[Spliffdaddy]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe...ash/index.html


MOSCOW, Russia (CNN) -- Russia's Interfax news agency has reported that a hijacking alarm was activated on one of two passenger jetliners that crashed over Russia in nearly simultaneous incidents.

As many as 94 people are feared killed.

Both planes took off from the same Moscow airport within minutes of each other late Tuesday and were bound for southwestern Russian cities.

The first plane disappeared from radar at 10:56 p.m. (0756 GMT), the news agency said.

The second plane, a Tupolev-154, dropped off the radar shortly afterwards.

That plane issued a signal indicating a hijacking or seizure before going missing, the Interfax news agency quoted an unidentified government source as saying on Wednesday.

CNN has no independent confirmation on whether the hijacking alarm was activated.

[AKcrab]

Was it only U.S. owned/operated airlines that reinforced the cockpit doors, or did everyone do it?

[lil'babykitten]

Sad

[badidea]

Originally posted by AKcrab:
Was it only U.S. owned/operated airlines that reinforced the cockpit doors, or did everyone do it?

Doesn't help the pilots in the cockpit very much when the rest of the plane is missing!

[vmarks]

What is interesting here is a comparison between US announcements of the same sort and Russian announcements.

The US has begun to habitually declare that terrorism is not a cause of whatever recent tragedy occurs, before any information is in. Russia came and said, "We suspect terrorism. We will confirm when we have more information."

[greenamp]

**This just in**

liberal blames it on Bush and the swiftboat vets

EDIT: no names, thank you.

[Taliesin]

If it was indeed an attack of Chechnia rebels, it was completely justified as a retaliation. Sad, but justified.

Taliesin

[phoenixboy70]

Originally posted by greenamp:
**This just in**

lerkfish blames it on Bush and the swiftboat vets

in other news, russian conservatives blame liburals for being too easy on terrorism. alert has been been raised to "yellow polka dot".

[Taliesin]

FSB says no signs for explosions or other terroristic activity. They issued the theory of either pilot-faults or bad airplane-fuels.

But who knows?

Taliesin

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by vmarks:
What is interesting here is a comparison between US announcements of the same sort and Russian announcements.

The US has begun to habitually declare that terrorism is not a cause of whatever recent tragedy occurs, before any information is in. Russia came and said, "We suspect terrorism. We will confirm when we have more information."

The reason everyone was immediately certain that 9/11 was terrorism was because more than one plane was involved. That's why the first plane hitting the WTC was assumed to be an accident, but when the second one hit it was obvious that it wasn't an accident.

Russia is in the same situation. With two planes crashing almost simultanously, the odds are high that it wasn't a coincidence. That indicates probable terrorism unless some other cause can be found that would cause to planes to both crash at the same time.

[lil'babykitten]

In the past, the Chechen rebels have claimed responsibility for these sort of attacks straight away. A lot of them have already denied involvement though. That's not to rule terrorism out however. One of those planes was headed to a resort near the Black Sea (if i remember correctly) - which is currently where Putin is on holiday. There's a conspiracy theory for you!

The Russian mafia have been known to do similar things, it's possible they had a target on that private jet, but that wouldn't explain why they crashed the other plane.

The fact that there were two planes involved makes it all too much of a coincidence.

[Logic]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Russia is in the same situation. With two planes crashing almost simultanously, the odds are high that it wasn't a coincidence.

Except that these are Russian airliners we are talking about so it's just as likely that it was two crashes



/tasteless joke of the day

[saab95]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
The reason everyone was immediately certain that 9/11 was terrorism was because more than one plane was involved. That's why the first plane hitting the WTC was assumed to be an accident, but when the second one hit it was obvious that it wasn't an accident.

Russia is in the same situation. With two planes crashing almost simultanously, the odds are high that it wasn't a coincidence. That indicates probable terrorism unless some other cause can be found that would cause to planes to both crash at the same time.

Maybe you thought that the first plane hitting the WTC was an accident, but I didn't.

No way, given the climatic conditions of 9-11 nor the wild deviation from its flight pattern that the first 9-11 crash was an accident. Anyone who assumed so has to be mentally challenged.

[saab95]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
In the past, the Chechen rebels have claimed responsibility for these sort of attacks straight away. A lot of them have already denied involvement though. That's not to rule terrorism out however. One of those planes was headed to a resort near the Black Sea (if i remember correctly) - which is currently where Putin is on holiday. There's a conspiracy theory for you!

