UAE Rejects Claims on Flight 201

UAE Rejects Claims on Flight 201

www.presstv.ir

The United Arab Emirates' Civil Aviation Authority has rejected claims that a US-bound Emirates' flight from Dubai contained "suspicious" parcels from Yemen.


Fighter jets were scrambled on Friday to accompany an Emirates plane into New York's JFK airport after a security alert, US media reported.

Emirati authorities, however, said flight 201 carried no 'suspicious' cargo from Yemen as claimed by US-Canadian military agency NORAD.

UAE officials rejected the claim and said the plane was not a source of threat.

"The Emirates plane that arrived today in the United States

(visit the link for the full news article)

This is getting interesting. After Yemen's denial, now UAE's categoric denial, as well as the seeming inconsistencies in the details coming from the UK, and UK's statement they are not going to increase the level of threat alert.

I also read on another website from an alleged 'inside source' that Euro countries are saying it's a big hoax to make Obama look 'presidential' in the elections.

Interesting. Could it be that people are not prepared to be 'hoaxed' by the US again, like 9/11?

www.presstv.ir
(visit the link for the full news article)

I saw the live CNN coverage of Emirates Flight 201 landing.

Ironically right after they mentioned 'possible UPS, Federal Express package bomb' they cut to a commercial break where the sponsor was the US Post Office, who were advertising flat rate package delivery.

no sheet? that sounds just about right for these days
don't it....dahannnggg what have we here?

Originally posted by In nothing we trust
I saw the live CNN coverage of Emirates Flight 201 landing.

Ironically right after they mentioned 'possible UPS, Federal Express package bomb' they cut to a commercial break where the sponsor was the US Post Office, who were advertising flat rate package delivery.

edit on 30-10-2010 by In nothing we trust because: (no reason given)

Lol!

reply to post by wcitizen


This UAE flight has been picking at my brain. There's just something not right about how it all went down. All the other planes were dealt with a SOP for dealing with bombs and explosives. Plane contacted to land at the closest airport that accomodates the size of the plane and quarantine the plane out on the tarmac, keeping it far away to prevent further damage.Then the passangers are taken to safety and the bomb squad does there thing.
However this flight was let in Canadian airspace escorted by there F16 over there country into the U.S and then escorted by the Airforce to JFK airport. Instead of being quarantined and kept away from the flight terminal, the plane pulls right up to the terminal. This makes absolutely no sense for a plane that was supposed to be carrying explosives.
The only thing that would make any sense about it would be a false flag operation or there was 'someone' on the plane that either defected or was secretly in transit and the FEDS wanted.

Originally posted by highfreq
reply to post by wcitizen

 

This UAE flight has been picking at my brain. There's just something not right about how it all went down. All the other planes were dealt with a SOP for dealing with bombs and explosives. Plane contacted to land at the closest airport that accomodates the size of the plane and quarantine the plane out on the tarmac, keeping it far away to prevent further damage.Then the passangers are taken to safety and the bomb squad does there thing.
However this flight was let in Canadian airspace escorted by there F16 over there country into the U.S and then escorted by the Airforce to JFK airport. Instead of being quarantined and kept away from the flight terminal, the plane pulls right up to the terminal. This makes absolutely no sense for a plane that was supposed to be carrying explosives.
The only thing that would make any sense about it would be a false flag operation or there was 'someone' on the plane that either defected or was secretly in transit and the FEDS wanted.

My thoughts exactly, I posted somewhere that I wondered if there was a 'someone' on the plane they wanted to secrete.

There's a lot more to this than meets the eye. False flag, I believe so - but possibly something else too. I have been reading on another website that there's a huge war going on as the psychos all try to get their hands on some gold - which none of them actually owns. According to the site they are trying to 'steal' it - who knows what's going on. Could well be a cover up for some kind of elite crime. So perhaps there was 'something' on the plane that they wanted to secrete.

My thoughts on it, as soon as I heard all the details, is that the bombs were a diversion, the real reason for the escorts was that they were delivering a person to the acronym boys. Perhaps a "terrorist leader" or a CIA operative, who knows. That was what first came to my mind though.

I do think that terrorism is a credible threat, however I found this plan odd, and noted the timing of evidence of "security breach" coming out the week when British Airways CEO criticized the US security measures as being not needed and over the top.

Also the "parcels"...how where they meant to work? there was no timer? and had syringes for a manual chemical reaction, how is posting that to a synagogue and not to a "person" to start the explosive a credible threat?
I may have gotten the incorrect infomation on the packages granted.

Emirates are a major aviation player,that must adhere to strict international aviation measures in order to maintain their right of flight, Im not sure how they would plan on denying this, unless they can prove it wasnt on board their craft.

reply to post by wcitizen


they are still testing the waters til they get it right

the shoe bomber
the underwear bomber
now packages

and they have all failed thus far.

i really dont know what to make of it all the timing is what i am having problems with so close to the elections and this is what we are talking about instead of the election.

whether this was manufactured which i am not sure what to beleive this is what people are talking about instead of election fraud.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by wcitizen

 

they are still testing the waters til they get it right

the shoe bomber
the underwear bomber
now packages

and they have all failed thus far.

i really dont know what to make of it all the timing is what i am having problems with so close to the elections and this is what we are talking about instead of the election.

whether this was manufactured which i am not sure what to beleive this is what people are talking about instead of election fraud.

I read elsewhere from an alleged 'insider' that the rumour is that Euro countries are saying it's a fake to make Obama look presidential before the elections. That seems so pathetic it can't be the only reason, IMO.

Don't know, obviously. It's puzzling, and yes, it's a distraction from the elections and the voter fraud as you say...which is also a typical tactic of theirs. And there's always an appearance of AQ before an election, and Obama really played the AQ card in his speech. Same as 9/11 - they are too quick to name the perpetrator, even before the whole charade is even finished.

But I still think there's something more to it. Gut feeling.

Originally posted by zazzafrazz
I do think that terrorism is a credible threat, however I found this plan odd, and noted the timing of evidence of "security breach" coming out the week when British Airways CEO criticized the US security measures as being not needed and over the top.

Also the "parcels"...how where they meant to work? there was no timer? and had syringes for a manual chemical reaction, how is posting that to a synagogue and not to a "person" to start the explosive a credible threat?
I may have gotten the incorrect infomation on the packages granted.

Emirates are a major aviation player,that must adhere to strict international aviation measures in order to maintain their right of flight, Im not sure how they would plan on denying this, unless they can prove it wasnt on board their craft.

Maybe Emirates can prove it. I would just love that.
My sense/hope is that the international community might just not be willing to buy into yet another FF.

reply to post by wcitizen

"You will not apply my precept," he said, shaking his head. "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? We know that he did not come through the door, the window, or the chimney. We also know that he could not have been concealed in the room, as there is no concealment possible. When, then, did he come?"-sherlock holmes

one of my favorite sayings maybe it bears some weight to this

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by wcitizen

 

"You will not apply my precept," he said, shaking his head. "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? We know that he did not come through the door, the window, or the chimney. We also know that he could not have been concealed in the room, as there is no concealment possible. When, then, did he come?"-sherlock holmes

one of my favorite sayings maybe it bears some weight to this

edit on 30-10-2010 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Lol! Indeed it does.