Well, I tried to avoid writing about this topic until more hard facts became available. But since this is apparently turning into a political fight between, on one side, Russia and Egypt and, on the other, the US and UK, I think that I can at least offer a few general thoughts.
What we know so far is this: Kogalymavia Flight 9268 had left Sharm el-Sheikh International Airport, Egypt, en route to Pulkovo Airport in Saint Petersburg. The aircraft reached an altitude of 33,500 ft (10,200 m) at 404 kn (748 km/h; 465 mph). Then something absolutely catastrophic happened. The pilots did not radio anything at all, the plane dropped and crashed. The tail section was found 5km away from the rest of the plan. Just from that data we can come to some initial conclusions: this was not a “regular” mechanical failure (like, say, an engine fire) but something which happened so fast that the pilots did not even have the time to react. The aircraft broke up in mid-air. Only three things could have caused this:
- A sudden and catastrophic structural failure
- A anti-aircraft missile
- A bomb inside the aircraft
The first option is possible, and there are reports that the tail had a crack in the back. Other reports mention that the aircraft was involved in an tailstrike 14 years ago. However, this aircraft was inspected, several times, the tailstrike incident was recorded and the long term dangers of tailstrikes are also well known. So the possibility of a catastrophic structural failure is sound.
The second option makes no sense to me at all. I know of no man portable or even SUV-mounted missile which could strike an aircraft flying at over 10km high and at over 700km/h. As for a bigger missile, well, we would have the same problem as with MH-17, only worse: not only would such a larger missile leave a visible plume, and make a very loud noise but, unlike in the Ukraine, in the Egyptian desert the missile launcher and crew would have nowhere to hide after the launch. In fact, even getting such a large missile into the crash area would be very difficult: just like the Ukraine, Egypt is a war zone and there are a lot of “eyes in the sky”. Finally, unless the missile can acquire an infra-red signature at 10km altitude, it would have to be cued to the aircraft by radar and that emission would also be detectable. I cannot prove a negative, and I suppose one ought never to say never, but I don’t buy the missile hypothesis at all.
Which leaves the bomb. To my great regret, this is the version which I find most plausible, if only by Occam’s razor. No offense to anybody here, but the Egyptian security services don’t exactly have an impressive track of protecting tourists. And while it is clear to me that the US and UK are trying to capitalize on this tragedy, I would note that Medvedev just publicly ordered the Russian security services to provide point security in airport terminal were Russian aircraft take off from. Could it be that the Russian security services have already come to the same conclusion as the Brits and Americans?
So it boils down to this: what is more likely – a massive sudden structural failure or a bomb. I believe that the latter is much more likely.
Still, we really should wait for the official report. “Much more likely” does not mean that this is what happened. It is “much more likely” that a coin will fall heads or tails, but sometimes they do end up standing on the edge. There have been tailstrike induced catastrophic failures in the past, and the Kogalymavia airline was facing some financial difficulties, so maybe maintenance was less than stellar.
So what if it really was Daesh which blew up Flight 9268?
Horrible as this may sound, I don’t think that this is very significant, at least not on a political level.
First, Russian officials have always said that the terrorist threat for Russia was real. As soon as the Russian military operation in Syria began, officials were asked whether this would not dramatically increase the risks of terrorist attacks against Russian. Their answer was always the same one: “we already are under maximal threat, this does not make it worse“. This is forgotten in the West, but Russia is still battling a terrorist insurgency in Dagestan. Wahabi crazies are regularly arrested even in Moscow! The anti-terror war for Russia has never stopped and the intervention in Syria is just one more episode of a war which really began following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Yes, this is an immense human tragedy, but it is no worse than Budennovsk or the Nord-Ost episode. Russian expect no less from the shaitans they have been fighting for decades now.
Second, the fact that Daesh had to strike abroad indirectly indicates that they did not have the means to strike inside Russia. Again, one should never say never, but the FSB-protected Russia is a tough one to crack for the Wahabi crazies.
