EgyptAir flight from Paris to Cairo has vanished from Radar

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

But what I'm saying was, there was lot's of proof.

But I won't argue with you that the media definitely inflated all of it initially. That much is true.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Were either of them on the TSA no-fly list...which is shared with any facility/airline sending pax to a US port?

Nope.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

And if there was no Intel that they should have been prior to that, or it wasn't shared, then how was it the TSAs fault? Reid managed to get through Israeli security, which is usually considered the best in the world. In 2009, before the attack, Intel services were still trying to determine if Abdulmutallab was a threat.

There's more than enough to blame them for, like I said, without trying to find more.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

Private intelligence company has posted an article outlining their opinion on why ISIS has not claimed credit for
Eqypt Air

Pointed out ISIS has sophisticated media group which claims credit for attacks

In case of San Bernardino it was lone wold type attack - it took 3 days to claim credit when become known of
their loyalty toward ISIS

Posted article below

www.stratfor.com... &utm_campaign=B2C_Weekend_Content&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_nfVKwRUM5S74OUTWPa5YFAUGsMm6QfI2gSD10l5pJuwOuYUfKi3_sc-TZLE3RB1ygyFz5sI9DUn0OI0ueP8o5Dkjvnw&_hsmi=29 824284

a reply to: firerescue

Link not working ....

Posting content of article from STRATFOR MODS please permit ........

Analysis

As the investigation into the crash of EgyptAir Flight 804 continues and searchers begin to find evidence, the jihadist world has been strangely silent. Air traffic controllers lost contact with the aircraft early May 19 and we are now nearly outside the timeframe in which jihadist groups have ordinarily taken credit for attacks. The one obvious explanation for this is that a catastrophic mechanical or electrical failure brought down the aircraft rather than a bomb, but given all of the indications that point to an attack, it is worth exploring the lack of a claim of responsibility and what that means for attributing the cause of the crash.

The primary jihadist actors with the capability and willingness to bring down Flight 804, the Islamic State and al Qaeda, both have sophisticated public relations and media outlets that they can use to quickly claim responsibility for attacks. Looking back to the last air disaster, Russian MetroJet Flight 9268, which went down over the Sinai Peninsula in 2015, the Islamic State claimed responsibility for that attack the same day. Islamic State also claimed other recent attacks in Brussels, Jakarta and Paris within a day. Similarly, al Qaeda affiliates behind the series of attacks against West African hotels claimed those the same or the following day. The San Bernardino attackers attributed their actions to Islamic State just before carrying them out, but it took the group's central media arm three days to praise the attack — likely because it was conducted by a grassroots jihadist acting in their name.

Judging by the pattern of previous claims, if the Islamic State, al Qaeda or a regional affiliate were behind this attack, we would have expected to see a claim of responsibility by now. The lack of a claim, however, does not rule out terrorism in the EgyptAir incident. The Islamic State and al Qaeda are most powerful when it comes to their ideology and their propaganda is more useful at inspiring grassroots jihadists to conduct their own attacks than in providing quality instruction on how to carry out an attack. If this were a grassroots attack, carried out independently by a cell in France, Tunisia or Eritrea (all locations where the aircraft had been over the 24-hour period before it crashed), then jihadist leaders and their media wings would be scrambling along with the rest of us to figure out what happened. As in the San Bernardino attack, it might take a few days for the jihadist propaganda arms to formulate a response.

The more sinister but less likely explanation is that a terrorist group has figured out a novel way to attack aircraft and is concealing its involvement in order to replicate the attack elsewhere. We saw this kind of covert activity in the 1995 Bojinka plot. The bombing of Philippines Airlines Flight 434 in December 1994 was not claimed because the planners hoped to use an improved version of the same device in a larger attack targeting 10 trans-Pacific airliners.

While authorities were quick to respond to the 2001 shoe bomb and the 2009 underwear bombs, if those devices had functioned as designed and destroyed the aircraft (especially over water), it may have taken months or years for investigators to determine the cause. This would have given the bombers a large window to replicate it. In a worst-case scenario, we may have a competent bombmaker on the loose with knowledge of how to get a bomb onto a plane, and the authorities have no idea what method he is using.

