9502_basic (150671 posts) -

@vfibsux said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@o0squishy0o said:

I agree that terrorism should be considered but its just the total bias towards it. I mean it just creates a panic about the whole situation. There has actually been reports and investigations that 1 of the 2 two "terrorists" was actually on their way to visit their mother in germany.

Again I won't say that terrorism shouldn't have been ruled out, its just the way it is being discussed in the video and the incredible bias towards it. It would be very much like "british soliders killed in friendly fire...." and the news reporting it as "Yeah I mean I wont say its the americans who did it, but I mean they have done it a lot before and well... it could be someone else but I mean cmon... we all know what they are like!"

It is just sensational nonsense.

I think it's silly to immediately assume anything. Facts....so much better then imaginations running wild. But hey...if reality isn't your thing....or the other dudes....so be it. Not going to talk sense to you then.

Assuming? Imaginations running wild? ROFL. I got some facts for you.......a missing plane with origins from a part of the world ripe with Islamic extremism, lost contact at max altitude where it is extremely rare to encounter emergencies, no pilot distress calls made, transponders turned off 1 hour prior to vanishing, a mysterious turn off course made without any contact from pilots, and a history of using commercial aviation to commit terrorist acts...........OR it could have been a simple catastrophic explosion/breakup caused by mechanical/structural issues which is FAR more rare than the former

.......and you call this assumptions and imaginations running wild? No one is even saying 100% terrorism, just throwing it on the table as being possible. Do you people have an ounce of critical thinking skill? This is absolutely absurd.

Yes assuming. Which is what you are still doing. Oh noez....it happened in that part of the world...it must be terrorism.

#82 Posted by Smashbrossive50 (2884 posts) -

@vfibsux: the more biased claims there are,the greater likelihood YOU are biasing it,I took my chance in proving that these asylum seekers boarded the wrong flight..to add this up,the Malaysian Immigration actually failed to seize the Iranians before the plane fly,and what I just received from the aviation officials,the plane diverted its course shortly before the plane lost its signal

#83 Posted by comp_atkins (31327 posts) -

@BluRayHiDef said:

I've never been on a plane, and I don't think I ever will be. If a plane crashes midair or falls out of the sky, death is guaranteed, but if a land vehicle or marine vehicle suffers an accident, there's a chance it won't be fatal.

Just so you know, more people die in car crashes every year than the total number of people who have died in plane crashes, in the entire history of flight. Statistically speaking, you are much, much more likely to be killed taking a cross country road trip than to die going across the country on a plane.

Anyway, on topic, and to all the people saying that there's no way it was any kind of mechanical because there was no communication from the pilots... Is it really that hard to believe that an electrical problem could destroy communication methods? Is that impossible? Someone please explain how, if that is, in fact, impossible.

not impossible, obviously, but unlikely. the aircraft has multiple redundant systems such that if one or two fail the plane may keep flying or at least communicate to alert others of the problem. to have it suddenly lose all contact would imply either a catastrophic event that rendered communications impossible or an intentional disabling of the systems. the fact that malaysian officials are saying they had it on radar an hour after they lost it's transponder would imply the latter imo

#84 Posted by l34052 (3150 posts) -

this.....

#85 Posted by Reaper4278 (337 posts) -

@vfibsux said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@o0squishy0o said:

I agree that terrorism should be considered but its just the total bias towards it. I mean it just creates a panic about the whole situation. There has actually been reports and investigations that 1 of the 2 two "terrorists" was actually on their way to visit their mother in germany.

Again I won't say that terrorism shouldn't have been ruled out, its just the way it is being discussed in the video and the incredible bias towards it. It would be very much like "british soliders killed in friendly fire...." and the news reporting it as "Yeah I mean I wont say its the americans who did it, but I mean they have done it a lot before and well... it could be someone else but I mean cmon... we all know what they are like!"

It is just sensational nonsense.

I think it's silly to immediately assume anything. Facts....so much better then imaginations running wild. But hey...if reality isn't your thing....or the other dudes....so be it. Not going to talk sense to you then.

Assuming? Imaginations running wild? ROFL. I got some facts for you.......a missing plane with origins from a part of the world ripe with Islamic extremism, lost contact at max altitude where it is extremely rare to encounter emergencies, no pilot distress calls made, transponders turned off 1 hour prior to vanishing, a mysterious turn off course made without any contact from pilots, and a history of using commercial aviation to commit terrorist acts...........OR it could have been a simple catastrophic explosion/breakup caused by mechanical/structural issues which is FAR more rare than the former

.......and you call this assumptions and imaginations running wild? No one is even saying 100% terrorism, just throwing it on the table as being possible. Do you people have an ounce of critical thinking skill? This is absolutely absurd.

