Terrorism - 747 Crash in Dubai

arsenal · Post by **arsenal** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 8:38 am

Nobody in the Media seem to be making a link to the UPS 747 crash in Dubai on September 3rd 2010. Talked about here:

viewtopic.php?f=54&t=67388&start=0&hilit=dubai

and

http://www.emirates247.com/news/ups-pro ... 1-1.302509

Seems to me that possibly one of Al Queda's Mail Bombs may have already worked?

v6g · Post by **v6g** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:12 am

Yes - the silence on that crash and the comparison is kinda deafening isn't it?

5x5 · Post by **5x5** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 10:14 am

Awesome - I guess the terrorists win either way. They come out and admit they did it, everyone is scared. Nothing is officially said or speculated about - it must be a coverup and everyone is scared.

Not every bush hides a terrorist.

arsenal · Post by **arsenal** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 10:41 am

UK says Yemen bomb could have brought down plane
http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/i ... 7320101030

Still not mentioned that just over a month ago a cargo 747 crashed coming out of Dubai.

Lithium-Ion batteries could be the problem, but I'd be double checking whether or not there were packages from Yemen.

bizjets101 · Post by **bizjets101** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 11:53 am

"Investigation of the crash is still underway, and the cause of the crash has not been determined," the FAA says. "We are aware, however, that the plane's cargo did include large quantities of lithium batteries and believe it prudent to advise operators of that fact."

Click Here for FAA safety alert issued after UPS crash.

scm · Post by **scm** » Sat Oct 30, 2010 12:01 pm

The terror of terrorism is in its unpredictability and imagination. And let's not forget terrorism is simply a tactic.
The future could see "terrorists" pursuing easier alternatives than aviation.

Besides, the US is the worlds biggest arms dealer. Only terror tactics can work against
an entity that large.

Energy security? Food and water security? I want those discussed in the news...

There may be more conventional explanations for the crash.

Go Guns · Post by **Go Guns** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 8:12 am

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... sh-in.html

DATE:31/10/10
SOURCE:Air Transport Intelligence news
Inquiry rules out explosive link to UPS 747 crash in Dubai
By David Kaminski-Morrow

Investigators are not linking last month's fatal loss of a UPS Boeing 747-400 freighter in Dubai to the recent discovery of explosive devices hidden in cargo consignments on the carrier's aircraft.
The United Arab Emirates' General Civil Aviation Authority insists that it has "eliminated" the possibility of an on-board explosion during the 3 September accident.
Both pilots on the 747 were killed after attempting to return to Dubai, the flight's departure point, after a fire alert and the spread of smoke into the cockpit while in cruise over Bahrain.
The GCAA states that its conclusions followed a "detailed on-site investigation" of the wreckage of the jet after it crashed and disintegrated outside of Dubai, as well as an examination of information from the cockpit-voice and flight-data recorders.
"There was no presence of acoustic evidence or any forensic signature supporting the detonation of an explosive device," it says.
It adds that it is still trying to establish the cause of the fire on board the aircraft. The US FAA drew up new procedures for handling lithium batteries - which had been part of the cargo - following the accident.
UPS suspended all services from Yemen following the discovery of an explosive device at East Midlands Airport in the UK which had been sourced from the Middle Eastern state.
A second device was discovered in Dubai after it was carried from the Yemeni capital Sana'a, via Doha, on board Qatar Airways services.
Qatar Airways has admitted that its aircraft transported the device, but stresses that the responsibility for inspecting and screening cargo lies with the state of origin, under the Chicago Convention.
"Furthermore, the explosives discovered were of a sophisticated nature whereby they could not be detected by x-ray screening or trained sniffer dogs," adds the carrier. "The explosives were only discovered after an intelligence tip off."
In a statement the UAE's GCAA says the package was seized at Dubai after authorities "grew suspicious" and laboratory tests subsequently confirmed that it contained explosives. The GCAA adds that it is "co-ordinating with competent authorities in other countries about the package and circumstances surrounding it"

Changes in Latitudes · Sun Oct 31, 2010 8:39 am

It could have sparked a few ideas in the minds of a few screwballs in Yemen, however.

Hawkerflyer · Post by **Hawkerflyer** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 9:56 am

What about the Air France 330 that went missing over the ocean? Yes, I know "bad pitot tubes"

bizjets101 · Post by **bizjets101** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 12:20 pm

Great - the leading suspect is a Saudi born national

Good thing (The U.N. aka USA) nailed Iraq and Afghanistan - that'll teach those Saudi's not to mess with America!!!

SkyNews Update same bomb maker suspected that put together the 'underwear' bomb on the NorthWest flight last year!!

Moose47 · Post by **Moose47** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 1:38 pm

<<<bizjets101
Post subject: Re: Terrorism - 747 Crash in Dubai
New postPosted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 7:20 pm

Good thing (The U.N. aka USA) nailed Iraq and Afghanistan - that'll teach those Saudi's not to mess with America!!!>>>

You obviously do not know the United Nothing that well. The U. S. does not have that much leverage with the dysfunctional organization. Many Americans I served with would gladly welcome the relocation to another country.

I would like to see the U. S. tell the Saudis to go f%&# themselves and leave that country on its own as well.

bizjets101 · Post by **bizjets101** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 2:07 pm

Rather than stoop to swearing to get my point across, nor shall I take a swipe at you.

The UN comment was 'sarcasm', and America uses the UN very well as an excuse to invade countries at will.

Canada's involvement in Afghanistan is a UN action, but directed and negotiated by American politics, and came from negotiations to keep us out of Iraq - considered at the time, the lessor of two evils.

KK7 · Post by **KK7** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 3:15 pm

bizjets101 wrote:Rather than stoop to swearing to get my point across, nor shall I take a swipe at you.

The UN comment was 'sarcasm', and America uses the UN very well as an excuse to invade countries at will.

Canada's involvement in Afghanistan is a UN action, but directed and negotiated by American politics, and came from negotiations to keep us out of Iraq - considered at the time, the lessor of two evils.

Nope, the recent (ie, last decade) activity in Iraq was not part of the UN or NATO, it was the US and it's "willing" allies. They defied the UN who was preaching diplomacy, and went in anyways.

Afghanistan was also not a UN initiative, it was NATO. The UN has no mission in Afghanistan with the exception WFP and other relief organizations. But the DPKO is not in Afghanistan. NATO is.

bizjets101 · Post by **bizjets101** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 3:23 pm

Wow, hit a nerve.

It was the US using the UN sanctions to edge their way in, where it is today in nothing more than one giant guagmire.

You can twist it any way to conform to your belief's but it was the USA using the pretense of UN resolutions that opened the door for WAR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nat ... e_Iraq_War

As for the topic of the thread, tonight's news states the person under arrest in Yemen has been freed and is no longer a suspect.

As for Afghanistan, UN was in fact in there, as you state NATO - NATO assumed control of the ISAF in 2003 - from the UN Security Council.

Call it what you want - the players and politics don't change.

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 3:46 pm

this whole ridiculous thread is because of one fear-inspiring, baseless assumption...

arsenal puts up some asinine rumor that UPS was brought down by a terrorist bomb and people start jumping on the bandwagon. changes in lat comes in with the idea that 'screwballs' in yemen needed to hear about a plane crash to come up with the idea to do it themselves. hawkerflyer jumps in with more unfounded rumors...hey maybe terrorists planted that ice in buffalo that brought colgan down too! and maybe the storm in yyz was a nefarious weather-bomb made by bin laden himself, air france should probably sue the terrorizers.

get a grip...or do you enjoy living in fear?

Hawkerflyer · Post by **Hawkerflyer** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:01 pm

Tim wrote:this whole ridiculous thread is because of one fear-inspiring, baseless assumption...

arsenal puts up some asinine rumor that UPS was brought down by a terrorist bomb and people start jumping on the bandwagon. changes in lat comes in with the idea that 'screwballs' in yemen needed to hear about a plane crash to come up with the idea to do it themselves. hawkerflyer jumps in with more unfounded rumors...hey maybe terrorists planted that ice in buffalo that brought colgan down too! and maybe the storm in yyz was a nefarious weather-bomb made by bin laden himself, air france should probably sue the terrorizers.

get a grip...or do you enjoy living in fear?

Sorry Tim, the only thing I fear is . Norris.

bizjets101 · Post by **bizjets101** » Sun Oct 31, 2010 7:35 pm

: chuck_norris.jpg (37.11 KiB) Viewed 4287 times

arsenal · Post by **arsenal** » Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:55 am

Tim,

Do you think it is ridiculous to think that the 747 in Dubai could have been taken down by a bomb?

We now know that they can get them through security onto cargo aircraft, even combi's.

With what is left of the 747 in Dubai, I find it hard to believe that they can rule it out so easily.

It could be because of Lithium Batteries, but there are millions of them being shipped and haven't been the cause of an accident yet.

I just hope they find the true cause. I'm not trying to drum up 'fear'.

alctel · Post by **alctel** » Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:00 am

Rest assured if it really was a terrorist attack then someone would have claimed it - after all that's the whole point, no reason to bomb something if no-one knows you did it or why!

The fact that even one of the smaller groups didn't try to jump on the bandwagon and claim it suggests that it was an accident, and was no way intentional.

Tim · Post by **Tim** » Mon Nov 01, 2010 5:11 pm

arsenal wrote:
With what is left of the 747 in Dubai, I find it hard to believe that they can rule it out so easily.

why do you find it so hard to believe? please tell me of the extent of your crash-investigation training that brought you to your conclusion. or maybe you could take me through your line of deductive reasoning and critical thinking. perhaps you could tell me what doesn't add up about the official report. one thing is certain: you don't know much about chemistry or fire forensics or you would know that bombs and batteries are different things and leave different signatures and burn patterns. hell watching the discovery channel could teach you that. people who use fact and science (as opposed to your rumors) can tell the difference. quite easily in fact. second-year university easy.

you are arguing that your idea has more merit than the same science that managed to put swiss air 111 back together from 1 inch square pieces that were dredged up from the bottom of the ocean and nail down exactly where and how the fire started and propagated.

that is my point.

it's not the notion that a bomb may have brought a plane down. any crash COULD have been caused by a bomb...that is until it's proven otherwise like this one was. my problem isn't with the idea of a bomb, it's that you have no f*cking clue what youre talking about. you are trying to convince others that you little idea is a fact or at the very least likely, yet offer no evidence other than your UNeducated guess. meanwhile, people who are highly trained to investigate accidents have come to a different conclusion, which you dismiss.

you're drumming up something, and if it ain't fear it's ignorance.