The fact that Egypt Air Flight 804 went down over water makes the investigation much more difficult than past investigations over land — some of which took years to solve, like Pan Am Flight 103. It has been over two years since Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappeared and investigators have only recently even recovered portions of the aircraft — much less determined the cause. Air France Flight 447 similarly crashed over the Atlantic in 2009. It took over three years to determine that technical problems caused that crash, plenty of time for terrorist to replicate tactics had it been an attack. Flight 804's crash site is much closer to land and not subject to the same currents that have wreaked havoc on the MH370 investigation. Still, the crash occurred in waters that can be up to a mile deep, making recovery of debris or the black box on the seafloor very complicated.

Judging by recent air disasters that have occurred over water, we will not likely have conclusive forensic results on what downed Flight 804 for months or years to come — if ever — leaving the all-important "how" question unanswered. Land-based investigations into ground crew, cabin crew, passengers and satellite reconnaissance are more likely to yield results before evidence from the crash site, but will not necessarily provide the full story of what happened. Complicating the already herculean task is the cooperation required between Egypt, Greece, France and any other countries that get involved in the investigation. International turf battles can cause delays over who is in charge, including the thorough and timely processing of evidence. The absence of claims of responsibility might alleviate fears of a terrorist attack, but in a worst-case scenario, it could also be a sign of more attacks to come.

a reply to: firerescue

The San Bernardino attackers attributed their actions to Islamic State just before carrying them out, but it took the group's central media arm three days to praise the attack — likely because it was conducted by a grassroots jihadist acting in their name.

Case in point.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

And yet, in the case of 9/11 we all knew it was Bin Laden pretty quickly. The CIA had been warning GWBush repeatedly before the attack that Bin Laden was planning something big.

Problem is difference between vague "Bin Laden planning something..." and having intelligence detailed enough to thwart
attack

What is needed are 3 T's

TIME - Need small time frame usually 48-72 hours, any longer and begin to relax and lose focus, also terrorists
become aware increased security around target and abort

TYPE - what type of attack coming Does no good to searching trucks in parking garage for bomb when someone
is flying planes into building

TARGET - what is (are) possible targets of attack.

Does no good saying "Bin Laden planning hijackings..." (as PDB of August 6 did) when there are thousands of flights
everyday leaving from hundreds of airports

If on other hand have intelligence saying "Bin Laden planning hijackings in Mid September, leaving from East Coast
airports, with targets in NYC or Washington " then have enough to disrupt terrorist plans.......

Even before IS was formed, there was question of islamic extremism, be it under many names, or loners/groups who sympathise with radical islam.
The extremists are everywhere and homegrown in Europe where politicians dream the multicultural dream, even after all the attacks in the last few years.

What i mean to say is that there is no need for IS to claim this terror attack, they are no authority, just another branch of extremist islamists.

a reply to: firerescue

Dude, they totally had enough to act. 9/11 was completely preventable.

As to why the intel wasn't acted on fast enough, your guess is as good as mine.

As a reminder....

Please stick to the topic.
That topic is not 9/11.

You are responsible for your own posts.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

a reply to: Agit8dChop

how can a plane just vanish? did it have a lighting storm? did it get hit by lighting?

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: Zaphod58

This would be huge bragging rights for some group, if they were able to put a device on a plane in Paris.

So true. I think it's important to point out that so far Daesh has not claimed responsibility for any attack that wasn't theirs.

If they get caught with their pants down on this one, and it turns out they claim responsibility for something they didn't do it will be unprecedented. And probably bad PR for them. So we will see.

but not saying anything for a time...making everyone wonder and sweat it out... I think they would switch it up toy with us like that. Like that big post up above...since no one is sure what happened, they keep quit, people think it was some kind of malfunction,,..much less scrutiny...they can do this again.....

a reply to: research100

In this case, admission or claiming credit, would almost immediately reveal not only the method, but those involved. I'm convinced of it. The method is a very narrow window (and I'm not going to post it exactly (even though I have generally already)). There are a select group who could accomplish something like this. Some may be willing, others not at all.

Take a cross section of ramp personnel at any international airport; many of them are foreign nationals. They may be citizens, they may be not. Maybe there's a reason.

Times are tough, airlines are drastically cutting costs (all of them) and outsourcing in the process. Ground handling and catering are chief among these cost cutting measures. Again, I absolutely REFUSE to expose specific weaknesses because my career depends on it. However, what I see on a daily basis troubles me; it honestly does.

