What's your theory?
#61
#62
Re: What's your theory?
I should have made myself clearer. When I said "a bit of a myth" I didn't mean they didn't exist at all, I was referring to the general "OMFG" aura that surrounds them. Having had a morbid fascination with these sorts of things for a long time I've read a lot about them. For various reasons, dirty bombs work far better as tools of psychological terrorism than actual practical terrorism.
Research strongly suggests that if one were ever set off, the real damage would be caused by the old-fashioned explosives, with the radioactive material having far less physical effect.
More to the point, standard explosives are far easier to obtain and work with and far more effective at causing mass damage and death.
While it would be possible to build a truly dangerous dirty bomb, it would require such a large amount of really nasty unshielded radioactive material that it would most likely kill whoever was trying to make it long before they had a chance to use it. Using the necessary amount of shielding to allow people to build and transport it any distance at all without being killed by the radiation before they had a chance to set it off would make it so impractical and reduce its ultimate effectiveness so much that it wouldn't have been worth all the effort.
Research strongly suggests that if one were ever set off, the real damage would be caused by the old-fashioned explosives, with the radioactive material having far less physical effect.
More to the point, standard explosives are far easier to obtain and work with and far more effective at causing mass damage and death.
While it would be possible to build a truly dangerous dirty bomb, it would require such a large amount of really nasty unshielded radioactive material that it would most likely kill whoever was trying to make it long before they had a chance to use it. Using the necessary amount of shielding to allow people to build and transport it any distance at all without being killed by the radiation before they had a chance to set it off would make it so impractical and reduce its ultimate effectiveness so much that it wouldn't have been worth all the effort.
As you say its a psychological weapon more than anything else.
As to this plane and it's unfortunate passengers the tales get stranger everyday and the apparent incompetence of Malaysian officials greater by the minute.
I find it hard to believe that so much of the information coming out over te last week wasn't known in the first 24 hours.
It's all very odd to say the least.
#63
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Jun 2008
Location: Abu Dhabi by body and Sydney by soul
Posts: 1,841
Re: What's your theory?
Sandboy, I have been thinking of the mothers on there with children (Because I can obviously relate), by myself I would be fatalistic or even, one hopes, brave, but with my kids.... it just doesn't bear thinking about.
#64
Hit 16's
Joined: Mar 2010
Location: Of all the gin joints, in all the towns, in all the world, she walks into mine
Posts: 13,112
Re: What's your theory?
I think it’s extremely significant that the pilot’s family left the family home the day before the flight. I haven’t seen much written regarding that, but if “left” means a split, rather than just a few days away, then couple that with the supposition that the pilot was “incensed” by the jailing of his chum the opposition leader, and you have a potentially de-stabilised pilot.
Add to the mix that the final verbal message was, apparently, spoken calmly by the pilot after one of the comms systems had been disabled (which he would have known about), and it suggests that he was rational and in control, but de-stabilised.
If he had planned things in advance, was his family’s departure a manifestation of his (growing) instability? Presumably he also knew when the opposition leader’s case was to be heard. That leads to the possibility that he’d planned things beforehand in anticipation of the opposition leader losing his case.
That, of course, raises the question of what it was he’d planned. Suicide + homicide, on a grand and public scale to draw attention to the problems he perceived in Malaysia’s political and social situation—but if so, why not make the crash itself high-profile? Or taking the plane to a pre-arranged location, presumably in a country sympathetic to his socio-political leanings—but that doesn’t add up either, because any such country would likely be western-leaning, and therefore unlikely to be complicit in the plan.
So that suggests that it wasn’t planned, at least not in detail. Did the court case tip him over the edge, and once airborne he decided to do something dramatic? But—and as with the other scenarios—what about the co-pilot? Did the pilot somehow disable him, lock the cockpit door (in an emergency, surely the crew have access?), and then have sole control? But that raises the question—as do the other scenarios—of why there was no mobile phone contact from either passengers or other crew to suggest something was wrong.
So then we’re down the route of all bar the pilot (and any accomplices) being incapacitated—can the pilot achieve that, and still retain control?
Does anyone know, from amongst the huge amount of “information” out there, what the opposition leader’s political leanings were, and the circumstances of the pilot’s family “leaving” the family home?
Add to the mix that the final verbal message was, apparently, spoken calmly by the pilot after one of the comms systems had been disabled (which he would have known about), and it suggests that he was rational and in control, but de-stabilised.
If he had planned things in advance, was his family’s departure a manifestation of his (growing) instability? Presumably he also knew when the opposition leader’s case was to be heard. That leads to the possibility that he’d planned things beforehand in anticipation of the opposition leader losing his case.
That, of course, raises the question of what it was he’d planned. Suicide + homicide, on a grand and public scale to draw attention to the problems he perceived in Malaysia’s political and social situation—but if so, why not make the crash itself high-profile? Or taking the plane to a pre-arranged location, presumably in a country sympathetic to his socio-political leanings—but that doesn’t add up either, because any such country would likely be western-leaning, and therefore unlikely to be complicit in the plan.
So that suggests that it wasn’t planned, at least not in detail. Did the court case tip him over the edge, and once airborne he decided to do something dramatic? But—and as with the other scenarios—what about the co-pilot? Did the pilot somehow disable him, lock the cockpit door (in an emergency, surely the crew have access?), and then have sole control? But that raises the question—as do the other scenarios—of why there was no mobile phone contact from either passengers or other crew to suggest something was wrong.
So then we’re down the route of all bar the pilot (and any accomplices) being incapacitated—can the pilot achieve that, and still retain control?
Does anyone know, from amongst the huge amount of “information” out there, what the opposition leader’s political leanings were, and the circumstances of the pilot’s family “leaving” the family home?
#65
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 312
Re: What's your theory?
There is definitely, definitely something suspicious with the cargo.
#66
Forum Regular
Joined: May 2013
Location: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 51
Re: What's your theory?
Latest I've read it it was the co pilots voice that radioed in the final message.
#67
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 312
Re: What's your theory?
Will be interesting to see if he usually signed off messages like that, or if this was thought to be a code of some sort that they are in trouble.
#68
Re: What's your theory?
I think it’s extremely significant that the pilot’s family left the family home the day before the flight. I haven’t seen much written regarding that, but if “left” means a split, rather than just a few days away, then couple that with the supposition that the pilot was “incensed” by the jailing of his chum the opposition leader, and you have a potentially de-stabilised pilot.
Add to the mix that the final verbal message was, apparently, spoken calmly by the pilot after one of the comms systems had been disabled (which he would have known about), and it suggests that he was rational and in control, but de-stabilised.
If he had planned things in advance, was his family’s departure a manifestation of his (growing) instability? Presumably he also knew when the opposition leader’s case was to be heard. That leads to the possibility that he’d planned things beforehand in anticipation of the opposition leader losing his case.
That, of course, raises the question of what it was he’d planned. Suicide + homicide, on a grand and public scale to draw attention to the problems he perceived in Malaysia’s political and social situation—but if so, why not make the crash itself high-profile? Or taking the plane to a pre-arranged location, presumably in a country sympathetic to his socio-political leanings—but that doesn’t add up either, because any such country would likely be western-leaning, and therefore unlikely to be complicit in the plan.
So that suggests that it wasn’t planned, at least not in detail. Did the court case tip him over the edge, and once airborne he decided to do something dramatic? But—and as with the other scenarios—what about the co-pilot? Did the pilot somehow disable him, lock the cockpit door (in an emergency, surely the crew have access?), and then have sole control? But that raises the question—as do the other scenarios—of why there was no mobile phone contact from either passengers or other crew to suggest something was wrong.
So then we’re down the route of all bar the pilot (and any accomplices) being incapacitated—can the pilot achieve that, and still retain control?
Does anyone know, from amongst the huge amount of “information” out there, what the opposition leader’s political leanings were, and the circumstances of the pilot’s family “leaving” the family home?
Add to the mix that the final verbal message was, apparently, spoken calmly by the pilot after one of the comms systems had been disabled (which he would have known about), and it suggests that he was rational and in control, but de-stabilised.
If he had planned things in advance, was his family’s departure a manifestation of his (growing) instability? Presumably he also knew when the opposition leader’s case was to be heard. That leads to the possibility that he’d planned things beforehand in anticipation of the opposition leader losing his case.
That, of course, raises the question of what it was he’d planned. Suicide + homicide, on a grand and public scale to draw attention to the problems he perceived in Malaysia’s political and social situation—but if so, why not make the crash itself high-profile? Or taking the plane to a pre-arranged location, presumably in a country sympathetic to his socio-political leanings—but that doesn’t add up either, because any such country would likely be western-leaning, and therefore unlikely to be complicit in the plan.
