• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Air France a terrorist attack after all?

celticlord said:
We cannot rule out the possibility of God sitting at his computer pressing the "Smite" button either.

Such is the problem with speculation in the absence of hard data.
Click to expand...

Lets not let him escape this time..
 
Arch Enemy said:
You would think that if it were related to an Organization they would have issued a statement already.
Click to expand...

Like Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie ?

//////////////////


Even the French Ministry said throwing such a possibility off the table at this stage is not only reckless but foolish.

Some of you are going to look like real asshats if it does turn out to be shown to be some Islamic Terrorist act.
 
Last edited:
Triad said:
Like Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie?
Click to expand...

uh..yeah?

Pan Am Flight 103 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As to date, no word of responsibility. Furthermore, last I checked, no indication of explosive related damage to the parts recovered. Appears just to be physical damage from the impact and storm.

Some of you are going to look like real asshats if it does turn out to be shown to be some Islamic Terrorist act.
Click to expand...

So terrorists who want to kill lots of people and have lots of people watching are suddenly...silent? :confused:
 
Furthermore, if the crew of the plane tried to crash the plane, why did they change flight paths to turn around and return to the airport? There's no way they could have gotten back to the airport to subdue the terrorists in time. It would have been much simplier to simple just throttle down into the ocean.

This appears to be a mechanical failure. The fact that airliners across the planet are now changing equipment believed to have cause part of the crash is further evidence.
 
And terrorism is virtually off the table:

Other causes have not been ruled out, but France's interior ministry said two passengers identified as suspicious turned out not to be a concern. The website of the French weekly L'Express had quoted a French military spokesman as saying they could have been linked to Islamic terrorism.
Click to expand...
 
Erod said:
Terror Names Linked To Doomed Flight AF 447: Two Passengers Shared Names Of Radical Muslims | World News | Sky News


So was this more than just a pilot error or bad storm? Something about it has been fishy from the outset.

I really hope they can find those black boxes.
Click to expand...

This has been my prediction on this forum from the beginning. What is not clear to me is why all the agencies and Governments involved REFUSE to even consider this as a plausible possibility with all the other absurd guessing of what could have happened to this aircraft.

Fact; a Lufthansa airbus preceded this flight by a few minutes flying through the same weather...no issues. A Lufthansa airbus flight following this flight by a few minutes did not report any problems.

FACT: A terrorist threat had been received days before and a previous Air France B777 flight was carefully inspected and cleared to leave.

FACT: A few known terrorist suspects on the flights passenger list.

So it begs the question; why are the world's Governments so desperate to assert that this could not be a terrorist act? Why not at least admit it could have been a factor instead of all the other wild speculations about what may have happened?

It also begs the question that when I mentioned this on another thread, why did so many of DP’s members assault me for even providing the speculation that it was a bomb?
 
Last edited:
obvious Child said:
Furthermore, if the crew of the plane tried to crash the plane, why did they change flight paths to turn around and return to the airport? There's no way they could have gotten back to the airport to subdue the terrorists in time. It would have been much simplier to simple just throttle down into the ocean.

This appears to be a mechanical failure. The fact that airliners across the planet are now changing equipment believed to have cause part of the crash is further evidence.
Click to expand...

Based on what information? Do you even know anything about flying and what a pitot tube does? The notion that the cause of the crash was a malfunctioned pitot tube on this aircraft is beyond stupid. Did you also know there is MORE than one on the airbus 330? There are THREE and they have heating elements to remove the existence of icing. In addition, the replacement of the Airbus pitot tubes was not a mandatory requirement as it posed no operational threat.

During flight training, pilots are trained to LAND the aircraft without the benefit of the air speed indicator; this would include training for a tiny private plane. I have done this on many occasions for practice.

It's absurd to assume that a professional pilot would have been so incompetent that losing his airspeed indicator would have caused massive disorientation resulting in the breakup of this aircraft.