Yes assuming. Which is what you are still doing. Oh noez....it happened in that part of the world...it must be terrorism.

You can't possibly be serious here, the facts have been laid out for you and you picked one thing and made fun of it. I don't know if you are playing games (aka trolling) or are just being stubborn, but in intelligence putting multiple facts and historical trends together to form an assessment is called corroboration. Assumptions are what you use to fill in the gaps in between the facts you have in order to come up with a theory. There is nothing wrong with exploring these theories.

#86 Posted by vfibsux (4205 posts) -

@vfibsux said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@o0squishy0o said:

I agree that terrorism should be considered but its just the total bias towards it. I mean it just creates a panic about the whole situation. There has actually been reports and investigations that 1 of the 2 two "terrorists" was actually on their way to visit their mother in germany.

Again I won't say that terrorism shouldn't have been ruled out, its just the way it is being discussed in the video and the incredible bias towards it. It would be very much like "british soliders killed in friendly fire...." and the news reporting it as "Yeah I mean I wont say its the americans who did it, but I mean they have done it a lot before and well... it could be someone else but I mean cmon... we all know what they are like!"

It is just sensational nonsense.

I think it's silly to immediately assume anything. Facts....so much better then imaginations running wild. But hey...if reality isn't your thing....or the other dudes....so be it. Not going to talk sense to you then.

Assuming? Imaginations running wild? ROFL. I got some facts for you.......a missing plane with origins from a part of the world ripe with Islamic extremism, lost contact at max altitude where it is extremely rare to encounter emergencies, no pilot distress calls made, transponders turned off 1 hour prior to vanishing, a mysterious turn off course made without any contact from pilots, and a history of using commercial aviation to commit terrorist acts...........OR it could have been a simple catastrophic explosion/breakup caused by mechanical/structural issues which is FAR more rare than the former

.......and you call this assumptions and imaginations running wild? No one is even saying 100% terrorism, just throwing it on the table as being possible. Do you people have an ounce of critical thinking skill? This is absolutely absurd.

Yes assuming. Which is what you are still doing. Oh noez....it happened in that part of the world...it must be terrorism.

Want to play that game? I will copy/paste every point in my post you did NOT reply to, which is everything after the first sentence. Try again genius.

"I got some facts for you.......a missing plane with origins from a part of the world ripe with Islamic extremism, lost contact at max altitude where it is extremely rare to encounter emergencies, no pilot distress calls made, transponders turned off 1 hour prior to vanishing, a mysterious turn off course made without any contact from pilots, and a history of using commercial aviation to commit terrorist acts...........OR it could have been a simple catastrophic explosion/breakup caused by mechanical/structural issues which is FAR more rare than the former

#87 Posted by vfibsux (4205 posts) -

@vfibsux: the more biased claims there are,the greater likelihood YOU are biasing it,I took my chance in proving that these asylum seekers boarded the wrong flight..to add this up,the Malaysian Immigration actually failed to seize the Iranians before the plane fly,and what I just received from the aviation officials,the plane diverted its course shortly before the plane lost its signal

wtf are you going on about again? Where is this bias in my claims? I never even mentioned the Iranians you keep going on about and already told you they are a non-factor and were seeking asylum. I think my IQ has gone down about 10 points reading the stupid posts in this thread.

#88 Edited by one_plum (6350 posts) -
#89 Edited by vfibsux (4205 posts) -

Absolutely flawed logic on #6. Who said the plane vanished upon being hijacked?

Fact #6: If Flight 370 was hijacked, it would not have vanished from radar

"Hijacking an airplane does not cause it to simply vanish from radar. Even if transponders are disabled on the aircraft, ground radar can still readily track the location of the aircraft using so-called "passive" radar (classic ground-based radar systems that emit a signal and monitor its reflection).Thus, the theory that the flight was hijacked makes no sense whatsoever. When planes are hijacked, they do not magically vanish from radar."

Ummm, no. But it DOES vanish when the said hijacker crashes the f'ing plane into the sea. The transponders were mysteriously turned off an hour BEFORE the plane "vanished", of which the 777 has two. The plane made a huge course deviation with zero contact from the pilots. On what planet does this sound like normal pilot behavior? Switching off transponders and huge course corrections from the pilots with zero communication? So this theory makes "no sense"....no this article makes no sense.

This kooky dude goes on to say this.....

"The frightening part about all this is not that we will find the debris of Flight 370; but rather that we won't. If we never find the debris, it means some entirely new, mysterious and powerful force is at work on our planet which can pluck airplanes out of the sky without leaving behind even a shred of evidence.