The Russian mafia have been known to do similar things, it's possible they had a target on that private jet, but that wouldn't explain why they crashed the other plane.

The fact that there were two planes involved makes it all too much of a coincidence.

Really? Please give us solid evidence that the Russian mafia has previously hijacked commercial aircraft and sabotaged them.

I can give you solid evidence that Al Qaeda and its many related operatives have hijacked planes and sabotaged them. Where do I start? 9-11?

Anyhow, it's about time that asshat Putin (who makes Bush look like a saint IMHO) wakes up to the fact that he has a serious problem on his hands. I think 8-24 is going to be the Russian 9-11.

We'll see.

[macvillage.net]

I believe there are elections in Chechnia this weekend no?

Originally posted by vmarks:
What is interesting here is a comparison between US announcements of the same sort and Russian announcements.

The US has begun to habitually declare that terrorism is not a cause of whatever recent tragedy occurs, before any information is in. Russia came and said, "We suspect terrorism. We will confirm when we have more information."

sad, but true.

But the media still has no bias, nor does it try to sensationalize the story.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by saab95:
Maybe you thought that the first plane hitting the WTC was an accident, but I didn't.

No way, given the climatic conditions of 9-11 nor the wild deviation from its flight pattern that the first 9-11 crash was an accident. Anyone who assumed so has to be mentally challenged.

If I recall correctly, your government thought the first crash was an accident. Not that I would disagree with your assertion that they must be mentally challenged...

[Logic]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
If I recall correctly, your government thought the first crash was an accident. Not that I would disagree with your assertion that they must be mentally challenged...

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
If I recall correctly, your government thought the first crash was an accident. Not that I would disagree with your assertion that they must be mentally challenged...

There is also a history of this. Aircraft hit things, it's a fact of life. Normally it is things like mountains, but in New York City, the "mountains" that are near several major airports (JFK, LaGuardia, Newark) are really tall buildings. Yes, the first plane was assumed to be an accident rather like the plane that once hit the Empire State Building.

With the second plane, however, it was obviously deliberate.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by saab95:
Really? Please give us solid evidence that the Russian mafia has previously hijacked commercial aircraft and sabotaged them.

I'm not saying they have previously hijacked planes -I'm not entirely sure. But I've heard experts say that RM involvement is a possibility.

Originally posted by saab95:
I can give you solid evidence that Al Qaeda and its many related operatives have hijacked planes and sabotaged them. Where do I start? 9-11?

So what? Are you suggesting AQ is behind this?

Originally posted by saab95:
Anyhow, it's about time that asshat Putin (who makes Bush look like a saint IMHO) wakes up to the fact that he has a serious problem on his hands. I think 8-24 is going to be the Russian 9-11.

Unlikely. The death toll is definitely upsetting, but it's not very high.

However, I think there are more attacks to come, because of the upcoming elections and the fact that Chechen rebels have said they are planning attacks.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
There is also a history of this. Aircraft hit things, it's a fact of life. Normally it is things like mountains, but in New York City, the "mountains" that are near several major airports (JFK, LaGuardia, Newark) are really tall buildings. Yes, the first plane was assumed to be an accident rather like the plane that once hit the Empire State Building.

With the second plane, however, it was obviously deliberate.

Yup.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Taliesin:
If it was indeed an attack of Chechnia rebels, it was completely justified as a retaliation. Sad, but justified.

Taliesin

Why don't you knock it off with your pro-murder drivel. I don't want to hear about a hoorific event then listen to you spout off about how killing innocent people on a plane is justified.

[Logic]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Why don't you knock it off with your pro-murder drivel. I don't want to hear about a hoorific event then listen to you spout off about how killing innocent people on a plane is justified.

Flight 655

While issuing notes of regret over the loss of human life, the US government has so far not admitted any wrongdoing or responsibility in this tragedy, nor apologized, but continued to blame Iranian hostile actions for the incident.

In a judgement from the 6 November 2003 the International Court of Justice concluded that American navy's actions in the Persian Gulf at the time had been unlawful.

Most officers involved in the shooting down of the aircraft received decorations for their action.

How about you telling your government that? But of course you won't do that because the US is "not" involved in terrorism.........

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Why don't you knock it off with your pro-murder drivel. I don't want to hear about a hoorific event then listen to you spout off about how killing innocent people on a plane is justified.

I could say the same about you. But if it really bothered me, I'd put you on my ignore list. Which is why you have that option. Why don't you use it if you can't stand tal?