Third, while I would not put it past the Egyptians to lie in their report (they really have a lot to lose!), I don’t think that the Russian officials will lie about the cause of this crash. This is too high visibility a case and, unlike the “Kursk”, this is not a military or national-security matter. The risks of attempting a cover-up much outweigh the potential benefits. Simply put: unlike the Egyptians, the Russians have no imperative reasons to lie (and that is not to say that I suspect the Egyptians of lying; I am only saying that they have much bigger motive to do so than the Russians).
Fourth, regardless of what the final report will say in a couple of months, the Egyptians will pay a huge economic price in lost income as there will always remain a suspicion about what happened. Even if the Egyptian security services did nothing wrong, and even if the final report fully clears Egypt from any wrongdoing, the panic induced by this precedent (fueled by US and UK statements) will badly hurt Egypt. In that sense, Daesh has already greatly benefited from this tragedy.
All of the above leads me to a paradoxical conclusion: whatever the final report will say, it will make very little difference to the situation on the ground. The damage has been done and there is nothing which will undo it.
This is getting weirder and weirder. Now reports are appearing that a British airliner had to “dodge” a missile that was coming towards it in Egypt. The missile was coming without bad intentions during military exercises.
Sharm el-Sheikh flight from Stansted dodged missile last August
Thomson Airways plane heading to Egyptian resort forced to take evasive action after projectile spotted by pilot, British government confirms
A plane carrying British holidaymakers to Sharm el-Sheikh came within 300 metres (1,000ft) of a missile as it neared the Egyptian airport in August, the government has confirmed.
A Thomson Airways flight from London Stansted to the Red Sea resort, carrying 189 passengers, took evasive action after the missile was spotted in its trajectory by the pilot. The crew of flight TOM 476 landed the plane safely and passengers were not advised of the incident, which occurred on 23 August.
The incident is not thought to be directly linked to Britain’s decision to curtail flights to Sharm el-Sheikh in the wake of the crash of the Russian Metrojet airliner, killing 224 people, last Saturday. However, it will underline fears that regional instability could threaten flights, as more countries joined Britain in restricting air travel and imposing tougher security measures.
The Department for Transport (DfT) confirmed that the incident took place but said it did not believe the missile was an attempt to target the British plane, instead ascribing the missile seen by the Thomson pilots to Egyptian military manoeuvres. Airlines are currently prohibited from flying below 26,000 feet over the Sinai peninsula due to fears that Islamic militants fighting the Egyptian government could have weapons capable of bringing down a plane.
The Manpads – portable anti-aircraft missile launchers, which intelligence agencies believe Isis-affiliated groups could possess – are capable of targeting planes only at low altitudes. A government spokesperson said: “We investigated the reported incident at the time and concluded that it was not a targeted attack and was likely to be connected to routine exercises being conducted by the Egyptian military in the area at the time.”
Thomson said that crew reported the missile near-miss to the DfT immediately after conducting an assessment upon landing in Sharm el-Sheikh, in line with established protocol.
A spokesperson said: “The DfT conducted a full investigation in conjunction with other UK government experts. After reviewing the details of the case, the investigation concluded that there was no cause for concern and that it was safe to continue our flying programme to Sharm el-Sheikh.”
Christopher Bollyn (http://www.bollyn.com/#article_15282) : “Although it is too early to say whatt caused the crash, there are some clear indications that suggest the plane was remotely sabbotaged…The Russian aircraft reportedly broke up in flight. This break up may have occured as a result of the extreme forces the plane was subjected to as it went through radical dives and climbs in the last thirty seconds before it dissappeared from radar. This scenario is very similar to the crash of Egypt Air 990, which went down exactly 16 years early on October 31, 1999 , over the Atlantic Ocean, 62 miles of Nantucket Island with 217 killed….The israeli signal inteligence facility, known as Unit 8200, has ‘rows of satellite dishes that covertly intercepts phone calls , emails and other communications’. This israeli spy facility would have had the ability to monitor and communicate directly with the aircraft navigation system -without the knowledge of the crew.” Your thoughts about this theory?
