Posted on 06/10/2009 5:11:28 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Two passengers with names linked to Islamic terrorism were on board the Air France flight that crashed in the Atlantic Ocean, killing all 228 on board, it has emerged.
French secret servicemen established the connection while working through the list of those who boarded the doomed Airbus in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on May 31.
Agents are now trying to establish dates of birth for the two dead passengers, and family connections.
There is a possibility that the name similarities are simply a "macabre coincidence," the source added, but the revelation is still being "taken very seriously."
A source working for the French security services told Paris weekly L’Express that the link was "highly significant."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Uhm, the kill dozens of U.S. soldiers every month. Your theory is idiotic, to say the least.
or C) test if the explosive material is detectable by dogs, etc.
It is clear that there was lots of bad weather in the area. Planes avoid the bad cells. If this one didn’t then it would make sense that it had a different outcome.
There is no evidence, if this was a bomb, that Muslims were involved. Is there?
Why can't we let the facts decide? Just as there's the side that claims there's never any terrorism (because that would mean airline safety is at fault) there's the side here that so desperately wants everything to be terrorism (justifies the 'round em up' mentality). So far now we have a circumstantial link to terrorism, but we need physical evidence. Nothing can be ruled out yet, just as nothing can be pointed as THE cause, just yet.
Thanks for your response.
I fail to see what is so idiotic about someone who hurts us not wanting us to know who they are? Hit and run tactics are classic military approaches by a number of cultures/countries, especially the Arabs. This also seems to be a valid response given our recent approach (Bush Doctrine) to seek out and destroy those who have hurt us.
schu
From the Wikipedia article on the Philippine Air 443 bombing, which killed the person sitting in the seat where it was planted:
The seat where the bomb exploded (seat 26K) would normally be above the center wing fuel tank on an older Boeing 747. However, on the SAS Version model of the 747, used in this flight, seat 26K was two seats forward of the tank. If the bomb exploded in a horizontal manner it would have punctured the aircraft skin, causing explosive decompression. Instead, the explosion occurred in a vertical manner running front-to-back on the plane; [Japanese businessman Haruki] Ikegami's body took the brunt of the force, people immediately in front and behind were injured, and the sudden vertical expansion of the cabin severed steel cables controlling the 747's rudder and elevator located in the aircraft ceiling. The bomb also severed the copilot's control cable for the right aileron....
United States prosecutors said the device was a "Mark II" "microbomb" constructed using Casio digital watches as described in Phase I of The Bojinka Plot of which this was a test. On Flight 434, Yousef used one tenth of the explosive power he planned to use on eleven U.S. airliners in January 1995. The bomb was, or at least all of its components were, designed to slip through airport security checks undetected. The explosive used was liquid nitroglycerin, which was disguised as a bottle of contact lens fluid. Other ingredients included glycerin, nitrate, sulfuric acid, and minute concentrations of nitrobenzene, silver azide, and liquid acetone. The wires he used were hidden in the heel of his shoe. At that time, metal detectors used in airports did not go down far enough to detect anything there.
AF 447 took unusually long to die for a bombing. Usually, a bomb causes instantaneous breakup, leaving no time for distress signals, automated or otherwise. However, a weak bomb such as the one described above might be consistent with what's known so far.
and they were allowed on the plane why?
“Terrorists” attacking a French airline departing from Brazil and doing it anonymously out of fear of US reprisals. Whatever you say.
Please read my posts. It is not my theory that the flight was brought down by terrorists, to the best of my knowledge the cause is unknown. The posts were in response to those who suggested that it could not be terrorism because no one or group had claimed responsibility. The point is that there are plenty of examples of terrorism that no one takes responsibility for and that this makes sense given the recent responses to terrorist activities.
My opinion on the reason AF 447 went down was not part of these posts.
schu
When Ron Brown’s plane flew into the side of a mountain, a sever storm was touted to cover up the moving of the beacon.
There was no storm, the weather was mild in that case.
What are some examples of Islamic terrorism that was disguised and where they didn’t take credit?
Look at all the mileage Mohammad and his little Jamaican buddy got out of the DC sniper shootings before they were caught by a law enforcement officer who didn't believe the "angry white guy in a white van" theory.
I have my doubts about it being terrorism myself, but I can think of one logical explanation as to why nobody would claim credit.
If this was a test to see if a particular method would work, and if they had a bunch more ready to go for essentially a recycling of the Bojinka plot, then they wouldn't want anyone to figure out what happened until after the main event, which would be a large number of planes going down over the ocean at the same time.
See post #35 for a short list.
schu
It's possible he's brain-damaged from excessive drinking. Or going senile. Early dementia. Then again gap-toothed hillbilly drunkards telling raunchy jokes are not entirely unknown.
Agreed. Why wait until you are halfway across the Atlantic and in a thunderstorm?
Wonder if they can trace the mosque they attended.....SOme mosque produce NO terrorist, others.....
I know when news breaks, it is hard to keep up with the latest updates, but I am amazed with those who latch onto these little tidbits that get “leaked.”
Odds are that you have as much chance of getting killed by a malfunction as a terrorist, and pilot error might even be more likely.
However, for the manufacturer of the aircraft, a fatal problem with the aircraft is more devastating in terms of retrofits and lost orders.
For the carrier, a question of maintennance just might make their ticket sales drop.
Terrorism, and the Government/airport security gets the blame, without necessarily impacting the carrier or the manufacturer anywhere near the way that a problem directly traceable to either of them would.
So, economically, a terrorist attack would be less likely to be as economically devastating as a problem with the design or maintenance/operation of the aircraft, problems which affect far more than the airport of origin of that one flight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.