[dcolton]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
I could say the same about you. But if it really bothered me, I'd put you on my ignore list. Which is why you have that option. Why don't you use it if you can't stand tal?

I actually quite like Tal. Above all, he is honest with his opinions.


You on the other hand...

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Logic:
Flight 655



How about you telling your government that? But of course you won't do that because the US is "not" involved in terrorism.........

HOw about discussing the issue at hand or starting another thread to discuss something that happened 15 years ago.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by greenamp:
**This just in**

liberal blames it on Bush and the swiftboat vets

Meanwhile in other news, conservatives blame the crashes on Clinton.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by saab95:
Maybe you thought that the first plane hitting the WTC was an accident, but I didn't.

No way, given the climatic conditions of 9-11 nor the wild deviation from its flight pattern that the first 9-11 crash was an accident. Anyone who assumed so has to be mentally challenged.

Many people assumed it. I did too, for about an hour (during which certain information, like the wild deviation from its flight path, was not yet released). A drunk pilot, for example, could have easily done that.

Then the second plane hit, and with it, the reality of what was going on: no one can pilot two planes that badly at once, no matter how drunk. But with the information available between the first and second hits, it was quite reasonable to assume an accident at that time.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Logic:
Flight 655



How about you telling your government that? But of course you won't do that because the US is "not" involved in terrorism.........

There's also flight 800 which had signs that something was going on.

From rescue crews by coincidence being at near the scene (just beyond the debree field), to eye witnesses, to the final report documenting an error in part of the aircraft they previously said was so badly damaged they couldn't even figure out what some of the parts were. Ex-military experts looking at pictures also noticed damage in line with what a missle would do.

But we'll never find the answer. Everyone who saw something was told to shutup, and that was the end of that.

Personally I think it was a 9/11 like attempt - a large aircraft (747 (ER I believe), extra fuel. They had the warning ahead of time, but didn't know what plane... and got in position just in case.

[deedar]

Originally posted by Taliesin:
If it was indeed an attack of Chechnia rebels, it was completely justified as a retaliation. Sad, but justified.

Taliesin

Sorry, but blowing up airliners full of civillians IS NEVER JUSTIFIED.

[eklipse]

People can 'justify' anything - doesn't necessarily make it 'right' though.

[deedar]

Originally posted by eklipse:
People can 'justify' anything - doesn't necessarily make it 'right' though.

I was referring to Taliesin's apparent absolution of the, at least at this point, hypothetical perpetrators.

[Taliesin]

There are massive doubts from the FSB that it is a terroristic attack, they currently favour the bad fuel-theory.

But if it were an attack by chechnya-rebels, I can't see why it shouldn't be justified as a retaliation, considering the many more civilians the russians have killed in Chechnya.

Maybe you are arguing that two wrongs don't make a right, and in principle I would agree, but try to tell that to the people in Chechnya that have lost numerous familiy-members to the russian aggression, and are still oppressed.

Taliesin

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by deedar:
Sorry, but blowing up airliners full of civillians IS NEVER JUSTIFIED.

agreed

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Taliesin:
If it was indeed an attack of Chechnia rebels, it was completely justified as a retaliation. Sad, but justified.

Taliesin

Poor misguided fool.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Taliesin:
Maybe you are arguing that two wrongs don't make a right, and in principle I would agree, but try to tell that to the people in Chechnya that have lost numerous familiy-members to the russian aggression, and are still oppressed.

That is still no excuse to sink to their level.

If you want to make war, that's fine: fight other warriors. Don't involve those who neither have, need, nor want to do with your conflict.

[Taliesin]

Originally posted by Millennium:
That is still no excuse to sink to their level.

If you want to make war, that's fine: fight other warriors. Don't involve those who neither have, need, nor want to do with your conflict.

That way doesn't work in these modern times anymore. Nowadays there are tanks and airplanes throwing bombs down. You can fight that armies only so long without the adequate technology, the enemy just easily replaces the few soldiers that get killed by the technologically inferior rebels, no problem, and the massive killing by the russians continues.

But if the rebels retaliate on the people that indirectly support the russian army, they can show them that it is against their own interest to kill other people in foreign countries, and earlier or later it will lead to a change in public opinion and then probably to a withdrawal of the russian army.

It would save many more lifes in the long run than to just do without the retaliations and just to concentrate on the foreign armies, espescially if you don't have the adequate technology.

Taliesin

[Taliesin]

There are new theories going around, that it is afterall a retaliation-operation by chechnia-rebels, but the FSB tries to portray it just an accident, in order to deceive the russian public, that feel more and more that the military engagement in Chechnya is a mistake.