I always look at motive and opportunity.
Russia is fighting on the side of Israel’s axis of evil, and Israel is right next door with the technology and intelligence. No Sinai IS group could pull off something like this.
The recent rapprochement – decoy.
Israel has been the boss in the neighborhood; until Russia stepped in.
How long before the NATO-West blames President Putin for this event? No doubt they will say he is trying to win sympathy from nations that have questioned Russian intervention in Syria or he is trying to shore-up flagging support among Russians who are suffering from western sanctions. The Charlie Hebdo cartoon is only the first strike. Brace yourselves Russians, the NATO-West are coming.
It is even possible that the Egyptians were instructed by the Americans to “look the other way” while the Jihadis placed the bomb! Their efforts to punish the Russians know no limit!
It seems the world of Maya is a world of never ending appearance . . .
The Egyptians however, always appeared to be adept, both at turning the other cheek, or looking the other way, depending naturally, on which way you choose, or chose, to see it. . .
Just to prove the direction of my drift… perhaps this is Saker in a previous incarnation. . . .
Assuming this actually is the VFX Thad Beier (Fast & Furious, Titanic etc) writing this then the “ISIS video” has a very high probability of being a fake.
“The blackness of the smoke at a distance of many miles, and the slow speed of the smoke relative to the airplane lead me to believe that this is shoddy visual effects work. It could easily have been done by anybody during the 24 hours between the crash and the release of the video”
In the FT (financial times) there was an article detailing why it was likely that ISIS/Daesh is behind the downing oft the Metrojet plane. There was almost a triumphant tone in the conclusion that said it was possible that Russia would now focus more on bombing Daesh in Syria after flying strikes almost exclusively against other rebel groups. And now comes the interesting part: The article also mentions that:
AQAP (AlQaida in the Arabian Penninsula) had advanced bomb-making facilities for non-metallic bombs that could be smuggled aboard an aircraft. It also stated that AQAP had a long history of operating in the Sinai. The article nevertheless concludes that because of some statement they released it was almost certain that ISIS/Daesh was behind the bomb, and not AQAP. Not detailing how ISIS would have taken over these advanced bomb-making capabilities of AQAP.
My question: Russia has been flying a lot of strikes against Al-Nusra and other AQ-affiliated groups. Isn’t it more likely that one of thoese seriously battered AQ-affiliated groups is responsible for the bomb on the metrojet rather than ISIS.
Then of course, would it make any difference? Would the reaction from Russia or the west be any different?
As for the shameful and despicable caricatures on the event of the Kogalymavia flight 9268, perpetrated by the infamous French “satirical” weekly Charlie Hebdo, we know that those responsible / creators / owners of this weekly lack something to be considered decent people, and therefore no hope of these characters,
but the leaders of the French Republic, in their claims that there is nothing punishable in this attitude, perhaps suffer from a certain lassitude when as guarantors of compliance with the most basic rules, and legislation, of coexistence and respect for human rights .
Therefore, it does not hurt to remind them some agreements, which French Republic most certainly have subscribed, namely “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of the UN. December 16, 1966”, which states in Articles 19 and 20:
1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.
2. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression; this right includes freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print or art, or through any other media of his choice.
3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. Therefore, it may be subject to certain restrictions, but must, however, be expressly established by law and are necessary:
a) Ensure the respect of the rights or the reputation of others;
b) The protection of national security, public order or public health or morals.
1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.
““International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of the UN. December 16, 1966″, which states in Articles 19 and 20:
Diseases can be attended to when they “present”.
Resort to “law” is resort to “representation” and hence deflects/precludes agency.
Precluding agency re-enforces the opponents’ system and hampers transcendence.
Resort to “law” is resort to “conformance” not to understanding and subsequent transcendence, irrespective of whether “law” is overtly or covertly advesarial.
