모두
← Back to Squawk list
Missing Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 is unlikely to be a terrorist act says Interpol
Interpol does not believe the disappearance of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200ER was the result of a terrorist attack, its head said on Tuesday Mar. 11. Interpol (International Police) secretary general Ronald Noble also suggested that two men who boarded using stolen passports and had aroused suspicion may have been smuggled by traffickers, reported Reuters. The plane, with 239 people on board, has been missing for four days and a search involving crews from 10 countries widened on Tuesday… (airguideonline.com) 기타...
Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
question ? how long would it take you to find a penny in a cloudy Olympic size pool , finding that plane is 100 times harder .sorry to say ....
First, find which swimming pool to look.
Pick a scenario any scenario you are just as likely to be correct as Interpol, CIA, FBI and CSIS. It's all based on theories and probabilities, not any given amount of fact. Until the plane is actually found and the crash is properly investigated will anyone truly know.
The swimming pool theory is pretty valid.
The swimming pool theory is pretty valid.
Not terrorist act? Maybe semantics are in play here. Is piracy for profit (monetary or other valuation) considered terrorism.
According to the FBI website terrorism includes, among other features, acts that:
"Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping." http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/terrorism-definition
As more information dribbles out, it appears increasingly likely that the aircraft may well have landed somewhere. As such, I infer an intent for further use for some, as yet, unknown purpose. If that further purpose is, in itself, a terrorist act, then the hijacking would be covered under the terrorism definition.
What is more worrisome to me is the possibility that this has been carried out by some nation/state as a preliminary act of war. The players and adversaries are completely unknown.
According to the FBI website terrorism includes, among other features, acts that:
"Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping." http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/terrorism-definition
As more information dribbles out, it appears increasingly likely that the aircraft may well have landed somewhere. As such, I infer an intent for further use for some, as yet, unknown purpose. If that further purpose is, in itself, a terrorist act, then the hijacking would be covered under the terrorism definition.
What is more worrisome to me is the possibility that this has been carried out by some nation/state as a preliminary act of war. The players and adversaries are completely unknown.
Yet just another scenario that is as credible as any other.
That Interpol believes that the two people currently identified as Irani flying with stolen passports were not terrorists. Based upon that they are concluding this was not a terrorist attack according to a source. That does not eliminate the possibility of another group that were terrorists- it may just mean the Iranis picked the wrong flight.
Then again, it may be that Interpol is being deceptive. It wouldn't be the first organization to do so about this flight.
Then again, it may be that Interpol is being deceptive. It wouldn't be the first organization to do so about this flight.
