2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Expanding the Search

Postby MinM » Sun Mar 08, 2015 5:00 pm

Image
Lord Balto » Mon Oct 13, 2014 11:31 am wrote:Here

Clark is the head of Emirates Airlines and doubts the Indian Ocean hypothesis. Of course, when The Independent picked up this story they started throwing around the term "conspiracy theory," as stooges are wont to do.

Add to this the only other route that fits the satellite data, and we have the plane flying over Burmese territory and ending up in eastern Tibet. Remember that Burma and China are on-again off-again allies, so I wouldn't exclude some kind of Chinese operation, with or without the consent of the civilian government.
Image
The image is from Victor Iannello @ this website.

https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/574676224238227456
Earth-704509
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3286
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby Iamwhomiam » Sun Mar 08, 2015 5:12 pm

Seem that many are now getting behind the plane being landed.

It was reported that the batteries of one of the Black Boxes expired a year before it disappeared. But that's something they should have confirmed before beginning searching long ago. 'tis a mystery.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby Lord Balto » Mon Mar 09, 2015 8:38 am

Iamwhomiam » Sun Mar 08, 2015 5:12 pm wrote:Seems that many are now getting behind the plane being landed.

It was reported that the batteries of one of the Black Boxes expired a year before it disappeared. But that's something they should have confirmed before beginning searching long ago. 'tis a mystery.


If I weren't engaged in a long-term historical/chronological project and were going to seriously research this, I would begin with the researchers aboard, the ones that were traveling to Mongolia, and investigate why the Chinese might want the Freescale technology and why they would go to such trouble to keep their acquisition of it hush hush. In the past the Chinese have had no qualms about stealing foreign techno with or without patent protection. One should also not rule out willing participation in this little charade, one of the researchers having profusely told his family how much he loved them, as if he knew he was about to vanish from the face of the earth.

Certainly a mystery, but not necessarily one that wouldn't succumb to serious analysis. We need to watch what the Chinese do in the field related to the Freescale chip patent:

In a detailed report from Malaysia Chronicle dated April 8, it said that Freescale launched what could be the world's smallest microcontroller in Feb 2013 called the Kinesis KL02.

KL02 measures 1.9 mm by 2mm and contains RAM, ROM and a clock. Even with its minute size, KL02 might be the most potent next-generation war weaponry.

Whether remotely controlled or automatically programmed, KLO2 can be utilised to employ drones smaller than flies. Such small-sized drones were allegedly being used to deliver lab-cloned viruses or toxic drugs instrumental for spreading plague, virus and disease; track spy satellites or large scale and hidden weaponries.


This from International Business Times back in April of last year.
User avatar
Lord Balto
 
Posts: 733
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 5:34 pm
Location: Interzone
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby zangtang » Mon Mar 09, 2015 9:25 am

'one of the researchers having profusely told his family how much he loved them, as if he knew he was about to vanish from the face of the earth.'

Did not know that. Ears prick up somewhat. begs a revisit to the others & their pre-flight behaviour.

some fuzzy 'data points' that get my goat : the aussie/kiwi roughneck who saw a 'plane' go down in a fireball - and was he on an oilrig at the time?
- no tv interview of this guy?
the joint military exercises whereby the plane may have been shot down /accidental targetting error - presumably within visible range of said rig and/or rigworker.....

The maldives fisherfolk (how many/) who claimed to see a plane flying low,(no lights i believe) early in the right time frame - this must be a radio interview at the least....i've never seen it attributed, just mentioned
(for added sexiness, flying in the general direction of.....Diego Grcia
are these not mutually exclusive? - which means someone is lying.
etc...............

i favour a freescale tech/patent theft/retention and Diego Garcia nexus.....but only because thats more spy novel - not like i've got any actual 'facts' to back it up and flesh it out.
zangtang
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby Lord Balto » Mon Mar 09, 2015 12:49 pm

zangtang » Mon Mar 09, 2015 9:25 am wrote:'one of the researchers having profusely told his family how much he loved them, as if he knew he was about to vanish from the face of the earth.'

Did not know that. Ears prick up somewhat. begs a revisit to the others & their pre-flight behaviour.

some fuzzy 'data points' that get my goat : the aussie/kiwi roughneck who saw a 'plane' go down in a fireball - and was he on an oilrig at the time?
- no tv interview of this guy?
the joint military exercises whereby the plane may have been shot down /accidental targetting error - presumably within visible range of said rig and/or rigworker.....

The maldives fisherfolk (how many/) who claimed to see a plane flying low,(no lights i believe) early in the right time frame - this must be a radio interview at the least....i've never seen it attributed, just mentioned
(for added sexiness, flying in the general direction of.....Diego Grcia
are these not mutually exclusive? - which means someone is lying.
etc...............

i favour a freescale tech/patent theft/retention and Diego Garcia nexus.....but only because thats more spy novel - not like i've got any actual 'facts' to back it up and flesh it out.


The problem is that all non Indian Ocean scenarios require some degree of complicity on the part of the Inmarsat satellite company, whether voluntary or involuntary. Whereas Diego Garcia requires massive distortion and collusion with the U.K./U.S. government, a northern route simply requires an intentional or honest misinterpretation of the data. I do understand the difficulty of finding plane wreckage at the bottom of the Indian Ocean, but I also understand that you're not going to find something that isn't there. The simplest explanation, in my estimation, is that the plane was purposely flown westward to place it in a position to fly directly over Burma--with poor radar coverage and possible Burmese complicity--and on to eastern Tibet proper or that historical Tibetan region already absorbed into China. Interestingly enough, these are the same geopolitical techniques being used in eastern Ukraine by the Russians. There are faint but distinguishable suggestions here of some kind of tit-for-tat, MH17 in exchange for MH370, on the part of *someone*. Consider that Mongolia is allied with the Russians. Were the Chinese preventing tech from falling into the hands of the Russians?