Perhaps the following link may aid in this regard:
there is another option. At the time of the downing of this flight, there was a military drill involving 4 nations (US, Israel, Poland and Greece) taking place in the Avara desert in southern Israel. The drill focused on air combat using drones as targets. It was called Blue Skies. It was approximately 40 nmi from the location flight 9268 dropped off the radar.
Currently being used by Poland, Greece and the United States are these air-to-air missiles with their associated ranges:
• AIM-120A/B: 55–75 km (30–40 nmi)
• AIM-120C-5: >105 km (>57 nmi)
• AIM-120D (C-8): >180 km (>97 nmi)
And of course, the AIM-54 Phoenix has a 100 mile range.
It’s quite possible that a stray missile from this military drill locked onto Flight 9268 and brought it down.
“Information Clearing House” has an Interesting Article by David Axe entitled “US brings Dogfighters , to counter Russians over Syria . And Veteranstoday.com reports of Western “War Games” held at the Same time in the Same Area of the Sinai ! Brits already escaped an Rockett Attac in August ! —- Your TAKE !?
Another wrinkle on this just to confuse everything further:
Regarding earlier post quoting (unverified) VFX Thad Beier (Fast & Furious, Titanic etc) who wrote the “ISIS video” had a very high probability of being a fake.
“The blackness of the smoke at a distance of many miles, and the slow speed of the smoke relative to the airplane lead me to believe that this is shoddy visual effects work. It could easily have been done by anybody during the 24 hours between the crash and the release of the video”
What is now being suggested is that the footage is real apart from the addition of doctored smoke for greater effect or to obscure the real cause.
Other than always tending to believe the video fake I have no opinion here.
Can anyone think why anyone e.g. alphabet agencies would add this obfuscation -ie. allow the discrediting of something esentially real?
“Can anyone think why anyone e.g. alphabet agencies would add this obfuscation -ie. allow the discrediting of something esentially real?”
Within certain circles it is unusual to “do” anything for a particular reason, more likely for a complex of reasons.
These reasons can include but not necessarily be restricted to:
1. That it can be done encouraging corroboration of attribution, budgets, status, to be seen to be doing.
2. As an over-extension, sometimes known as gilding the lily, through contempt for the targeted audience and lack of patience.
3. To create doubt and deflect the focus of others – such as giving rise to your question.
4. As a consequence of inter-agency competition.
5. To frame investigation within linear paradigms thereby minimising understanding and agency – ergo the obfuscation can be a reason in itself.
Your way of framing the question encourges facilitation of reasons 3 and 5 above.
A more productive approach is to be aware of your purpose, and test the hypothesis – what significance does this have for my purpose?
The following link may illustrate this:
given that Kremlinologists should rarely be removed from their “certainties”.
Welcome to wonderland.
“A more productive approach is to be aware of your purpose, and test the hypothesis – what significance does this have for my purpose?”
Putting aside whether the following link is “true” or not, applying the method above may prove illuminating.
Speaking of paradigms, is infinity a linear or cyclical paradigm?
“is infinity a linear or cyclical paradigm?”
Infinity is a construct to bridge doubt.
““A more productive approach is to be aware of your purpose, and test the hypothesis – what significance does this have for my purpose?”
One possible reason for the framing of your question could be as previously stated
“To create doubt and deflect the focus of others – such as giving rise to your question.”
“To frame investigation within linear paradigms thereby minimising understanding and agency – ergo the obfuscation can be a reason in itself.”
To add to the possible reasons outlined in
6. Because opponents don’t understand that sometimes silence is golden.
Thank you for your broadcast datastream since at 00-30 hrs UTC 11th November 2015 the views on this thread were 14,687 and the comments 308.
My broadcast whether “published” or not on this blog suits my purpose, since broadcasts are made on transmission.
If you want to get technical…
Aleph 1 and Aleph 2 are not linear, and seemingly not cyclical; cyclic ideas about Aleph 0 (infinity of rational numbers), ouroboros sort of thing with the end returning to the beginning, or even a spiral concept, or ‘what goes around comes around’, is not so much a paradigm as a trope.
People like the idea of closure or completeness, but also lack of limits in possibility. Mathematically, the concept of infinity, and the continuum, get’s involved, and has generally been conceived of as a ‘method, rather than a number — long article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity with various links for more on it if you want to tie yourself in an endless knot (cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endless_knot )
Better read some Korzybski before getting into this — a start at http://www.rijnlandmodel.nl/english/general_semantics/abstraction_ladder.htm
“The important thing about the knowledge of the ladder of abstractions, now almost obvious, is that what may be true as a rule between things at the same level of abstraction, almost certainly isn’t true when one changes the level of the entities in the rule.”
This sounds a bit off the wall at first, but we see the practical application all the time, such as when talking about politics and ideology, and words used in propaganda (‘terrorist’ for instance). And there is ‘no end’ to that stuff.
Chomsky had things to say besides politics:
For Chomsky, acquiring language cannot be reduced to simply developing an inventory of responses to stimuli, because every sentence that anyone produces can be a totally new combination of words. When we speak, we combine a finite number of elements—the words of our language—to create an infinite number of larger structures—sentences.
This works out if we consider the production is indefinite length, but in practice we run out brain before we run out of word combinations in even moderate length sentences. And we run out of political speeches and propaganda long before that – there’s a relatively small number of techniques and narratives, really – like the practical limits on logical fallacies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies , many of which are variations of each other.
If we consider the definition
1. One that serves as a pattern or model.
2. A set or list of all the inflectional forms of a word or of one of its grammatical categories: the paradigm of an irregular verb.
3. A set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality for the community that shares them, especially in an intellectual discipline.
We also see some practical limits of variations, although many have never been seriously considered, and people tend to fall into familiar patterns and unquestioned assumptions, making shifting to another difficult.
This whole linear vs lateral spiel, for instance, is all one or at best two dimensional. (Compare right vs left politics, or even a ‘political compass’ idea with possible political spectrum or personality inventory models.
The problem if we go abstract is throttling thought and creative perception to the largely linguistic abstractions and paradigms. Even Saker’s ‘goofball’ comment shows up the danger when it invokes Occam’s razor and lists only a few possibilities, when if this was intentional it increases the motivation (and chances) that some more obscure mechanism was at work simply because it was more obscure, and therefore harder to trace or guard against. In the speculative stage we should not eliminate any possibilities — but then we need to look at plausibility at the decision stage, although none of us here will be required to make a decision as to the immediate actions to be taken, but only our own narrative of the event and what narrative we want to ‘push’ while talking to others. Security measures and retaliation or such is in the hands of the leaders and those with power to make decisions.
At this point I am in danger of going on endlessly, or going around in circles, so I’ll just post this.
“At this point I am in danger of going on endlessly, or going around in circles, so I’ll just post this. “
Quite so, like the opponents you are going around in circles.
This was also the case in your comments
In conjunction with appearing to rely on devotional texts, you appear to “believe” that my associates and I are unaware of “the literature”.
Another interesting projection you appear to make is that the published “literature” illustrates the pinnacle of present knowledge.
However as previously outlined some do not seek attribution, have no worries of tenure and do not seek a Fields medal or a Nobel prize.
Some choose not to publish the results of their activities in the public sphere, but implement strategies on the bases of “understanding” which they have derived from their activities.
You appear to have a restricted notion of what these activities could be.
Strategically this is very useful – the “perceptions” of opponents often are.
This was the case in Russia during the 1990’s and continues to be so.
A blog is a broadcast medium and as outlined in broadcasts
lateral opportunities are afforded since
“6. Because opponents don’t understand that sometimes silence is golden. “
Thank you for your datastream.