If there does exist a weapon with such capabilities, whoever controls it already has the ability to dominate all of Earth's nations with a fearsome military weapon of unimaginable power. That thought is a lot more scary than the idea of an aircraft suffering a fatal mechanical failure."

But yea.....hijacking makes no sense at all. lol.

#90 Posted by hippiesanta (9836 posts) -
#91 Posted by indzman (17532 posts) -

Malaysian Government has been heavily criticise for not being transparent and very slow in their SAR .....

Malaysia using Shaman in their SAR mission which anger most malaysian citizen

I'd laugh if you had posted it in another circumstance.

BUT now is the time not to laugh over such a critical situation , all the people are probably dead by now :(

#92 Edited by hippiesanta (9836 posts) -

@indzman said:

@hippiesanta said:

Malaysian Government has been heavily criticise for not being transparent and very slow in their SAR .....

Malaysia using Shaman in their SAR mission which anger most malaysian citizen

I'd laugh if you had posted it in another circumstance.

BUT now is the time not to laugh over such a critical situation , all the people are probably dead by now :(

Who said I'm laughing...... read this article

ps: I've been working with one of the missing crew before .... so there's no reason for me to laugh..... :)

#93 Edited by o0squishy0o (2754 posts) -

If it were a terrorist attack, how come no distress calls were made? I am assuming things a bit here but no panic button was pressed (I would guess after 9/11 a silent panic button would have been pressed). A terrorist attack that dumps a plane in the sea is hardly "sending a message" to anyone, the worst thing looking at it now is that is almost undermining China as a country to be able to locate and find its civilians. From there noone has come forward to say "we did it" which usually happens from an attack.

More details are slowly being leaked out that the plane had "cracking issues", again this could have caused the crash. Maybe it was a failed terrorist attack, the plane was taken over but broke apart due to a mechanical failure.

I highly doubt anyone is ruling out an at of terrorism. It is just the way "its got to be terrorism" is being lauded as the only real option. Yes there may be things even you yourself have got to support that argument. However atleast from my own knowledge, if it was a terrorist attack it is usually very obvious. I mean all those people on board and nobody tried to call their parents, family the police or whatever? The only argument against that would be no signal for phones, but then if that isn't true, how do you say 200+ passengers, noone tries to contact anyone? Or maybe they had and the authorites are keeping it quiet, much like days after this horrible event has happened it has come to light about the "cracking" issue.

Once again, I don't think anyone is saying "No it isn't terrorism!" just some of us think we need to seriously focus on finding the plane and then looking into it and with that we must look at all other options of failure the plane could have had.

#94 Edited by vfibsux (4205 posts) -

@o0squishy0o said:

If it were a terrorist attack, how come no distress calls were made? I am assuming things a bit here but no panic button was pressed (I would guess after 9/11 a silent panic button would have been pressed). A terrorist attack that dumps a plane in the sea is hardly "sending a message" to anyone, the worst thing looking at it now is that is almost undermining China as a country to be able to locate and find its civilians. From there noone has come forward to say "we did it" which usually happens from an attack.

More details are slowly being leaked out that the plane had "cracking issues", again this could have caused the crash. Maybe it was a failed terrorist attack, the plane was taken over but broke apart due to a mechanical failure.

I highly doubt anyone is ruling out an at of terrorism. It is just the way "its got to be terrorism" is being lauded as the only real option. Yes there may be things even you yourself have got to support that argument. However atleast from my own knowledge, if it was a terrorist attack it is usually very obvious. I mean all those people on board and nobody tried to call their parents, family the police or whatever? The only argument against that would be no signal for phones, but then if that isn't true, how do you say 200+ passengers, noone tries to contact anyone? Or maybe they had and the authorites are keeping it quiet, much like days after this horrible event has happened it has come to light about the "cracking" issue.

Once again, I don't think anyone is saying "No it isn't terrorism!" just some of us think we need to seriously focus on finding the plane and then looking into it and with that we must look at all other options of failure the plane could have had.

"Once again, I don't think anyone is saying "No it isn't terrorism!"

Ummm, what board are you on? Not only are there people saying it was not terrorism, but they are insulting those who are saying it lol. And what person in this thread stated as a fact this IS 100% terrorism? Why do you people keep implying this? lol. I have stated time and time again it is all up in the air right now, no one knows. Could go either way.

