MAS370 - Was it a Remote Hijacking?

by fulltimestudent 23 Replies latest social current

  • fulltimestudent
    fulltimestudent

    Professor Kevin Barrett is not exactly the most trusted commentator you could find, but that, of course, just maybe because, there are people who want his views on 9/11 to be ignored.

    Anyway he's advanced a theory that the missing Malaysian Airlines plane was remotely hi-jacked. In the absence of other evidence, it just maybe what happened. To consider whether it did happen, we need to ask why it may have been hijacked? The only reason I could see is if there was someone on the plane that someone else wanted out of the way .

    Now I sound like a conspiracy theorist !!! (sardonic grin)

    This interview is from the Radio Voice of Russia. (and I know what you're thinking).

    Reference: http://voiceofrussia.com/2014_03_22/Malaysian-MH370-may-have-been-remotely-hijacked-Prof-Kevin-Barrett-3666/

    In part Barrett says:

    Robles: For listeners can you tell us exactly what you mean by 'remote hijacking'?

    Barrett: Yeah, there is a system for taking over a plane from a location that is not on the plane. You can either do it from the ground or you can do it from another aircraft. And there was a system developed called The Flight Termination System developed by a company run by Dov Zakheim. Dov Zakheim is a radical Zionist who was head of the, he was the controller of the Pentagon, in charge of the Pentagon budget up through 9-11. And he managed to lose $2.3 trillion of the Pentagon's money during that period.

    Zakheim's company created The Flight Termination System, which allows you to take over planes from either the ground or from another plane. So for various reasons researchers looking into 9-11 think that the most likely hypothesis about what happened that day was that commercial airliners were remotely hijacked by people using Dov Zakheim's Flight Termination System, or something like it. They were probably landed at military bases, and drones were then used to attack the targets. So the planes that we saw flying into the World Trade Center were almost certainly remote-controlled drones.

    This Malaysian 370 plane also appears to have been remotely hijacked because all of the systems stopped working, the pilots were unable to squawk an emergency request for help, and as I said that only takes one second. So if anything happens a pilot always squawks that, and there is even a code for hijacking which takes a couple of seconds to squawk.

    There was no squawking any code, there was the transponders just “boom” went off, and then the plane turned and flew off and disappeared, just like on 9-11. So I think the most likely hypothesis would be that Malaysian Flight 370 was remotely hijacked by a person or persons unknown, and the group that we know is in control of this technology and using if for nefarious purposes is the group that used it on 9-11.

    Robles: What would be the purpose then here?

    Barrett: Well the spare parts of a 777 aircraft are apparently worth over $100 million so that might provide some motivation, and there may have been people on that plane who somebody wanted to interrogate or get rid of. It is hard to say. I don't really know what the motive would be at this point but we know that quite often intelligence agencies cause plane crashes in order to kill targeted individuals who are on the plane.

    Robles: Sure, and it could be one person, right?

    Barrett: Yeah, they'll take down a whole plane for one person. I've interviewed Saint John Hunt whose father Howard Hunt was a high level CIA agent, and his mom Dorothy Hunt was killed in a staged plane crash by CIA people. Likewise I've John Perkins on my radio show, the Economic Hit Man, who's talked about how his colleagues killed many heads of state in sporadic [6: 59] plane crashes.

  • JeffT
    JeffT

    Complete crap. There is no way to take control of an airplane from some place else. The control systems don't have external inputs.

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    Can't you people stop with the 9/11 crazy talk? I don't believe the content of the post. No way.

    B/c of 9/11, the first thing I worried about was the plane being used by terrorists to come after me (and a lot of other people). The 9/11 museum is opening this month. Freedom Tower is up. I want to be certain that that plane is down and down permnanently. Random stuff happens in life. Battles are lost b/c of weather patterns. People meet by chance. Luck exists. I notice that conspiracy nuts are never in for one catastrophe. Things happen.

    The only conspiracy I feel happened was MLK's murder. He was going to unite blacks and white labor. James Earl Ray had no funds for his extensive travel.

  • fulltimestudent
    fulltimestudent

    Interesting, if predictable responses, but note:

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/465126/Missing-Malaysia-Airlines-plane-may-have-been-cyber-hijacked-using-mobile-phone

    British anti-terror expert Dr Sally Leivesley said last night: “It might well be the world’s first cyber hijack.”

    Dr Leivesley, a former Home Office scientific adviser, said the hackers could change the plane’s speed, altitude and direction by sending radio signals to its flight management system. It could then be landed or made to crash by remote control. Possible culprits include criminal gangs, terrorists or a foreign power.

    The chilling new theory emerged as the hunt for the missing Malaysia Airways Boeing 777 with 239 people on board became the biggest air-sea search in history.

    More than a week after Flight MH370 vanished en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, Malaysian police began searching the captain and co-pilot’s homes as it was finally confirmed that the disappearance was a “deliberate act”.

    Dr Leivesley, who runs her own company training businesses and governments to counter terrorist attacks, told the Sunday Express she believes a framework of malicious codes, triggered by a mobile phone, would have been able to override the aircraft’s security software.

    “There appears to be an element of planning from someone with a very sophisticated systems engineering understanding,” she said.

    “This is a very early version of what I would call a smart plane, a fly-by-wire aircraft controlled by electronic signals.

    “It is looking more and more likely that the control of some systems was taken over in a deceptive manner, either manually, so someone sitting in a seat overriding the autopilot, or via a remote device turning off or overwhelming the systems.

    “A mobile phone could have been used to do so or a USB stick.

    “When the plane is air-side, you can insert a set of commands and codes that may initiate, on signal, a set of processes.”

    Dr Leivesley said the hacking threat was laid bare late last year at a science conference in China.

  • Finkelstein
    Finkelstein

    My recent evaluation of this incident leaves me with the notion that the plane had been taken

    over by an on board hijacker and perhaps tried to fly the plane themselves but failed in doing so.

    .

    Its unlikely that both the pilot and co-pilot were in cahoots on a suicide mission.

    The turning off of radio communication is another aspect that supports a hijacking theory.

    Its highly unlikely that if the plane had gone through a failer in its flight control electronics

    that the pilots wouldn't recognize this and fly the plane without navigation assistance.

    There are numerous battery back ups on planes of this design.

  • DJS
    DJS

    FullTime

    You make some good posts. This isn't one of them. You are risking not being taken seriously for this and a few other recent posts. Conduct a bit more research and you will see that this isn't feasible/doable.

  • Defianttruth
    Defianttruth

    I am now dumber for having read this. So, let me get this straight. Some one remotely hacked the SAS (stability agumentation system),AFCS (airframe flight control system), autopilot, or fadec(Full authority digital engine controls) To crash the airplane. First off an airplane can be flown without any of these systems. All the pilots would have to do would be to turn of the systems. They could have done this with the power buttons, fuses,or control buses. It might not be comfortable but pilots train for these types of emergencies all the time. These systems are isolated and protected from each other. No way this could happen period. Worst case scenario would be to turn them off and fly anyway. (All except the fadec which I'm sure is a redunant system on this aircraft.). honestly my money would be on the zombie theory before this.

  • Witness My Fury
    Witness My Fury

    The mayday switch is right next to the switch that turns the transponder off apparently,....doh!

    No I dont buy into any conspiracy nonsense about this plane, it's in the sea miles from anywhere and may never be found at all.

  • barry
    barry

    I have a radio control system for aircraft and I have been trying to over ride the control systems of aircraft flying overhead all morning and it doesn't work. I decided to try when I first read this thread. The aircraft are too far away my 2.4 gig radio only has a 4km range.

  • villagegirl
    villagegirl

    Zionist conspiracies ? Really ? or it could be really badly trained pilots, and the plane

    went down over the ocean in some very deep water, like the Mariana Trench, near

    Guam, the Mariana Trench, which is over 1,500 miles long, 69 miles wide,

    and almost seven miles deep, the bottom of the trench exerts a pressure of

    15,750 psi which is over 1000 times the standard atmospheric pressure at sea level

    and nothing that has gone down in it, has ever been found. Just a thought.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit