OMG have you guys just heard......

OMG have you guys just heard.....

Two russian civil planes has just crashed in russia..........

People suspect it to be an terrorist attack......:angry:

I "Hate" terrorists :angry: :angry:


KBO

 

Here is the USA the reports say no suspected terrorist involvement.

 

What... that sounds wird...... :-?

Hmm every country has its own meaning i guess...... :lol: :lol:

KBO

 

Not to sound like nitpicker but it happened yesterday, not just few minutes ago.

 

Oh i just heard it now.... man i need to watch some more television :lol:

KBO

 

It seems that every time there is some accident, especially when aircrafts are involved, people start to speculate about terrorism. I see no point in crashing two aircrafts for the purpose of terror - it would take a lot of coordination to hijact two aircrafts, and then crash them into each other, and the casualties could be much easier reached by more conventional measures. It wouldn't have much effect of terror either, as it would 'only' concern air traffic - whenever terrorists strike, they do so by attacking something which is more everyday to all of us - buildings or railroads/subways. These are both easier to attack, there is the possibility of higher casualties and it is much more difficult to avoid - thus, people will become more frightened.

 

According to the BBC, one aircraft put out an emergency signal that could mean 'we've been hijacked'

Terrorism or not, still an awful event.

 

It could be a stranger-than-fiction coincidence, but I doubt it. Look for facts to dribble out about bombs being involved with timing devices. Some are speculating shoulder fired missles, but if this were the case they would have both gone down close to Moscow immediately after takeoff. Then look for the Russians to deal with Chechnya harshly.

 

Uh, Christian, the planes didn't crash into each other. They crashed down some 1000 kilometers apart, and also 15 minutes apart. I don't think terrorism has anything to do with it, for what Christian mentioned, and also because it has no point to just make an airplane crash. If you had them both crashed into something, then it would be another matter, of course.

 

Terrorists do 'just' blow up planes. Several hundred dead people is not pointless, not to mention a loss of faith in the safety of flying as transport.
Have you forgotten Lockerbie, where a 747 was blown up by Libeyan terrorists? There are other examples...

Terrorist does not automatically mean Al-Qa-wotsit, either.
I'm sure that Putin will be pointing the finger straight at Chechens.

 

Roel
Guess I mixed up how they crashed - realized this morning.

Ricky
There is a difference between blowing up an aircraft and crashing it. Chrashing it means that you'll first have to hijack it. This will take many persons to do, whom must all be willing to die (which is hardly the case for all terrorists). By crashing the aircrafts, it isn't even certain that people will know it's a terrorist attack, and if they don't know, they won't be terrorized.
Blowing up the aircraft will, on the other hand, leave little doubt of terrorism, and is also much easier to do.

 

Thanks, Christian.

Ricky: the name of the terrorist organization is "Al Qua'eda", which means "the Base" as in foundation. It doesn't matter how you write it, because it's originally Arabic and their tones and letters are impossible to write down in Latin script. For example, the infamous Iraqi prison was dubbed "Abu Ghraib" by western media, even though there isn't a single G in the name. It's a hard sort of "hhR" that Englsh-speaking people just dont know.

 

Cheers Roel - I was vastly unsure of the spelling.

So far there is little evidence for terrorism - but there is little evidence of anything else either.

From the BBC website:

"The wide distribution of large fragments indirectly confirms the conjecture that the plane broke up in midair because of an explosion," Sibir Airlines said in a statement.

They do not yet know if it is from error or a deliberate explosion.

May I suggest we wait until results are out?

 

Abit like the g in dutch, with I believe a northern accent. I love saying 'goede dag'.

 

I don't believe in the tooth fairy, I don't believe in most conspiracy theories, but most of all I don't believe in coincidences. This is terrorism, there's no doubt in my mind. The only positive thing I find here is that they must have had trouble getting some Stingers or SA-7s to get it done that way. They stayed decidedly low-tech.

Done for what purpose? If the world's population has to worry about getting shot out of the sky every time they board a plane, the confidence crisis will cripple the world's economy.

 

Yes, but I will wait until all the facts are presented before I make my decision. Lerts just hope that this is not a pretense to the near future.

 

Stinger and SA-7s are short range low altitude shoulder fired heatseeking AA-missiles. There is no way they could reach an airplane flying in their normal flight altitude.

 

There's no Dutch G in there either, though. It's a hard R, not a G, preceded by some kind of throat sound. It's most like "hhR".

 

further news...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3604134.stm

 

That is what I was saying it sounds like the Dutch G.