Diego Garcia does make a bit of sense in regard to prevention of the patents falling into the hands of the Chinese, but I have to think that disposing of the plane and the passengers presents difficulties that could have been avoided using other, less in-your-face, techniques. And again, it requires dragging the Inmarsat folks into the plot. Why not just "lose" their baggage and plant contraband on them and notify the Malaysians? More damaging to this scenario is the distribution of Freescale branches around the world. There's really no reason to try to keep Freescale employees from entering China. They are already there.
User avatar
Lord Balto
 
Posts: 733
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 5:34 pm
Location: Interzone
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Wed Jul 29, 2015 4:08 pm

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news ... ca-6160148

MH370: Is wreckage discovered off coast of Africa from missing jetliner?

Airplane wreckage found off the coast of Africa could belong to missing Flight MH370, it has emerged.

Debris discovered on the coast of the island of Reunion could be that from the airframe of a Boeing 777, like the Malaysia Airlines jetliner which disappeared without trace last year.

Pictures show police officers inspecting what could be part of the vanished aircraft.
Image

The plane was flying from Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia to Beijing, China, when it is thought to have come down in the Indian Ocean on March 8 last year.

There were 239 passengers and crew - most of whom were from China - on board when it disappeared.

MH370 vanished from radar screens shortly after taking off from Kuala Lumpur.

Malaysia has officially declared the disappearance of the flight an accident and has said all 239 passengers and crew on board are presumed dead.

An international search operation in the Indian Ocean has yet to find any trace of the missing plane.
Image
There have been several theories as to what might have happened to the aircraft after it disappeared from radar.

These include:

It went north heading towards ­Kazakhstan. Thai military radar seems to confirm the plane turned west, then north.
It went west and was flown to Diego Garcia, the British-owned island in the Indian Ocean that is let as a military base to America. Surrounding islanders claim they saw a plane low in the sky the morning Flight MH370 went missing.

It went south over the ocean off Australia, where the search has been concentrated.

Reunion is a territory of France in the Indian Ocean, several thousand miles from the international search zone.
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:16 pm

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/05/experts- ... n-jet.html


Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak confirmed Wednesday U.S.-time that the plane debris discovered on Reunion Island belongs to the missing Malaysian MH370 jetliner.

International crash experts have examined a wing part that washed up on the Indian Ocean island of Reunion last week, hoping to determine whether it came from the missing plane.

"The international team of experts have conclusively confirmed that the aircraft debris found on Reunion Island is indeed from MH370," Najib said in a televised statement.

The examination of the part is being carried out under the direction of a judge at an aeronautical test facility run by the French military at Balma, a suburb of the southwestern city of Toulouse. Reunion is one of France's overseas territories.

Malaysian officials who are leading an international air crash investigation were due to witness the inspection of the part, which was flown to the French mainland at the weekend.
Officials from the United States and manufacturer Boeing were also on hand to advise whether the piece can be tied to Flight MH370, which went missing on March 8 last year while en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing with 239 people on board.

The initial examination was expected to last until Thursday but Malaysian officials were on stand-by in Kuala Lumpur in case any results could be announced earlier.

Malaysia had already said the piece of debris, a wing surface known as a flaperon, had been identified as being from the type of plane that disappeared.

The Boeing 777 is believed to have crashed in the southern Indian Ocean, about 3,700 km (2,300 miles) from Reunion.

Investigators will try to glean whatever clues they can about the cause of the crash, experts said.

But the question of why the aircraft vanished may be clearer only when the main debris field is found, and its flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder have been recovered.

"A wing's moving surfaces give you far fewer clues than bigger structures like the rudder, for example. As a single piece of evidence, it is likely to reveal quite little other than it comes from MH370," a former investigator said.

The Balma test center specializes in metal analysis and is equipped with a scanning electron microscope capable of 100,000 times magnification. It was used to store and analyse debris from an Air France jet which crashed in the Atlantic in 2009.

The Boeing 777 was minutes into its scheduled flight when it disappeared from civil radars. Investigators believe that someone deliberately switched off the aircraft's transponder, diverted it thousands of miles off course, and deliberately crashed into the ocean off Australia.

In January, Malaysia Airlines officially declared the disappearance an accident, clearing the way for the carrier to pay compensation to relatives while the search goes on.

An A$120 million ($88 million) hunt along a rugged 60,000 sq km patch of sea floor 1,600 km (1,000 miles) west of the Australian city of Perth has yielded nothing.

The search has been extended to another 60,000 sq km (23,000 sq mile) and Malaysian and Australian authorities say this will cover 95 percent of MH370's flight path, at a cost of A$50 million.
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby Iamwhomiam » Tue Oct 13, 2015 5:50 pm

Teen's discovery of skeleton-filled fuselage in jungle could be MH370

By Emily Saul
October 12, 2015 | 1:38pm

A teenager hunting for birds in the jungle of a Philippine island claims to have stumbled upon a fuselage “full of skeletons” and a Malaysian flag, and authorities believe it could be from missing Flight MH370.

The coastal wreckage in Tawi Tawi was under investigation by local authorities in Malaysia’s Sabah region Monday.

The finding was reported by Jamil Omar of Borneo, 46, who says his nephew made the grim discovery in September, but didn’t realize what it was as he has no access to television or newspapers.

“There was a skeleton still in the pilot’s seat. The pilot had his safety belt on and the communication gear attached to his head and ears,” Omar told local police, Free Malaysia Today reports.

The youth and pals found “many skeletons” in the fuselage, Omar said, some still wearing seatbelts, and more human bones nearby.

The teen also allegedly swiped a piece of fabric to use as a blanket, only to discover later it was a Malaysian flag.

“I have told the [Department of Civil Aviation] to look into the report. We don’t know if the report is true, so we need to verify it first … Let’s not speculate and give space to the DCA to conduct its investigation,” Malaysian Transport Minister Liow Tiong Lai told local media.

The claim comes five weeks after French experts confirmed a piece of wing that washed up on Reunion Island near Madagascar was indeed from the missing Malaysia Airlines plane.

The Beijing-bound Boeing 777 was carrying 239 passengers and crew members when it vanished into thin air an hour after departing from Kuala Lumpur on March 8 last year.

http://nypost.com/2015/10/12/teen-might-have-found-flight-mh370s-skeleton-filled-fuselage-in-philippines/
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby Lord Balto » Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:12 pm



Truth Sentinel with Scott episode 49 (MH370 update with Jeff Wise and Sarah Bajc)

Inmarsat analysis is so faulty it suggests fraud.

Jeff Wise's website.

Satellite communication was rebooted. Boeing is very secretive about plane's wiring.
User avatar
Lord Balto
 
Posts: 733
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 5:34 pm
Location: Interzone
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:54 pm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/fli ... 0de4036711?

Debris Found In Mozambique Consistent With That Of Missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Australia's transportation chief said on Thursday the location of debris found on a beach in the southeast African nation of Mozambique was consistent with drift modeling related to the search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

"The location of the debris is consistent with drift modeling commissioned by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and reaffirms the search area for MH370 in the southern Indian Ocean," Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Darren Chester said in a statement.

Flight MH370 disappeared with 239 people on board on its way from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing in March 2014.

The debris would be the first to face thorough analysis by MH370 crash investigators as another object suspected to be part the plane's wing has been held by French authorities since being found on Reunion Island, in the Indian Ocean, last year.

Chester added that officials will now send the meter-long piece of metal to Australia, where Australian and Malaysian officials will examine it. Earlier, Chester told the Australian Broadcasting Corp that the Mozambique government has taken possession of the debris.

The ATSB and the international agency set up in Australia to co-ordinate the search for the missing plane, the Joint Agency Coordination Centre, were not immediately available for comment.

Multiple media reports said the debris was found by Seattle lawyer Blaine Alan Gibson, who has been conducting his own investigation into the missing plane. Gibson did not respond to inquiries made by Reuters via his website and social media.
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:37 am

The Ever-Curiouser MH-17 Case
March 16, 2016


Exclusive: The shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine has served as a potent propaganda club against Russia but the U.S. government is hiding key evidence that could solve the mystery, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

The curious mystery surrounding the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014, gets more curious and more curious as the U.S. government and Dutch investigators balk at giving straightforward answers to the simplest of questions even when asked by the families of the victims.

Adding to the mystery Dutch investigators have indicated that the Dutch Safety Board did not request radar information from the United States, even though Secretary of State John Kerry indicated just three days after the crash that the U.S. government possessed data that pinpointed the location of the suspected missile launch that allegedly downed the airliner, killing all 298 people onboard.

Although Kerry claimed that the U.S. government knew the location almost immediately, Dutch investigators now say they hope to identify the spot sometime “in the second half of the year,” meaning that something as basic as the missile-launch site might remain unknown to the public more than two years after the tragedy.

The families of the Dutch victims, including the father of a Dutch-American citizen, have been pressing for an explanation about the slow pace of the investigation and the apparent failure to obtain relevant data from the U.S. and other governments.

I spent time with the family members in early February at the Dutch parliament in The Hague as opposition parliamentarians, led by Christian Democrat Pieter Omtzigt, unsuccessfully sought answers from the government about the absence of radar data and other basic facts.

When answers have been provided to the families and the public, they are often hard to understand, as if to obfuscate what information the investigation possesses or doesn’t possess. For instance, when I asked the U.S. State Department whether the U.S. government had supplied the Dutch with radar data and satellite images, I received the following response, attributable to “a State Department spokesperson”: “While I won’t go into the details of our law enforcement cooperation in the investigation, I would note that Dutch officials said March 8 that all information asked of the United States has been shared.”

I wrote back thanking the spokesperson for the response, but adding: “I must say it seems unnecessarily fuzzy. Why can’t you just say that the U.S. government has provided the radar data cited by Secretary Kerry immediately after the tragedy? Or the U.S. government has provided satellite imagery before and after the shootdown? Why the indirect and imprecise phrasing? …

“I’ve spent time with the Dutch families of the victims, including the father of a U.S.-Dutch citizen, and I can tell you that they are quite disturbed by what they regard as double-talk and stalling. I would like to tell them that my government has provided all relevant data in a cooperative and timely fashion. But all I get is this indirect and imprecise word-smithing.”

The State Department spokesperson wrote back, “I understand your questions, and also the importance of the view of these families so devastated by this tragedy. However, I am going to have to leave our comments as below.”

Propaganda Value

This lack of transparency, of course, has a propaganda value since it leaves in place the widespread public impression that ethnic Russian rebels and Russian President Vladimir Putin were responsible for the 298 deaths, a rush to judgment that Secretary Kerry and other senior U.S. officials (and the Western news media) encouraged in July 2014.

Once that impression took hold there has been little interest in Official Washington to clarify the mystery especially as evidence has emerged implicating elements of the Ukrainian military. For instance, Dutch intelligence has reported (and U.S. intelligence has implicitly confirmed) that the only operational Buk anti-aircraft missile systems in eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014, were under the control of the Ukrainian military.

In a Dutch report released last October, the Netherlands’ Military Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD) reported that the only anti-aircraft weapons in eastern Ukraine capable of bringing down MH-17 at 33,000 feet belonged to the Ukrainian government.

MIVD made that assessment in the context of explaining why commercial aircraft continued to fly over the eastern Ukrainian battle zone in summer 2014. MIVD said that based on “state secret” information, it was known that Ukraine possessed some older but “powerful anti-aircraft systems” and “a number of these systems were located in the eastern part of the country.”

The intelligence agency added that the rebels lacked that capability: “Prior to the crash, the MIVD knew that, in addition to light aircraft artillery, the Separatists also possessed short-range portable air defence systems (man-portable air-defence systems; MANPADS) and that they possibly possessed short-range vehicle-borne air-defence systems. Both types of systems are considered surface-to-air missiles (SAMs). Due to their limited range they do not constitute a danger to civil aviation at cruising altitude.”

One could infer a similar finding by reading a U.S. “Government Assessment” released by the Director of National Intelligence on July 22, 2014, five days after the crash, seeking to cast suspicion on the ethnic Russian rebels and Putin by noting military equipment that Moscow had provided the rebels. But most tellingly the list did not include Buk anti-aircraft missiles. In other words, in the context of trying to blame the rebels and Putin, U.S. intelligence could not put an operational Buk system in the rebels’ hands.

So, perhaps the most logical suspicion would be that the Ukrainian military, then engaged in an offensive in the east and fearing a possible Russian invasion, moved its Buk missile systems up to the front and an undisciplined crew fired a missile at a suspected Russian aircraft, bringing down MH-17 by accident.

That was essentially what I was told by a source who had been briefed by U.S. intelligence analysts in July and August 2014. [See, for instance, Consortiumnews.com’s “Flight 17 Shoot-Down Scenario Shifts” and “The Danger of an MH-17 Cold Case.”]

But Ukraine is a principal participant in the Dutch-led Joint Investigative Team (JIT), which has been probing the MH-17 case, and thus the investigation suffers from a possible conflict of interest since Ukraine would prefer that the world’s public perception of the MH-17 case continue to blame Putin. Under the JIT’s terms, any of the five key participants (The Netherlands, Ukraine, Australia, Belgium and Malaysia) can block release of information.

The interest in keeping Putin on the propaganda defensive is shared by the Obama administration which used the furor over the MH-17 deaths to spur the European Union into imposing economic sanctions on Russia.

In contrast, clearing the Russians and blaming the Ukrainians would destroy a carefully constructed propaganda narrative which has stuck black hats on Putin and the ethnic Russian rebels and white hats on the U.S.-backed government of Ukraine, which seized power after a putsch that overthrew elected pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych on Feb. 22, 2014.

Accusations against Russia have also been fanned by propaganda outlets, such as the British-based Bellingcat site, which has collaborated with Western mainstream media to continue pointing the finger of blame at Moscow and Putin – as the Dutch investigators drag their heels and refuse to divulge any information that would clarify the case.

Letter to the Families

Perhaps the most detailed – although still hazy – status report on the investigation came in a recent letter from JIT chief prosecutor Fred Westerbeke to the Dutch family members. The letter acknowledged that the investigators lacked “primary raw radar images” which could have revealed a missile or a military aircraft in the vicinity of MH-17.

Ukrainian authorities said all their primary radar facilities were shut down for maintenance and only secondary radar, which would show commercial aircraft, was available. Russian officials have said their radar data suggest that a Ukrainian warplane might have fired on MH-17 with an air-to-air missile, a possibility that is difficult to rule out without examining primary radar which has so far not been available. Primary radar data also might have picked up a ground-fired missile, Westerbeke wrote.

“Raw primary radar data could provide information on the rocket trajectory,” Westerbeke’s letter said. “The JIT does not have that information yet. JIT has questioned a member of the Ukrainian air traffic control and a Ukrainian radar specialist. They explained why no primary radar images were saved in Ukraine.” Westerbeke said investigators are also asking Russia about its data.

Westerbeke added that the JIT had “no video or film of the launch or the trajectory of the rocket.” Nor, he said, do the investigators have satellite photos of the rocket launch.

“The clouds on the part of the day of the downing of MH17 prevented usable pictures of the launch site from being available,” he wrote. “There are pictures from just before and just after July 17th and they are an asset in the investigation.” According to intelligence sources, the satellite photos show several Ukrainian military Buk missile systems in the area.

Secretary of State John Kerry denounces Russia's RT network as a "propaganda bullhorn" during remarks on April 24, 2014.
Secretary of State John Kerry denounces Russia’s RT network as a “propaganda bullhorn” during remarks on April 24, 2014.
Why the investigation’s data is so uncertain has become a secondary mystery in the MH-17 whodunit. During an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on July 20, 2014, three days after the crash, Secretary Kerry declared, “we picked up the imagery of this launch. We know the trajectory. We know where it came from. We know the timing. And it was exactly at the time that this aircraft disappeared from the radar.”

But this U.S. data has never been made public. In the letter, Westerbeke wrote, “The American authorities have data, that come from their own secret services, which could provide information on the trajectory of the rocket. This information was shared in secret with the [Dutch] MIVD.” Westerbeke added that the information may be made available as proof in a criminal case as an “amtsbericht” or “official statement.”

Yet, despite the U.S. data, Westerbeke said the location of the launch site remains uncertain. Last October, the Dutch Safety Board placed the likely firing location within a 320-square-kilometer area that covered territory both under government and rebel control. (The safety board did not seek to identify which side fired the fateful missile.)