You make a good point in that no one has taken responsibility yet, and every day that fact remains the chance it was terrorism drops significantly. Saying that, I would still lean toward hijacking of some sort for whatever reasons over mechanical failure at this time. My first thought is the Egypt Air flight in which one of the pilots purposely crashed the plane for unknown reasons. No distress calls were made then either because the other pilot was fighting with the suicidal one all the way down. And any crew could easily have been incapacitated prior to making any distress calls. The facts that lead me to this conclusion are the two transponders being turned off 1 hour prior to the plane disappearing and this strange turn it took as well. For so many things to be going on with zero pilot contact it just makes sense it was intentional.

And there is no cell phone service 35k ft, not a factor in any way, shape, or form.

#95 Posted by comp_atkins (31327 posts) -

only in OT can a discussion about a missing aircraft turn into a pissing contest. well done, guys :)

#96 Posted by LJS9502_basic (150671 posts) -

If it were a terrorist attack, how come no distress calls were made? I am assuming things a bit here but no panic button was pressed (I would guess after 9/11 a silent panic button would have been pressed). A terrorist attack that dumps a plane in the sea is hardly "sending a message" to anyone, the worst thing looking at it now is that is almost undermining China as a country to be able to locate and find its civilians. From there noone has come forward to say "we did it" which usually happens from an attack.

More details are slowly being leaked out that the plane had "cracking issues", again this could have caused the crash. Maybe it was a failed terrorist attack, the plane was taken over but broke apart due to a mechanical failure.

I highly doubt anyone is ruling out an at of terrorism. It is just the way "its got to be terrorism" is being lauded as the only real option. Yes there may be things even you yourself have got to support that argument. However atleast from my own knowledge, if it was a terrorist attack it is usually very obvious. I mean all those people on board and nobody tried to call their parents, family the police or whatever? The only argument against that would be no signal for phones, but then if that isn't true, how do you say 200+ passengers, noone tries to contact anyone? Or maybe they had and the authorites are keeping it quiet, much like days after this horrible event has happened it has come to light about the "cracking" issue.

Once again, I don't think anyone is saying "No it isn't terrorism!" just some of us think we need to seriously focus on finding the plane and then looking into it and with that we must look at all other options of failure the plane could have had.

If it were a terrorist attack someone would have claimed credit for it. You can't have terrorism if you don't have someone with an agenda saying look what we can do if we don't get what we want.

#97 Posted by vfibsux (4205 posts) -

@o0squishy0o said:

If it were a terrorist attack, how come no distress calls were made? I am assuming things a bit here but no panic button was pressed (I would guess after 9/11 a silent panic button would have been pressed). A terrorist attack that dumps a plane in the sea is hardly "sending a message" to anyone, the worst thing looking at it now is that is almost undermining China as a country to be able to locate and find its civilians. From there noone has come forward to say "we did it" which usually happens from an attack.

More details are slowly being leaked out that the plane had "cracking issues", again this could have caused the crash. Maybe it was a failed terrorist attack, the plane was taken over but broke apart due to a mechanical failure.

I highly doubt anyone is ruling out an at of terrorism. It is just the way "its got to be terrorism" is being lauded as the only real option. Yes there may be things even you yourself have got to support that argument. However atleast from my own knowledge, if it was a terrorist attack it is usually very obvious. I mean all those people on board and nobody tried to call their parents, family the police or whatever? The only argument against that would be no signal for phones, but then if that isn't true, how do you say 200+ passengers, noone tries to contact anyone? Or maybe they had and the authorites are keeping it quiet, much like days after this horrible event has happened it has come to light about the "cracking" issue.

Once again, I don't think anyone is saying "No it isn't terrorism!" just some of us think we need to seriously focus on finding the plane and then looking into it and with that we must look at all other options of failure the plane could have had.

If it were a terrorist attack someone would have claimed credit for it. You can't have terrorism if you don't have someone with an agenda saying look what we can do if we don't get what we want.

I see you finally have something to work with here, how convenient for you. Yes with every passing day with no one taking credit terrorism can be ruled out, but you cannot rule out human involvement altogether.

I see you ignored my last reply to you calling you out for ignoring all but one of my points.

#98 Posted by LJS9502_basic (150671 posts) -

@vfibsux said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@o0squishy0o said:

If it were a terrorist attack, how come no distress calls were made? I am assuming things a bit here but no panic button was pressed (I would guess after 9/11 a silent panic button would have been pressed). A terrorist attack that dumps a plane in the sea is hardly "sending a message" to anyone, the worst thing looking at it now is that is almost undermining China as a country to be able to locate and find its civilians. From there noone has come forward to say "we did it" which usually happens from an attack.

More details are slowly being leaked out that the plane had "cracking issues", again this could have caused the crash. Maybe it was a failed terrorist attack, the plane was taken over but broke apart due to a mechanical failure.

