On 26/03/2014 00:51, LP wrote:
"Government Shill #2" wrote:
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 19:33:05 -0500, "LP" wrote:


wrote:
On 03/25/2014 11:04 AM, LP wrote:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...a-live-updates

I'm wondering why all the secrecy in the first ten days, if this is the
outcome. Why was the transponder initially turned off, if it wasn't a
hijacking or crazy pilot suicide plot? Any ideas or theories?

Everything I saw about the pilot didn't sell me on the suicide bit. How
about the crew struggling to fly an unfylable maybe depressurized
airplane, or passed out? Secrecy? We have NOTHING but alleged opinion,
no pieces, no bodies, no verifiable DNA, no NOTHING. I'll wait for facts
and data and until then everything stays on the table.

I agree that there are more questions than answers, but I can't think of
one
reason to turn off the transponder if my plane is on fire, depressurized,
etc.

If the fire was in the transponder, or something effecting the power
supply to
the transponder... or the depressurisation was caused by the transponder
antenna
ripping out and leaving a hole in the fuselage...?

There's a couple of reasons. Just tossing out some crazy ideas.

Thanks for brainstorming for a reason. Seems more than we have got from the
media. This morning on abc was all about what the ping sounded like on a
real black box. guffaw Just the facts, please, if you can find them abc.

At this stage, my money is on the systems being deliberately switched of
by
person, or persons, unknown. This is based on wild eyed guesswork on my
part.

I find it strange that it supposedly flew for over 7 hours total. With
submarines all over the Indian Ocean, you would think they would have picked
up the ping on the box.

LP



1) The Indian Ocean is BIG
2) Nuclear Submarines typically operate submerged with no radar working
3) DE Submarines tend to lurk around main shipping routes and also
practise EMCON

Keith