:roll:
 
Truth Detector said:
It's absurd to assume that a professional pilot would have been so incompetent that losing his airspeed indicator would have caused massive disorientation resulting in the breakup of this aircraft.

:roll:
Click to expand...

Professional or non-professional, people are humans and make mistakes.

Instrumentation loss can be catastrophic under the right circumstances, it isn't a simple matter of incompetence or lack therefore. There have been several crashes recently that - upon investigation - were caused (in part at least) due to a bad altimeter.

There are many more cases where what would seem like a simple matter of instrumentation failue really set off a chain of events resulting in an aircraft's loss. Youtube some of those "seconds from disaster" videos on major airliner crashes, you will find plenty of examples..
 
Truth Detector said:
FACT: A few known terrorist suspects on the flights passenger list.
Click to expand...

Did you not read the post directly above yours?

Source [Mail Online | Two passengers on doomed Air France jet cleared of links to Islamic terrorism]

Two men aboard doomed Air France Flight 447 have been cleared of having links to Islamic terrorism, it has been revealed.

Posthumous security checks into the backgrounds of the men found that they solely ‘shared the same name’ as known Islamic radicals, even though their bodies have not yet been found.
Click to expand...
 
Travelsonic said:
Professional or non-professional, people are humans and make mistakes.
Click to expand...

First question; are you a pilot?

Travelsonic said:
Instrumentation loss can be catastrophic under the right circumstances, it isn't a simple matter of incompetence or lack therefore. There have been several crashes recently that - upon investigation - were caused (in part at least) due to a bad altimeter.
Click to expand...

There is a HUGE difference between a faulty altimeter setting and air speed indication. But that stated, a faulty altimeter reading at altitude is pretty meaningless until you start the landing over topography.

Travelsonic said:
There are many more cases where what would seem like a simple matter of instrumentation failue really set off a chain of events resulting in an aircraft's loss. Youtube some of those "seconds from disaster" videos on major airliner crashes, you will find plenty of examples..
Click to expand...

I challenge you to find ONE instance where a commercial flight accident was the result of a faulty air speed indicator or was the result of a chain of events that caused a catastrophic breakup of the aircraft in high altitude flight.

If you do, please post it here because all the information I have read on civil accidents do not include ONE regarding faulty air speed readings.

Again, it begs the question; why is terrorism, which is more plausible than all the other explanations, OFF the table for all intents and purposes of the story line here?
 
Last edited:
Truth Detector said:
First question; are you a pilot?
Click to expand...

The statement you posed that question to is common sense.

I am going to start taking formal lessons once laser eye surgery for strabismus is perfected, I have the training books though, and have read up extensively on flying, and major aviation disasters.

I challenge you to find ONE instance where a commercial flight accident was the result of a faulty air speed indicator or was the result of a chain of events that caused a catastrophic breakup of the aircraft in high altitude flight.
Click to expand...

[emphasis mine]

The de Havilland DH-106 Comet. Elba, Italy, and Stromboli, Italy crashes

Granted that was the design of the aircraft, but it was a chain of events (fraturing/cracking/fatigue) leading to a catastrophic breakup of the aircraft in flight.

Also:

Even after millions of flights and scores of serious failures that have helped engineers build safer craft, commercial airliners still occasionally face an improbable chain of events that leads to disaster in a way no designer anticipated.
Click to expand...

LOSS OF THE SHUTTLE: THE THEORIES; Studies of Airplane Crashes Could Provide Guidance - The New York Times

Just because it never happened before doesn't make it impossible.
 
Last edited:
Truth Detector said:
At the time I posted this response, no; but that doesn't change my argument and even if these individuals are not linked to any particular group it begs the question; why is a terrorist bomb not plausible?
Click to expand...
What evidence are you privy to that hints at a terrorist bomb?
 
Truth Detector said:
At the time I posted this response, no;
Click to expand...