I highly doubt anyone is ruling out an at of terrorism. It is just the way "its got to be terrorism" is being lauded as the only real option. Yes there may be things even you yourself have got to support that argument. However atleast from my own knowledge, if it was a terrorist attack it is usually very obvious. I mean all those people on board and nobody tried to call their parents, family the police or whatever? The only argument against that would be no signal for phones, but then if that isn't true, how do you say 200+ passengers, noone tries to contact anyone? Or maybe they had and the authorites are keeping it quiet, much like days after this horrible event has happened it has come to light about the "cracking" issue.

Once again, I don't think anyone is saying "No it isn't terrorism!" just some of us think we need to seriously focus on finding the plane and then looking into it and with that we must look at all other options of failure the plane could have had.

If it were a terrorist attack someone would have claimed credit for it. You can't have terrorism if you don't have someone with an agenda saying look what we can do if we don't get what we want.

I see you finally have something to work with here, how convenient for you. Yes with every passing day with no one taking credit terrorism can be ruled out, but you cannot rule out human involvement altogether.

I see you ignored my last reply to you calling you out for ignoring all but one of my points.

I went to work dude. Sorry I don't have all day to hang around looking for your posts. Not a priority of mine. And frankly from the start I've thought your supposition was merit-less. Like I told you in the first post....assumptions =/= facts. I'll stick with facts. Until a link has been established as to the reason be it terrorism, faulty equipment, pilot error etc....I will not make an uninformed opinion.

Try that sometime....

#99 Posted by MrGeezer (56218 posts) -

@vfibsux said:

@dave123321 said:

@LJS9502_basic: apparently we are anti-USA if we don't think terrorism is likely for some reason.

Why someone would talk about the USA(in a defensive way, not a negative way is beyond me)

What goes on in people's minds is strange

Where are you getting this anti-USA stuff from? This was not even a U.S. airline, why would anyone think you are being anti-U.S. over this? Is my flag avatar intimidating you? Every time I disagree with people it is because I am an American now? lol.

And what facts are you basing terrorism not being likely on? The problem is none of you are basing this theory on any known facts at all. The chances of this being mechanical/structural and terrorism are pretty equal at this point based on the circumstances and the known facts. There is no reason to discount either at this time.

I beg you, please tell me the facts you are basing this "unlikely it is terrorism" on, because I have yet to see one from any of you.

Edit: Just read the two transponders (which give location data) were switched off an hour before the flight vanished. Nah, not suspicious at all.

If I had to make a guess, I'd suspect that it wasn't terrorism simply because no one has admitted to it. I mean, terrorism usually has a cause behind it. Just seems kind of pointless for terrorists to blow up or crash a plane and then not having anyone associated with them come forward and take the blame for it. If no one's gonna know that it was an act of terrorism, then what's the point of committing that act of terrorism in the first place?

Of course, that's just my guess and I certainly may be wrong. But I do agree that terrorism can't be ruled out, I just sort of doubt that it was an act of terrorism.

#100 Posted by limpbizkit818 (15038 posts) -

@MrGeezer said:

@vfibsux said:

@dave123321 said:

@LJS9502_basic: apparently we are anti-USA if we don't think terrorism is likely for some reason.

Why someone would talk about the USA(in a defensive way, not a negative way is beyond me)

What goes on in people's minds is strange

Where are you getting this anti-USA stuff from? This was not even a U.S. airline, why would anyone think you are being anti-U.S. over this? Is my flag avatar intimidating you? Every time I disagree with people it is because I am an American now? lol.

And what facts are you basing terrorism not being likely on? The problem is none of you are basing this theory on any known facts at all. The chances of this being mechanical/structural and terrorism are pretty equal at this point based on the circumstances and the known facts. There is no reason to discount either at this time.

I beg you, please tell me the facts you are basing this "unlikely it is terrorism" on, because I have yet to see one from any of you.

Edit: Just read the two transponders (which give location data) were switched off an hour before the flight vanished. Nah, not suspicious at all.

If I had to make a guess, I'd suspect that it wasn't terrorism simply because no one has admitted to it. I mean, terrorism usually has a cause behind it. Just seems kind of pointless for terrorists to blow up or crash a plane and then not having anyone associated with them come forward and take the blame for it. If no one's gonna know that it was an act of terrorism, then what's the point of committing that act of terrorism in the first place?

Of course, that's just my guess and I certainly may be wrong. But I do agree that terrorism can't be ruled out, I just sort of doubt that it was an act of terrorism.

The Boston Bombers were not working for any group. They just wanted to blow some people up in the name of Islam.

My guess would be that the plane was hijacked and the pilots/passengers were able to crash to plane. Similar to Flight 93.