So that suggests that it wasn’t planned, at least not in detail. Did the court case tip him over the edge, and once airborne he decided to do something dramatic? But—and as with the other scenarios—what about the co-pilot? Did the pilot somehow disable him, lock the cockpit door (in an emergency, surely the crew have access?), and then have sole control? But that raises the question—as do the other scenarios—of why there was no mobile phone contact from either passengers or other crew to suggest something was wrong.
So then we’re down the route of all bar the pilot (and any accomplices) being incapacitated—can the pilot achieve that, and still retain control?
Does anyone know, from amongst the huge amount of “information” out there, what the opposition leader’s political leanings were, and the circumstances of the pilot’s family “leaving” the family home?
#69
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 312
Re: What's your theory?
I agree Alexa. I think they know exactly where it is...........
#70
Re: What's your theory?
Maybe. I just think this whole thing is very odd. Nothing makes sense. The pieces of news thrown out to the public do not fit in any way. Nothing adds up. and that what seems to be in obvious need to be followed up on is not..or is discarded . Or at least the public is made to believe that.
Something is very fishy. And I am most certainly not one of those conspiracy people. But this one is just too blatant.
For some reason I have the feeling this plane is just sitting somewhere...and hopefully everybody is alive and as well as possible in such a situation.
Something is very fishy. And I am most certainly not one of those conspiracy people. But this one is just too blatant.
For some reason I have the feeling this plane is just sitting somewhere...and hopefully everybody is alive and as well as possible in such a situation.
#71
Hit 16's
Joined: Mar 2010
Location: Of all the gin joints, in all the towns, in all the world, she walks into mine
Posts: 13,112
Re: What's your theory?
Maybe. I just think this whole thing is very odd. Nothing makes sense. The pieces of news thrown out to the public do not fit in any way. Nothing adds up. and that what seems to be in obvious need to be followed up on is not..or is discarded . Or at least the public is made to believe that.
Something is very fishy. And I am most certainly not one of those conspiracy people. But this one is just too blatant.
For some reason I have the feeling this plane is just sitting somewhere...and hopefully everybody is alive and as well as possible in such a situation.
Something is very fishy. And I am most certainly not one of those conspiracy people. But this one is just too blatant.
For some reason I have the feeling this plane is just sitting somewhere...and hopefully everybody is alive and as well as possible in such a situation.
#73
Re: What's your theory?
i.e. "they" being the Malaysian government (and/or military), or that/those of one of the other countries involved. I can understand that a cover-up could start, but I cannot understand how one will subsequently be revealed and admitted, given the almost-global involvement in the search--the culprits would be made to look stupid, untrustworthy, callous, deceitful etc etc beyond belief and beyond redemption. So if the plane is in the custody of one of the countries involved, it will be "buried", along with those on board, for ever. Horrible, but if there's a national or military involvement, they're way, way past the point of no return.
All I can come up with is that there was something or someone on that plane that somebody wanted for some reason.
#74
Soupy twist
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,271
Re: What's your theory?
On the basis that the plane couldn't be used as a weapon - it would be spotted and shot down long before it reached any major target, there's certainly no way it could be used to attack the West - we were speculating at lunch today that maybe, making it disappear permanently and mysteriously was the entire purpose of the exercise.
After all, isn't that actually a scarier thought than a conventional hijacking or bombing? That a commercial jet full of passengers could just vanish, with no closure at all for anybody? Although it has to be said, if a terrorist group was involved, it seems unlikely that they would be able to resist publicly gloating about what they'd done. What's the point of a terrorist act that doesn't bring public attention to the terrorists' cause?
After all, isn't that actually a scarier thought than a conventional hijacking or bombing? That a commercial jet full of passengers could just vanish, with no closure at all for anybody? Although it has to be said, if a terrorist group was involved, it seems unlikely that they would be able to resist publicly gloating about what they'd done. What's the point of a terrorist act that doesn't bring public attention to the terrorists' cause?
Last edited by Eeyore; Mar 17th 2014 at 3:09 pm.
#75
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 312
Re: What's your theory?
I can't make head nor tail of all the satellite/acars/ping talk that is now on that forum.... it's making my head hurt.