By contrast, Almaz-Antey, the Russian arms manufacturer of the Buk systems, conducted its own experiments to determine the likely firing location and placed it in a much smaller area near the village of Zaroshchenskoye, about 20 kilometers west of the Dutch Safety Board’s zone and in an area under Ukrainian government control.

Westerbeke wrote, “Raw primary radar data and the American secret information are only two sources of information for the determination of the launch site. There is more. JIT collects evidence on the basis of telephone taps, locations of telephones, pictures, witness statements and technical calculations of the trajectory of the rocket. The calculations are made by the national air and space laboratory on the basis of the location of MH17, the damage pattern on the wreckage and the special characteristics of the rockets. JIT does extra research on top of the [Dutch Safety Board] research. On the basis of these sources, JIT gets ever more clarity on the exact launch site. In the second half of the year we expect exact results.”

Meanwhile, the U.S. government continues to stonewall a request from Thomas J. Schansman, the father of Quinn Schansman, the only American citizen to die aboard MH-17, to Secretary Kerry to release the U.S. data that Kerry has publicly cited.

Quinn Schansman, who had dual U.S.-Dutch citizenship, boarded MH-17 along with 297 other people for a flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur on July 17, 2014. The 19-year-old was planning to join his family for a vacation in Malaysia.

In a letter to Kerry dated Jan. 5, 2016, Thomas J. Schansman noted Kerry’s remarks at a press conference on Aug. 12, 2014, when the Secretary of State said about the Buk anti-aircraft missile suspected of downing the plane: “We saw the take-off. We saw the trajectory. We saw the hit. We saw this aeroplane disappear from the radar screens. So there is really no mystery about where it came from and where these weapons have come from.”

Although U.S. consular officials in the Netherlands indicated that Kerry would respond personally to the request, Schansman told me this week that he had not yet received a reply from Kerry.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Thu May 12, 2016 2:05 pm

http://news.sky.com/story/1694590/plane ... from-mh370

Plane Debris Confirmed As Being From MH370
Investigators confirm wreckage found in South Africa and Mauritius is "almost certainly" from Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.
Image

Debris which washed ashore on beaches in South Africa and Mauritius two months ago has been confirmed as belonging to Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

A statement from the Malaysian Minister of Transport said investigators have concluded an engine cowling with a Rolls Royce logo and an interior panel from an aircraft cabin are consistent with those found on Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 aircraft.

"As such, the team has confirmed that both pieces of debris from South Africa and Rodrigues Island are almost certainly from MH370," the statement said.

It added the findings complemented results from an examination of two further pieces of wreckage discovered along the coast of Mozambique said to be "almost certainly" from the missing aircraft, according to Australian officials.

Local archaeologist Neels Kruger found the Rolls Royce debris near Mossel Bay, a small town in Western Cape province, South Africa, in March.

He came across it while walking with his family along a river, and immediately contacted authorities.

The other piece of wreckage was found by hotel guests on Rodrigues Island, which lies about 350 miles east of Mauritius Island, in April.

MH370 went missing on 8 March, 2014, en route from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. There were 239 passengers and crew aboard.

Aviation experts believe MH370 veered sharply off course to the far-southern Indian Ocean before crashing into the sea.

The Malaysian Transport Ministry statement added that the governments of Malaysia, Australia and China continue to be "wholly committed" to the search for MH370.
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Fri May 13, 2016 3:09 pm

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... shows.html

MH370’s Cabin Was Torn Apart on Impact, New Debris Shows
With two new pieces ‘almost certainly’ from the jet, we have the first indication that at least part of the cabin did not go to the bottom of the sea immediately.

For the first time there are indications that when Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 hit the water its fuselage was torn open by the impact.
Australian investigators have now identified a piece of wreckage found on a remote Indian Ocean island as “almost certainly” being part of closet door in the forward cabin of the Boeing 777 that went missing on March 8, 2014.

Four other pieces of wreckage so far recovered were from external parts of the jet: a wing control surface called a flaperon, found on Réunion Island; two pieces of a horizontal stabilizer, found near Mozambique; part of an engine cowling, found on the east coast of South Africa.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has announced that examination carried out by Geoscience Australia of the two latest pieces of debris to be discovered, the piece from a closet door and part of a Rolls Royce logo from an engine cowling, has matched them with parts specific to the Malaysian 777.
Until now experts have held open the possibility that the airplane’s cabin might have remained intact after impact while the other more vulnerable parts like the wings and the tail broke away—simulations made of the last minutes of the flight have the jet, out of fuel, gliding in a spiral toward the ocean, with possibly one wing hitting the water first. This left the possibility that the fuselage and central core of the wing would have swiftly sunk to the bottom of the ocean. In view of the discovery of the closet door that scenario now seems highly unlikely.

The survival of part of an engine cowling is less of a puzzle. The engines would shear away from the wings on impact and, because of their weight, sink rapidly. The external cowling with the Rolls Royce logo is, however, far lighter. This fragment floated the farthest distance, to the South African coast.

This kind of breakup would be consistent with what happened to the Airbus A330 in the crash of Air France Flight 447 into the South Atlantic in 2009. In that case pieces of cabin wreckage and 50 bodies were found floating once the crash site was located within days of the disaster. In the case of Flight 370 there was a complete absence of such precise knowledge of the crash location.