Another theory is that the FSB tries to make it an accident, because the supposed attack would again show how ineffective the FSB is in detecting the activities of the rebels.

Taliesin

[Logic]

You guys might disagree with Taliesin, but he definitely got a point.

[eklipse]

Originally posted by Logic:
You guys might disagree with Taliesin, but he definitely got a point.

Yup.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Logic:
You guys might disagree with Taliesin, but he definitely got a point.

and that point is?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by voodoo:
and that point is?

Voters, not the government, are the ultimate decision makers in a democracy. Government merely represents the collective will of the electorate.

[Logic]

Originally posted by voodoo:
and that point is?

That it unfortunately most likely saves more lives in the long run. If no one would fight back and bring the fight to the occupier and aggressor there would be no reason for the aggressor and occupier to stop. We might not like it, we might hate it but I think the words of Mr. Palme says it best:

The resistance of the racist regimes raises the question of whether changes can be brought about only by violence or revolution, or whether there still is a peaceful way of eradicating the affront to human dignity known as colonialism, racism and apartheid. But it is easy to foresee that when people in search of peace and progress are met only by oppression and exploitation, they will ultimately resort to violence. The armed struggle becomes the last possible resort.

and

The resistance of the racist regimes raises the question of whether changes can be brought about only by violence, by armed struggle, or whether there is still a peaceful way of eradicating the affront to human dignity known as colonialism, racism and apartheid. We all obviously prefer peaceful solutions to violent ones. But those of us who are privileged and who have had the good fortune of peaceful change should never moralize about it, never try to appear virtuous in relation to those who have been forced to take up arms to liberate themselves. If we do, we have forgotten our own past.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Voters, not the government, are the ultimate decision makers in a democracy. Government merely represents the collective will of the electorate.

Naturally, so why don't the Chechens use democratic paths to gain independence. It will take generations but looking at history it is the only way to achieve independence against a superior military power.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Naturally, so why don't the Chechens use democratic paths to gain independence. It will take generations but looking at history it is the only way to achieve independence against a superior military power.

Agreed. But, some people aren't willing to wait generations.

[Taliesin]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Naturally, so why don't the Chechens use democratic paths to gain independence. It will take generations but looking at history it is the only way to achieve independence against a superior military power.

The chechens tried the democratic way, they elected a president of their will, and Russia simply dethroned him and put a local governor in, and when resistance came up because of that, Russia simply started wars against Chechnya and occupied it. Grosny, the capital, by the way was nearly completely eradicated with vaccuum-bombs.

Taliesin

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Logic:
That it unfortunately most likely saves more lives in the long run. If no one would fight back and bring the fight to the occupier and aggressor there would be no reason for the aggressor and occupier to stop. We might not like it, we might hate it but I think the words of Mr. Palme says it best:

and

South Africa did not achieve the end of apartheid with violence. Terrorism and retaliations lasted for decades without *any* progress. Isreal vs Palestine independence: same story. Northern-Ireland is still a part of the UK despite decades of IRA terrorsim and Basque is still an inseparable part of Spain despite ETA terrorism for decades. I could go on. The list of the impotence of terrorism is long.

How did Iceland achieve it's independence? How about Norway? South Africa, as I mentioned before gained nothing from petty wars and terrorism. It takes time and patience but in time the soft water pierces the adamant rock. Taoism and Christianity got it right thousands of years ago.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
Agreed. But, some people aren't willing to wait generations.

That is the problem. Not that independence and freedom can't be achieved affectively and permanently through peaceful democratic ways. Why people who are ready to sacrifice their own lives for a cause don't to it in a way that matters is astounding. Increíble.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Taliesin:
The chechens tried the democratic way, they elected a president of their will, and Russia simply dethroned him and put a local governor in, and when resistance came up because of that, Russia simply started wars against Chechnya and occupied it. Grosny, the capital, by the way was nearly completely eradicated with vaccuum-bombs.

Taliesin

No the Chechens didn't try the democratic way. They tried to effectively elect themselves out of Russia as if they had the choice in their hands and got all upset when Russia said no. Excuse me but I hope Chechens aren't that naive. They'll have to work for their freedom. Like everybody else who are desire freedom but haven't got the power and resources to grab it with military.

[Wiskedjak]

What I'm curious about is why Russia won't let Chechnya be independant?

[eklipse]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
What I'm curious about is why Russia won't let Chechnya be independant?

United we stand, divided we fall.