We are not fighting the "fight". We are applying window dressing to make it look like we are! The flip side of the coin is, to truly fight the real "fight" you paralyze the industry in the process. Economy is crippled, and as I've said ad-nauseum; MONEY is the end game. AND, money is the only way to stop them. No amount of window dressing will; those are just "feel good" measures for all the honest people.

Further, the airlines have used fuel prices as a justification for cutting costs and/or losing money. Well, fuel prices are at an all time low. Then they got greedy (i.e. bag fees, fees, fees and more fees).

Well, I say BS...now is the time to act. The airlines have no excuse now. The TSA is worthless. They've not caught terrorist one, not one. What's the solution?

Increase the screening standards for airport personnel. Yes, it will drive up the hourly wage simply because it's more difficult to find credible people who are willing to work for nothing. Oh well. Do we want safety, or do we want cheap?

If "cheap" is the answer then I guess we as a people better accept exponentially more risk. The business models will eventually have to take this into account. They can operate more efficiently, but not the way they're doing it now. So buy fuel now, buy lots of it!! This is your primary cost and you know it. Stop with the excuses!

The TSA is not effective, not at all. MS 804 didn't leave a US port so they weren't exposed to the TSA. Zaphod says don't blame the TSA for something they didn't do. Okay, I'll agree with this. Blame the whole security model when it comes to aviation security...it's broken and non functional!

So how does all of this relate to MS 804? Easy answer...because it relates to all air travel. People, you are not getting the real picture of what is going on here. You really aren't. Folks (i.e. politicians) are trying to obfuscate it in every way imaginable, attempting to find some other reason. Commercial aviation is absolutely replete with excuses why they can't do the right thing.

In my not so humble opinion, MS 804 was lost to terrorism. We can dance around the edges of terrorism all day long, trying to keep our PC hats on (at the expense of a tinfoil one) and not hurt anyone's feewings. Fine. Only when we, as a people, accept that the only way you can deal with this SCOURGE is to STARVE them will there be any change.

I'm sorry, but people need to WAKE UP!!

ISIS released a new recording with the usual anti-Western rhetoric, and absolutely nothing about EgyptAir. They confirmed the death of Abu Omar al-Shishani, their minister of war.

a reply to: Zaphod58

And, as I stated, you know why, right? RS100 and FireRescue said it too. To claim responsibility now will compromise future abilities along the same lines.

I know we don't agree, my friend. I have a lot of respect for you and (applaud) your efforts here (as a mod), but we don't agree on this one and we most likely won't until the proverbial fat lady sings. It may be a while.

I don't mean to be contrary, but I feel you are being a bit contrary yourself as well...seeking a solution which is of the vast minority and ignoring the most likely solution. You know a great deal about aircraft and aviation, hence the 'fsme' title.

I've worked in this business far too long, and perhaps I'm jaded, but on this count I'm pretty sure I'm right.

All the best.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I'm simply refusing to jump on the terrorism bandwagon until there is evidence. Just as with every other crash, I actually look at different possibilities and don't close my mind to other possibilities until there's evidence to back them up.

As for them not claiming responsibility, yes, I read that, I'm simply updating the thread since it was posted earlier that they were making a statement and might claim responsibility for it, or give a statement showing it was terrorism.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Fair enough.

I will stand down and wait for more facts.

I never disagree with facts.

Cheers!

That aircraft was shot down by an order of the EU commission. It was supposed to create some sort of incident between the EU and Egypt, to attempt to discredit and blackmail Presiden Sisi. Clearly the EU does not learn the lessons and will not end the coming summer as a united Europe, but rather as a complete chaos! The EU is the only possible lunatic political circle that would be interested in shooting down an airliner in that specific area! Most probably the shoot down was actually done by the Greek air force with the involvement of the british and the Italian Air Farce!

a reply to: Flanker86

Shot down??? Really??? Whoa!!!!

Ooooookay.

The whole region is filled with infrared tracking systems for just such events, I'm sure if there was a rocket, anything, launched from anywhere...we would ("we" being the western world) would know about it by now.

Sorry, but NO...it wasn't shot down. Whatever happened to MS804, happened from inside, deliberate or not.