The story of the closet door shows the remarkably accidental nature of the way debris has been discovered and collected. It washed up on a beach on Rodrigues Island, east of Mauritius. As exclusively reported in The Daily Beast, the island lies atop a volcanic ridge and is encircled by a coral reef. There is a gap in the reef near the Mourouk Ebony Hotel, where a current apparently carried the debris to the beach where it was found by two holidaymakers.
The haphazard distribution of the debris discovered so far from Flight 370, stretching well over 1,000 miles west from Rodgrigues Island to the South African coast, suggests that there could be many more pieces that remained afloat for more than 500 days from the day of the 777’s disappearance. As the closet door shows, each piece has its own story to tell to investigators.

Curiously, though, the largest piece of debris, the flaperon, remains in the custody of judicial authorities in France while the rest is with the Australians.
Meanwhile, the $180 million undersea search for wreckage 1,700 miles off the coast of Australia has been temporarily suspended because of bad weather as the Southern Hemisphere winter sets in. Of the 46,000 square miles of the designated search area some 5,700 square miles, an area the size of Connecticut, remain to be searched.

And time is running out. The search is due to end
within six weeks.
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Jul 22, 2016 1:32 pm

‘Fraud’ Alleged in NYT’s MH-17 Report
July 19, 2016

Exclusive: An amateur report alleging Russian doctoring of satellite photos on the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 case – a finding embraced by The New York Times – is denounced by a forensic expert as an “outright fraud,” reports Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

Forensic experts are challenging an amateur report – touted in The New York Times – that claimed Russia faked satellite imagery of Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile batteries in eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014, the day that Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was shot out of the sky killing 298 people.

In a Twitter exchange, Dr. Neal Krawetz, founder of the FotoForensics digital image analytical tool, wrote: “‘Bad analysis’ is an understatement. This ‘report’ is outright fraud.”

A Malaysia Airways' Boeing 777 like the one that crashed in eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014. (Photo credit: Aero Icarus from Zürich, Switzerland)
A Malaysia Airways’ Boeing 777 like the one that crashed in eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014. (Photo credit: Aero Icarus from Zürich, Switzerland)
Another computer imaging expert, Masami Kuramoto, wrote, “This is either amateur hour or supposed to deceive audiences without tech background,” to which Krawetz responded: “Why ‘or’? Amateur hour AND deceptive.”

On Saturday, The New York Times, which usually disdains Internet reports even from qualified experts, chose to highlight the report by arms control researchers at armscontrolwonk.com who appear to have little expertise in the field of forensic photographic analysis.

The Times article suggested that the Russians were falsely claiming that the Ukrainian military had Buk missile systems in eastern Ukraine on the day that MH-17 was shot down. But the presence of Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile batteries in the area has been confirmed by Western intelligence, including a report issued last October on the findings of the Dutch intelligence agency which had access to NATO’s satellite and other data collection.

Indeed, the Netherlands’ Military Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD) concluded that the only anti-aircraft weapons in eastern Ukraine capable of bringing down MH-17 at 33,000 feet belonged to the Ukrainian government, not the ethnic Russian rebels. MIVD made that assessment in the context of explaining why commercial aircraft continued to fly over the eastern Ukrainian battle zone in summer 2014. (The MH-17 flight had originated in Amsterdam and carried many Dutch citizens, explaining why the Netherlands took the lead in the investigation.)

MIVD said that based on “state secret” information, it was known that Ukraine possessed some older but “powerful anti-aircraft systems” and “a number of these systems were located in the eastern part of the country.” MIVD added that the rebels lacked that capacity:

“Prior to the crash, the MIVD knew that, in addition to light aircraft artillery, the Separatists also possessed short-range portable air defence systems (man-portable air-defence systems; MANPADS) and that they possibly possessed short-range vehicle-borne air-defence systems. Both types of systems are considered surface-to-air missiles (SAMs). Due to their limited range they do not constitute a danger to civil aviation at cruising altitude.”

I know that I have cited this section of the Dutch report before but I repeat it because The New York Times, The Washington Post and other leading U.S. news organizations have ignored these findings, presumably because they don’t advance the desired propaganda theme blaming the Russians for the tragedy.

In other words, the Times, the Post and the rest of the mainstream U.S. media want the Russians to be guilty, so they exclude from their articles evidence that suggests that some element of the Ukrainian military might have fired the fateful missile. Such “group think” is, of course, the same journalistic malfeasance that led to the false reporting about Iraq’s WMD. Doubts, even expressed by experts, were systematically filtered out then and the same now.

Dishonest Journalism

Further, it is dishonest journalism to ignore a credible government report that bears directly on an important issue, especially while running dubious Internet analyses and accepting propaganda claims from self-interested U.S. officials seeking to make the case against Russia.

Quinn Schansman, a dual U.S.-Dutch citizen killed aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 on July 17, 2014. (Photo from Facebook)
Quinn Schansman, a dual U.S.-Dutch citizen killed aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 on July 17, 2014. (Photo from Facebook)
For instance, the Dutch report contradicted The Washington Post’s early reporting on MH-17. On July 20, 2014, just three days after the crash, the Post published an article with the title “Russia Supplied Missile Launchers to Separatists, U.S. Official Says.”

In the article, the Post’s Michael Birnbaum and Karen DeYoung reported from Kiev that an anonymous U.S. official said the U.S. government had “confirmed that Russia supplied sophisticated missile launchers to separatists in eastern Ukraine and that attempts were made to move them back across the Russian border.”

This official told the Post that Russia didn’t just supply one Buk battery, but three. Though this account has never been retracted, there were problems with it from the start, including the fact that a U.S. “government assessment” – released by the Director of National Intelligence on July 22, 2014, (two days later) – listed a variety of weapons allegedly provided by the Russians to the ethnic Russian rebels but not a Buk anti-aircraft missile system.

In other words, two days after the Post cited a U.S. official claiming that the Russians had given the rebels three Buk batteries, the DNI’s “government assessment” made no reference to a delivery of one, let alone three Buk systems. And that absence of evidence came in the context of the DNI larding the “government assessment” with every possible innuendo to implicate the Russians, including “social media” entries. But there was no mention of a Buk delivery.

The significance of this missing link is hard to overstate. At the time eastern Ukraine was the focus of extraordinary U.S. intelligence collection because of the potential for the crisis to spin out of control and start World War III. Plus, a Buk missile battery is large and difficult to conceal. The missiles themselves are 16-feet-long and are usually pulled around by truck.

U.S. spy satellites, which supposedly can let you read a license plate in Moscow, would have picked up these images. And, if for some inexplicable reason a Buk battery was missed before July 17, 2014, it would surely have been spotted during an after-action review of the satellite imagery. But the U.S. government has released nothing of the kind.

In the days after the MH-17 crash, I was told by a source that U.S. intelligence had spotted Buk systems in the area but they appeared to be under Ukrainian government control. The source who had been briefed by U.S. intelligence analysts said the likely missile battery that launched the fateful missile was manned by troops dressed in what looked like Ukrainian uniforms.

At that point, the source said CIA analysts were still not ruling out the possibility that the troops might have been eastern Ukrainian rebels in similar uniforms but the initial assessment was that the troops were Ukrainian soldiers. There also was the suggestion that the soldiers were undisciplined and possibly drunk, since the imagery showed what looked like beer bottles scattered around the site, the source said. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “What Did US Spy Satellites See in Ukraine?”]

Subsequently, the source said, these analysts reviewed other intelligence data, including recorded phone intercepts, and concluded that the shoot-down was carried out by a rogue element of the Ukrainian government, working with a rabidly anti-Russian oligarch, but that senior Ukrainian leaders, such as President Petro Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, were not implicated. However, I have not been able to determine if this assessment was a dissident opinion or a consensus within U.S. intelligence circles.

Another intelligence source told me that CIA analysts did brief Dutch authorities during the preparation of the Dutch Safety Board’s report but that the U.S. information remained classified and unavailable for public release. In the Dutch reports, there is no reference to U.S.-supplied information although they do reflect sensitive details about Russian-made weapons systems, secrets declassified by Moscow for the investigation.

An NYT Pattern?

So, what to make of the Times hyping an amateur analysis of two Russian satellite photos and reporting that they showed manipulation. Though the claim seems to be designed to raise doubts about the presence of Ukrainian Buk missile batteries in eastern Ukraine, the presence of those missiles is really not in doubt.

A photograph of a Russian BUK missile system that U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt published on Twitter in support of a claim about Russia placing BUK missiles in eastern Ukraine, except that the image appears to be an AP photo taken at an air show near Moscow two years earlier.
A photograph of a Russian BUK missile system that U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt published on Twitter in support of a claim about Russia placing BUK missiles in eastern Ukraine, except that the image appears to be an AP photo taken at an air show near Moscow two years earlier.
And it makes sense the Ukrainians would move their anti-aircraft missiles toward the front because of fears that the powerful Ukrainian offensive then underway against ethnic Russian rebels might provoke Russia to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Shifting anti-aircraft missile batteries toward the border would be a normal military preparation in such a situation.

That’s particularly true because a Ukrainian fighter plane was shot down along the border on July 16, 2014, presumably from an air-to-air missile fired by a Russian plane. Tensions were high at the time and the possibility that an out-of-control Ukrainian crew misidentified MH-17 as a Russian military jet or Putin’s plane cannot be dismissed.

But all this context is missing from the Times article by reporter Andrew E. Kramer, who has been a regular contributor to the Times’ anti-Russian propaganda. He treats the findings by some nuclear arms control researchers at the Middlebury Institute for International Studies as definitive though there’s no reason to believe that these folks have any special expertise in applying this software whose creator says requires careful analysis.

The new report was based on the filtering software Tungstene designed by Roger Cozien, who has warned against rushing to judge “anomalies” in photographs as intentional falsifications when they may result from the normal process of saving an image or making innocent adjustments.

In an interview in Time magazine, Cozien said, “These filters aim at detecting anomalies. They give you any and all specific and particular information which can be found in the photograph file. And these particularities, called ‘singularities’, are sometimes only accidental: this is because the image was not well re-saved or that the camera had specific features, for example.

“The software in itself is neutral: it does not know what is an alteration or a manipulation. So, when it notices an error, the operator needs to consider whether it is an image manipulation, or just an accident.”

In other words, anomalies can be introduced by innocent actions related to saving or modifying an image, such as transferring it to a different format, adjusting the contrast or adding a word box. But it is difficult for a layman to assess the intricacies involved.

To buttress the new report, Kramer cited the work of Bellingcat, a group of “citizen journalists” who have made a solid business out of reaffirming whatever Western propaganda is claiming, whether about Syria, Ukraine or Russia.

Bellingcat’s founder Eliot Higgins also had raised doubts about the Russian photos – using Dr. Krawetz’s FotoForensics software – but those findings were subsequently debunked by Dr. Krawetz himself and other experts. While Kramer cited Higgins’s earlier analysis, the Times reporter left out the fact that those findings were disputed by professional experts.

Dr. Krawetz also found the new photographic analysis both amateurish and deceptive. When I contacted him by email, he declined an interview and noted that Bellingcat fans were already on the offensive, trying to shut down dissent to the new report.

In an email to me, he wrote: “I have already seen the Bellingcat trolls verbally attack me, their ‘reporters’ use intimidation tactics, and their CEO insults me. (Hmmm … First he uses my software, then his team seeks me out as an expert, then he insults me when my opinion differs from his.)”