I see :)

but that doesn't change my argument and even if these individuals are not linked to any particular group it begs the question; why is a terrorist bomb not plausible?
Click to expand...

Based on current evidence, a terrorist attack is not a natural conclusion. If one starts with the idea that it was it's possible to find a bit of information or two to support the idea, but if one starts with the evidence it looks like mechanical failure, bad weather, and more than likely a bit of pilot error took the plane down.
 
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
First question; are you a pilot?
Travelsonic said:
Answer: irrelevant. The statement you posed that question to is common sense.

I am going to start taking formal lessons once laser eye surgery for strabismus is perfected, I have the training books though, and have read up extensively on flying, and major aviation disasters.
Click to expand...

I wish you good luck in your training.

I believe it is absolutely relevant because as a pilot, I would say I have a better understanding of in flight characteristics than you would.

Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
I challenge you to find ONE instance where a commercial flight accident was the result of a faulty air speed indicator or was the result of a chain of events that caused a catastrophic breakup of the aircraft in high altitude flight.
Travelsonic said:
The de Havilland DH-106 Comet. Elba, Italy, and Stromboli, Italy crashes

Granted that was the design of the aircraft, but it was a chain of events (fraturing/cracking/fatigue) leading to a catastrophic breakup of the aircraft in flight.
Click to expand...

This is totally unrelated to the THEORIES being given for this disaster. Comparing the Comet to a modern Airbus is like comparing a hang glider to a Cessna.

Travelsonic said:
Also:

LOSS OF THE SHUTTLE: THE THEORIES; Studies of Airplane Crashes Could Provide Guidance - The New York Times
Click to expand...

Again, how does this respond to my earlier questions to you and the absurd theories surrounding this disaster?

Travelsonic said:
Just because it never happened before doesn't make it impossible.
Click to expand...

What is amusing in this debate is that a terrorist BOMB has happened before, yet in this case we are more willing to look at all the implausible events rather than the most plausible. Why do you think that is?
 
EgoffTib said:
What evidence are you privy to that hints at a terrorist bomb?
Click to expand...

I am not privy to any evidence other than that everyone else has; and what evidence there is, it is more plausible that this was a bomb causing a catastrophic instantaneous breakup in flight at altitude than some absurd theory about pitot tubes.

That is why I keep asking the question; why is it that everyone is so desperate to avoid the most plausible theory over some absurd theory about pitot tubes?
 
Kernel Sanders said:
Based on current evidence, a terrorist attack is not a natural conclusion.
Click to expand...

I am sorry, but what current evidence would sugest that a terrorist bomb is NOT a plausible conclusion?

From what I have read and based on my knowledge as a pilot, it is the ONLY plausible one to date. All the others require the willing suspension of disbelief or some remote ONE time implausible event.

Kernel Sanders said:
If one starts with the idea that it was it's possible to find a bit of information or two to support the idea, but if one starts with the evidence it looks like mechanical failure, bad weather, and more than likely a bit of pilot error took the plane down.
Click to expand...

Again, the efforts on the part of the media and those who want to believe EVERYTHING else is plausible requires a stretch away from reality I find hard to believe.

There is no evidence that supports the wild theories promoted so far that it could have been equipment failure or pilot error.

Again here are some FACTS:

Fact; a Lufthansa airbus preceded this flight by a few minutes flying through the same weather...no issues. A Lufthansa airbus flight following this flight by a few minutes did not report any problems.

FACT: A terrorist threat had been received days before and a previous Air France B777 flight was carefully inspected and cleared to leave.

ADJUSTED FACT: approximately 28 passengers on the flights passenger list come from Muslim countries where France has received direct threats.

So it begs the question of you; why are you so determined to suggest it cannot be a terrorist bomb?
 
Truth Detector said:
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector

This is totally unrelated to the THEORIES being given for this disaster. Comparing the Comet to a modern Airbus is like comparing a hang glider to a Cessna.