“a finite number of elements—the words of our language—to create an infinite number”
The logical lacuna facilitating
“going around in circles”
An interesting posit: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/11/jack-perry/us-drone-russian-metrojet/
Unfortunately, this hypothesis doesn’t appear to fit the mid-air break-up of the rear of the aircraft. It’s a long slog through 90 pages of aviation professionals (mostly) but the conclusions tend towards a catastropic event took place aft of the wing root on the fuselage. In other words, RPB blowout, bomb in either cargo hold 4 or kitchen area, extreme angle of horizontal stabiliser etc.
I bet they found his driving license inside his backpack close by the crash site.. He was also carrying cash and gold coins as well as meals ready to eat for a week and an inflatable ducky..
Abu Osama Al-Masri Number One Suspect of Russian Plane Bombing. As media reports plane bombing mastermind behind the downing of a Russian passenger jet near Sharm el-Sheikh has been unmasked. It is believed he is an Egyptian cleric.
New Evidence for Blast Theory of Russian Holiday Jet, Photo and Video
A picture of one of the crashed Airbus A321’s doors show it bearing ‘pockmarks’ on the inside, which could be evidence of shrapnel from a bomb that has gone off inside the plane.
Before this according to another picture from crash site’s Aviation sources claim the tail section of the aircraft shows evidence of ‘the fuselage skin peeling outwards possibly indicative of a force acting outwards from within’ – possibly a bomb – which could be linked to the earliest moments of the aircraft’s disaster sequence.
The pockmarks on that door panel could be evidence of a bomb but could also be from those hard stones on the ground either from a direct hit or some other impacting wreckage throwing stones at the door. It could also be bolts, rivets, fasteners etc. that were ripped out when the A321 broke apart at altitude.
Without closer visual evidence or other data (e.g. what is that panel made of) my estimation would be the direct hit of that panel on the ground since the rest of the door doesn’t appear to have the same pockmarks. It would be a strange explosion that targeted just that panel.
It’s interesting data nevertheless and I am sure noted by the crash investigators, especially the pattern, residue, depth, tear shape and vectors.
“The pockmarks on that door panel could be evidence”
It would appear that as predicted by Hans Christian Andersen most of the procession still marches on.
save yourselves a lot of bother and just ask this fella
he will know.
(This ‘news’ have been already reported on several other threads here, but I thought, might as well post it here. Mostly, to get closure…)
No need to speculate anymore, it was a bomb:
OFFICIAL: Airbus A321 crashed in Sinai because of terrorist attack
“Russian aircraft A321 that crashed over the Sinai Peninsula, was destroyed by terrorists, the head of the Federal Security Bureau, Alexander Bortnikov said.
Traces of the explosive substance were found in the wreckage of the aircraft. The explosive device had been hidden inside the cabin [..]”
More at the Link> http://www.pravdareport.com/news/russia/17-11-2015/132612-sinai_crash-0/
Could Saudi Arabia or Qatar Be Behind the Crash of the Russian Airbus?
“Commenting on the theory that the plane may have been downed by terrorists, Russian business and analysis magazine Expert noted that such a theory “poses serious foreign policy implications. It is absolutely clear that Russia cannot simply passively swallow such a bitter pill, and that its next steps in the complex game in the Middle East must take account of a new kind of threat [..]”
Russia to use right of self-defense to fight terrorists — Russian Foreign Ministry
“Russia will use the right of self-defense fixed in the United Nations Charter to fight terrorists, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement released on Tuesday in connection with Kogalymavia’s A321 plane crash in Egypt on October 31.
“We consider the barbaric attack on our citizens in the context of the recent series of bloody terror strikes committed in Paris, Beirut, Iraq, Ankara and Egypt,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said.
“Under these circumstances, Russia will act in compliance with article 51 of the United Nations Charter which provides for the right of a state to self-defense,” the ministry said in its statement [..]”
RIP to the victims and I send my most heartfelt condolences to their grieving loved-ones.
The plane was brought down by cyber warfare.