If it’s true that the first casualty of war is truth, the old saying also seems to apply to a new Cold War.

[For more on Bellingcat and its erroneous work, see Consortiumnews.com’s “MH-17 Case: ‘Old’ Journalism vs. ‘New.’”]
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: 2014 Malaysian Planes Lost: Pacific and Ukraine

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Jul 24, 2016 1:06 am

Exclusive: MH370 Pilot Flew a Suicide Route on His Home Simulator Closely Matching Final Flight

By Jeff Wise

New York has obtained a confidential document from the Malaysian police investigation into the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 that shows that the plane’s captain, Zaharie Ahmad Shah, conducted a simulated flight deep into the remote southern Indian Ocean less than a month before the plane vanished under uncannily similar circumstances. The revelation, which Malaysia withheld from a lengthy public report on the investigation, is the strongest evidence yet that Zaharie made off with the plane in a premeditated act of mass murder-suicide.

The document presents the findings of the Malaysian police’s investigation into Zaharie. It reveals that after the plane disappeared in March of 2014, Malaysia turned over to the FBI hard drives that Zaharie used to record sessions on an elaborate home-built flight simulator. The FBI was able to recover six deleted data points that had been stored by the Microsoft Flight Simulator X program in the weeks before MH370 disappeared, according to the document. Each point records the airplane’s altitude, speed, direction of flight, and other key parameters at a given moment. The document reads, in part:

Based on the Forensics Analysis conducted on the 5 HDDs obtained from the Flight Simulator from MH370 Pilot’s house, we found a flight path, that lead to the Southern Indian Ocean, among the numerous other flight paths charted on the Flight Simulator, that could be of interest, as contained in Table 2.
Taken together, these points show a flight that departs Kuala Lumpur, heads northwest over the Malacca Strait, then turns left and heads south over the Indian Ocean, continuing until fuel exhaustion over an empty stretch of sea.

Search officials believe MH370 followed a similar route, based on signals the plane transmitted to a satellite after ceasing communications and turning off course. The actual and the simulated flights were not identical, though, with the simulated endpoint some 900 miles from the remote patch of southern ocean area where officials believe the plane went down. Based on the data in the document, here's a map of the simulated flight compared to the route searchers believe the lost airliner followed:


MH370's presumed flight path is in yellow. Zaharie's simulated suicide flight is in red.
Rumors have long circulated that the FBI had discovered such evidence, but Malaysian officials made no mention of the find in the otherwise detailed report into the investigation, “Factual Information,” that was released on the first anniversary of the disappearance.

The credibility of the rumors was further undermined by the fact that many media accounts mentioned “a small runway on an unnamed island in the far southern Indian Ocean,” of which there are none.

From the beginning, Zaharie has been a primary suspect, but until now no hard evidence implicating him has emerged. The “Factual Information” report states, “The Captain’s ability to handle stress at work and home was good. There was no known history of apathy, anxiety, or irritability. There were no significant changes in his life style, interpersonal conflict or family stresses.” After his disappearance, friends and family members came forward to described Zaharie as an affable, helpful family man who enjoyed making instructional YouTube videos for home DIY projects — hardly the typical profile of a mass murderer.

The newly unveiled documents, however, suggest Malaysian officials have suppressed at least one key piece of incriminating information. This is not entirely surprising: There is a history in aircraft investigations of national safety boards refusing to believe that their pilots could have intentionally crashed an aircraft full of passengers. After EgyptAir 990 went down near Martha’s Vineyard in 1999, for example, Egyptian officials angrily rejected the U.S. National Transport Safety Board finding that the pilot had deliberately steered the plane into the sea. Indonesian officials likewise rejected the NTSB finding that the 1997 crash of SilkAir 185 was an act of pilot suicide.

Previous press accounts suggest that Australian and U.S. officials involved in the MH370 investigation have long been more suspicious of Zaharie than their Malaysian counterparts. In January, Byron Bailey wrote in The Australian: “Several months after the MH370 disappearance I was told by a government source that the FBI had recovered from Zaharie’s home computer deleted information showing flight plan waypoints … my source ... left me with the impression that the FBI were of the opinion that Zaharie was responsible for the crash.”

However, it’s not entirely clear that the recovered flight-simulator data is conclusive. The differences between the simulated and actual flights are significant, most notably in the final direction in which they were heading. It’s possible that their overall similarities are coincidental — that Zaharie didn't intend his simulator flight as a practice run but had merely decided to fly someplace unusual.

Today, ministers from Malaysia, China, and Australia announced that once the current seabed search for MH370’s wreckage is completed, they will suspend further efforts to find the plane. The search was originally expected to wrap up this month, but stormy weather has pushed back the anticipated completion date to this fall. So far, 42,000 square miles have been covered at a cost of more than $130 million, with another 4,000 square miles to go.

"I must emphasise that this does not mean we are giving up on the search for MH370,” Malaysian Transport minister Liow Tiong Lai said. Officials have previously stated that if they received “credible new information that leads to the identification of a specific location of the aircraft,” the search could be expanded.

But some, including relatives of the missing passengers, believe that that evidentiary threshold has already been past. Recent months have seen the discovery of more than a dozen pieces of suspected aircraft debris, which analyzed collectively could narrow down where the plane went down. (The surprising absence of such wreckage for more than a year left me exploring alternative explanations that ultimately proved unnecessary.) The fact that Zaharie apparently practiced flying until he ran out of fuel over the remote southern Indian Ocean suggests the current search is on the right track — and that another year of hunting might be a worthwhile investment.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Belligerent Savant and 32 guests