Click to expand...



You said to give me an instance where a chain of events lead to the loss of an aircraft hull. I gave one. The comet, and the airbus aircraft in the accident are very different - different design, different avionics), wing design, engine, etc, but the aircraft fuselage is still a tube of aluminum riveted together... so the analogy isn't QUITE like comparing a hang glider to a cessna - two COMPLETELY different styles of flight, and design.
 
Travelsonic said:
You said to give me an instance where a chain of events lead to the loss of an aircraft hull. I gave one. The comet, and the airbus aircraft in the accident are very different - different design, different avionics), wing design, engine, etc, but the aircraft fuselage is still a tube of aluminum riveted together... so the analogy isn't QUITE like comparing a hang glider to a cessna - two COMPLETELY different styles of flight, and design.
Click to expand...

My question was pretty clear;

I challenge you to find ONE instance where a commercial flight accident was the result of a faulty air speed indicator or was the result of a chain of events that caused a catastrophic breakup of the aircraft in high altitude flight.
 
Truth Detector said:
That is why I keep asking the question; why is it that everyone is so desperate to avoid the most plausible theory over some absurd theory about pitot tubes?
Click to expand...


The plausible theory isnt a terrorist attack, its a system failure. All the signs point away from a terrorist attack. Firstly, nobody has taken responsibility, and even Al Qaeda who on occassion have nothing to do with the attack, would release a video applausing there muslim brothers for carrying out Jihad. This hasnt happened. All the extremists are silent about it. Secondly, what good is it exploding the plane over the Atlantic? One would have thought a terrorist would have waited over Paris or something. There intent: maximum destruction. Thirdly i havent seen any evidence of extremist muslims being registered on the flight, this is just speculation. If anything, in this instance, its the least plausible theory.
 
Last edited:
WillRockwell said:
Interesting thread in the airline pilot's forum that the tail may have broken off the AF plane, that Airbus has a reputation for fragile construction, and that the American Airlines plane which crashed in Queens suffered from the same design flaw.

Interesting Airbus / Air France read - Airline Pilot Central Forums
Click to expand...

If the following information from Larson's report is true, I don't know how the people that allow this to happen sleep at night, knowing that it's only a matter of time till a midair disaster occurs:

Airbus products are the flimsiest and most poorly designed as far as
airframe structure is concerned by an almost obsession to utilize composite
materials.
Click to expand...
 
Truth Detector said:
Based on what information?
Click to expand...

Your tendency to not read threads is quite amusing yet annoying. Please read the thread. People have gone over the various pieces of evidence all suggesting that it was a mechanical. Your inability to put the time and effort into your postings is not a right to be an ignorant loudmouth.

Do you even know anything about flying and what a pitot tube does? The notion that the cause of the crash was a malfunctioned pitot tube on this aircraft is beyond stupid.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that people have ruled out that pitot tubes were the only possibility. As WillRockwell pointed out, there may have been other causes for it.

I have done this on many occasions for practice.
Click to expand...

At the same time you got your fake finance/accounting degree?

More internet thuggery, straight from TD?

It's absurd to assume that a professional pilot would have been so incompetent that losing his airspeed indicator would have caused massive disorientation resulting in the breakup of this aircraft.

:roll:
Click to expand...

Huh. You mean like the various pilots who have done other stupid things? Such as crashing into mountains around Guam? Tired pilots make all kinds of mistakes that rested pilots do not. I suggest you read "Nudge" by Thaler and Sunstein about various histories of airliner crashes by culturally inhibited crew and pilots.

If it was terrorism, why haven't we found blast residue? Why has no one taken responsibility? Why did they attempt to fly back to Brazil instead of hitting a high profile European target?

Furthermore, where are you getting your alleged facts from?

Air France flight 447

If that site is to be trusted, a bomb is clearly out of the question as no people were found with burns. This also seems to invalidate a lightning strike on the fuel tanks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom