Malaysia Airlines 777 disappears

First topic message reminder :

This is just in...a Malaysia 777 Airliner, bound from Kuala Lampur to Bejing, has disappeared somewhere over Ho Chi Min airspace.

Just broke, so that's all I have.

NemsAgain wrote:

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

all the claims made on technology these days it is hard to imagine people and planes can just disappear..

I dunno, I think if it crashed in that jungle there would be little chance of finding it

the phones were still ringing, that alone should show a gps signal surely...

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

I dunno, I think if it crashed in that jungle there would be little chance of finding it

the phones were still ringing, that alone should show a gps signal surely...

The experts I heard said that what people heard when they called the cell phone was the central equipment signal indicating an outgoing pulse. No word on whether the actual phones were picking up the signal.

Original Quill wrote:

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

the phones were still ringing, that alone should show a gps signal surely...

The experts I heard said that what people heard when they called the cell phone was the central equipment signal indicating an outgoing pulse.  No word on whether the actual phones were picking up the signal.

oh right but if they did not receive the signal you don't normally get a ring tone...

The aircraft could have been going northeast, or north, or west out over the Indian Ocean.

It appears that someone deliberately turned off the transponder signal, but radar returns indicated the plane was flying for nine minutes, at which point it flew out of radar range.  It could have flown on for several hours.  A report from The Wall Street Journal said U.S. aviation investigators and national security officials were basing their belief that the missing plane kept flying on data automatically transmitted to the ground from the passenger jet's engines.

The newspaper said it was unclear whether the aircraft had landed somewhere or had crashed.

The account has raised questions among some U.S. officials about whether the plane had been steered off course "with the intention of using it later for another purpose," the newspaper reported, citing a "person familiar with the matter."  

But Malaysia's acting Transportation Minister Hishammuddin Hussein rejected the Wall Street Journal report at a news conference Thursday, reiterating that the plane sent its last transmissions at 1:07 a.m. Saturday.  However, the US has resources that far surpass that of Malaysia, and it is an American aircraft with British engines.  

The Wall Street Journal report said the plane's engines have an onboard monitoring system supplied by their manufacturer, Rolls-Royce PLC. The system "periodically sends bursts of data about engine health, operations and aircraft movements to facilities on the ground," the newspaper said.

Vietnamese and Chinese search crews found nothing where Chinese satellite photographs released Wednesday showed large floating objects in the South China Sea, northeast of Kuala Lumpur.  The spot is between Malaysia and Vietnam and not far from the plane's expected flight path.

The Wall Street Journal report threatened to open the door to a fresh round of theories about what has become of the plane, which vanished while flying over Southeast Asia on its way from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

Four more hours in the air could have put the plane many hundreds of miles beyond the area currently being searched.  The aircraft took off with 7-hours of fuel on board, enough to make it to Yemen, one ABC expert said.

still baffles me why the transponder can be switched off..

To turn all the instruments that could be tracked off would take minutes, not seconds.

Nobody knows what happened.

They'll find it eventually.

BigAndy9 wrote:To turn all the instruments that could be tracked off would take minutes, not seconds.

Nobody knows what happened.

They'll find it eventually.

If the aircraft was in tact, they had plenty of time...seven hours, given their fuel. The transponder switch on a Boeing 777 is on the center console, in between the pilots. It's a circular indicator switch, the last notch of which is "off". It would take nanoseconds, not minutes.

There would be no reason (that I can think of) to turn off all of the instruments. Some of them are necessary for navigation. Only the transponder is designed specifically to locate the aircraft.

If the transponder were deliberately turned off, it would indicate someone didn't want the location of the aircraft known.

Original Quill wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:To turn all the instruments that could be tracked off would take minutes, not seconds.

Nobody knows what happened.

They'll find it eventually.

If the aircraft was in tact, they had plenty of time...seven hours, given their fuel.  The transponder switch on a Boeing 777 is on the center console, in between the pilots.  It's a circular indicator switch, the last notch of which is "off".  It would take nanoseconds, not minutes.  

There would be no reason (that I can think of) to turn off all of the instruments.  Some of them are necessary for navigation.  Only the transponder is designed specifically to locate the aircraft.

If the transponder were deliberately turned off, it would indicate someone didn't want the location of the aircraft known.

Yes but there's more than the "transponder" isn't there?

Transponders will occasionally malfunction and transmit data that isn't accurate, then crew will recycle it, switching it off, then on, like rebooting a computer, or swap to another unit. Normally at least two transponders are onboard, and you can’t run both at the same time.   The also have the ability to turn just about every device on or off, so that they can isolate them if they go wrong or in the case of a fire.

In the case of the Boeing 777, there are two transponders, for redundancy. Failures are improbable, and in the case of two, almost impossible.

For an aircraft to go completely silent, it would have had to be destroyed or the transponder turned off deliberately.

That said, a failure of two transponders is mathematically possible.

Original Quill wrote:In the case of the Boeing 777, there are two transponders, for redundancy.  Failures are improbable, and in the case of two, almost impossible.

For an aircraft to go completely silent, it would have had to be destroyed or the transponder turned off deliberately.

That said, a failure of two transponders is mathematically possible.

Are both transponders accessible Quill?

At least two transponders:



Very few of a plane’s components are hot-wired to be, as you might say, “always on.” In the interest of safety — namely, fire and electrical system protection — it’s important to have the ability to isolate a piece of equipment, either by a standard switch or, if need be, through a circuit breaker. Also transponders will occasionally malfunction and transmit erroneous or incomplete data, at which point a crew will recycle the device — switching it off, then on — or swap to another unit. Typically at least two transponders are onboard, and you can’t run both simultaneously. Bear in mind too that switching the unit “off” might refer to only one of the various subfunctions, or “modes” — for example, mode C, mode S — responsible for different data.

http://www.askthepilot.com/malaysia-airlines-flight-370/

BigAndy9 wrote:At least two transponders:



Very few of a plane’s components are hot-wired to be, as you might say, “always on.” In the interest of safety — namely, fire and electrical system protection — it’s important to have the ability to isolate a piece of equipment, either by a standard switch or, if need be, through a circuit breaker. Also transponders will occasionally malfunction and transmit erroneous or incomplete data, at which point a crew will recycle the device — switching it off, then on — or swap to another unit. Typically at least two transponders are onboard, and you can’t run both simultaneously. Bear in mind too that switching the unit “off” might refer to only one of the various subfunctions, or “modes” — for example, mode C, mode S — responsible for different data.

http://www.askthepilot.com/malaysia-airlines-flight-370/

if you can ask the pilot surely he will know where his damn plan has gone..lol

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:At least two transponders:



Very few of a plane’s components are hot-wired to be, as you might say, “always on.” In the interest of safety — namely, fire and electrical system protection — it’s important to have the ability to isolate a piece of equipment, either by a standard switch or, if need be, through a circuit breaker. Also transponders will occasionally malfunction and transmit erroneous or incomplete data, at which point a crew will recycle the device — switching it off, then on — or swap to another unit. Typically at least two transponders are onboard, and you can’t run both simultaneously. Bear in mind too that switching the unit “off” might refer to only one of the various subfunctions, or “modes” — for example, mode C, mode S — responsible for different data.

http://www.askthepilot.com/malaysia-airlines-flight-370/

if you can ask the pilot surely he will know where his damn plan has gone..lol

  

NemsAgain wrote:

Original Quill wrote:In the case of the Boeing 777, there are two transponders, for redundancy.  Failures are improbable, and in the case of two, almost impossible.

For an aircraft to go completely silent, it would have had to be destroyed or the transponder turned off deliberately.

That said, a failure of two transponders is mathematically possible.

Are both transponders accessible Quill?

They are sequential, as sassy says.  The second won't be activated unless the first goes into failure mode. Then the switchover is automatic.

So if the first is turned off, the second will not respond.  The first has not failed, but been manually overridden.

Malaysian officials deny claims that missing flight MH370 flew on for hours
Airline chief says Rolls-Royce and Boeing have said they did not receive data from plane after 1.07am on night of disappearance

Malaysian authorities have said reports that the missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 may have flown for an additional four hours beyond its last sighting are inaccurate, and that the final information received from its engines indicated everything was operating normally.

Sources described as familiar with the details of the missing Boeing 777's data had told the Wall Street Journal that US investigators believed the plane had flown for a total of five hours, indicating that the plane may have been diverted "with the intention of using it later for another purpose".

The theory was based on data downloaded in real time straight from the Boeing's engines, which are manufactured by British company Rolls-Royce.

"We have contacted both the possible sources of data – Rolls-Royce and Boeing – and both have said they did not receive data beyond 1.07am," Malaysia Airlines chief executive, Ahmad Jauhari Yahyain, told reporters on Thursday afternoon. "The last transmission at 1.07am stated that everything was operating normally."

The data retrieval system is said to be standard procedure for maintaining and monitoring the engines and is loaded with information regarding the jet's performance, altitude and speed, which is then "compiled and transmitted in 30-minute increments", according to the Wall Street Journal.

A New Scientist report on the Boeing engine data retrieval system also indicated that Rolls-Royce received two data summaries from MH370 — one when it was taking off from Kuala Lumpur, the second as it was climbing towards Beijing.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/13/malaysian-officials-deny-flight-mh370-missing-plane-flew-hours

So even the engines were being monitored and that still doesn't give any more information!

Original Quill wrote:The aircraft could have been going northeast, or north, or west out over the Indian Ocean.

It appears that someone deliberately turned off the transponder signal, but radar returns indicated the plane was flying for nine minutes, at which point it flew out of radar range.  It could have flown on for several hours.  A report from The Wall Street Journal said U.S. aviation investigators and national security officials were basing their belief that the missing plane kept flying on data automatically transmitted to the ground from the passenger jet's engines.

The newspaper said it was unclear whether the aircraft had landed somewhere or had crashed.

The account has raised questions among some U.S. officials about whether the plane had been steered off course "with the intention of using it later for another purpose," the newspaper reported, citing a "person familiar with the matter."  

But Malaysia's acting Transportation Minister Hishammuddin Hussein rejected the Wall Street Journal report at a news conference Thursday, reiterating that the plane sent its last transmissions at 1:07 a.m. Saturday.  However, the US has resources that far surpass that of Malaysia, and it is an American aircraft with British engines.  

The Wall Street Journal report said the plane's engines have an onboard monitoring system supplied by their manufacturer, Rolls-Royce PLC. The system "periodically sends bursts of data about engine health, operations and aircraft movements to facilities on the ground," the newspaper said.

Vietnamese and Chinese search crews found nothing where Chinese satellite photographs released Wednesday showed large floating objects in the South China Sea, northeast of Kuala Lumpur.  The spot is between Malaysia and Vietnam and not far from the plane's expected flight path.

The Wall Street Journal report threatened to open the door to a fresh round of theories about what has become of the plane, which vanished while flying over Southeast Asia on its way from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

Four more hours in the air could have put the plane many hundreds of miles beyond the area currently being searched.  The aircraft took off with 7-hours of fuel on board, enough to make it to Yemen, one ABC expert said.

I have already reported the latest on this. See above. People are beginning the question the Malaysian authorities. They have requested the US Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration to become involved. Presumably, the Malaysians are in over their heads.

Not the same data Quill '"We have contacted both the possible sources of data – Rolls-Royce and Boeing – and both have said they did not receive data beyond 1.07am," Malaysia Airlines chief executive, Ahmad Jauhari Yahyain, told reporters on Thursday afternoon. "The last transmission at 1.07am stated that everything was operating normally."

I have not heard of any reports as to whether the engine data bursts can be manually overridden.

The TSB and FAA have only just gotten involved. Malaysian authorities have just sent them the radar and other data.

Original Quill wrote:I have not heard of any reports as to whether the engine data bursts can be manually overridden.

The TSB and FAA have only just gotten involved.  Malaysian authorities have just sent them the radar and other data.

good on malaysia, no point rushing stuff eh...

Original Quill wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

Are both transponders accessible Quill?

They are sequential, as sassy says.  The second won't be activated unless the first goes into failure mode.  Then the switchover is automatic.

So if the first is turned off, the second will not respond.  The first has not failed, but been manually overridden.

By manually overridden, you mean "or blown up", of course!

Original Quill wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

Are both transponders accessible Quill?

They are sequential, as sassy says.  The second won't be activated unless the first goes into failure mode.  Then the switchover is automatic.

So if the first is turned off, the second will not respond.  The first has not failed, but been manually overridden.

Thanks Quill
weird weird weird

If it crashed into the jungle surely smoke could have been monitored by satellites..............

And wouldn't the " Black box " kick in and send a signal ?

Wouldn't permission be needed to fly in to anyone else's airspace though ?

Aliens   

BigAndy9 wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

They are sequential, as sassy says.  The second won't be activated unless the first goes into failure mode.  Then the switchover is automatic.

So if the first is turned off, the second will not respond.  The first has not failed, but been manually overridden.

By manually overridden, you mean "or blown up", of course!

No, I believe Nems asked whether the two transponders operated independently, and I said they operated sequentially. The question becomes, under what conditions would the second unit switch on. I was saying if the first transponder were switched off, the second box would not consider that a failure. It would recognize that the first box was still operable, but manually overridden.

Of course, in the event of a catastrophe it would read it as a failure.

   WHAT is this mythical "jungle" that people keep talking about in here???

There is NO unexplored and wild "jungle" left over there ~ numerous criss-crossing loggers, oil and gas drillers, farmers, scientists and tourism operators mean that if anything is hidden in their forests now it will eventually be discovered in a matter of only days or weeks ~ not years, as was tha case as recently as only 20-30 years ago..

THAT'S one of the reasons why Orangutans and other wildlife are in so much strife across Indonesia, Burma and Malaysia ~ illegal and extensive deforestation by rogue Malaysian timber merchants has 'denuded' much of those old jungles !  

A couple of people also seem somewhat confused as to just how large that area is, apparently imagining some of those countries to be a lot larger than the reality ~ the Malaysian and Vietnamese peninsulas really aren't all that big, especially when their population densities are also considered. Most of those countries aren't even represented on your average desk-top globes !   

Lone Wolf wrote:   WHAT is this mythical "jungle" that people keep talking about in here???

There is NO unexplored and wild "jungle" left over there ~ numerous criss-crossing loggers, oil and gas drillers, farmers, scientists and tourism operators mean that if anything is hidden in their forests now it will eventually be discovered in a matter of only days or weeks ~ not years, as was tha case as recently as only 20-30 years ago..

THAT'S one of the reasons why Orangutans and other wildlife are in so much strife across Indonesia, Burma and Malaysia ~ illegal and extensive deforestation by rogue Malaysian timber merchants has 'denuded' much of those old jungles !  

A couple of people also seem somewhat confused as to just how large that area is, apparently imagining some of those countries to be a lot larger than the reality ~ the Malaysian and Vietnamese peninsulas really aren't all that big, especially when their population densities are also considered. Most of those countries aren't even represented on your average desk-top globes !   

So that leaves aliens then   

eddie wrote:

Lone Wolf wrote:   WHAT is this mythical "jungle" that people keep talking about in here???

There is NO unexplored and wild "jungle" left over there ~ numerous criss-crossing loggers, oil and gas drillers, farmers, scientists and tourism operators mean that if anything is hidden in their forests now it will eventually be discovered in a matter of only days or weeks ~ not years, as was tha case as recently as only 20-30 years ago..

THAT'S one of the reasons why Orangutans and other wildlife are in so much strife across Indonesia, Burma and Malaysia ~ illegal and extensive deforestation by rogue Malaysian timber merchants has 'denuded' much of those old jungles !  

A couple of people also seem somewhat confused as to just how large that area is, apparently imagining some of those countries to be a lot larger than the reality ~ the Malaysian and Vietnamese peninsulas really aren't all that big, especially when their population densities are also considered. Most of those countries aren't even represented on your average desk-top globes !   

So that leaves aliens then   

Time to call in International Rescue, Lady Penelope. Thunderbirds are GO

eddie wrote:

Lone Wolf wrote:   WHAT is this mythical "jungle" that people keep talking about in here???

There is NO unexplored and wild "jungle" left over there ~ numerous criss-crossing loggers, oil and gas drillers, farmers, scientists and tourism operators mean that if anything is hidden in their forests now it will eventually be discovered in a matter of only days or weeks ~ not years, as was tha case as recently as only 20-30 years ago..

THAT'S one of the reasons why Orangutans and other wildlife are in so much strife across Indonesia, Burma and Malaysia ~ illegal and extensive deforestation by rogue Malaysian timber merchants has 'denuded' much of those old jungles !  

A couple of people also seem somewhat confused as to just how large that area is, apparently imagining some of those countries to be a lot larger than the reality ~ the Malaysian and Vietnamese peninsulas really aren't all that big, especially when their population densities are also considered. Most of those countries aren't even represented on your average desk-top globes !   

So that leaves aliens then   

Oh man, it's the 3,000 year old virus!

Maybe the Higgs Boson thingimajiggy!

they are now saying both transponders were switched off within 14 minutes of each other, the plot thickens so to speak and they have again widened the search to the indian ocean.

Inmarsat statement on Malaysia Airlines flight MH370

14 March 2014: Inmarsat has issued the following statement regarding Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

Routine, automated signals were registered on the Inmarsat network from Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 during its flight from Kuala Lumpur.

This information was provided to our partner SITA, which in turn has shared it with Malaysia Airlines.

Reported on Sky as 5 hours after it left Malaysian air space.

http://www.inmarsat.com/news/inmarsat-statement-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370/

Irn Bru wrote:Inmarsat statement on Malaysia Airlines flight MH370

14 March 2014: Inmarsat has issued the following statement regarding Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

Routine, automated signals were registered on the Inmarsat network from Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 during its flight from Kuala Lumpur.

This information was provided to our partner SITA, which in turn has shared it with Malaysia Airlines.

Reported on Sky as 5 hours after it left Malaysian air space.

http://www.inmarsat.com/news/inmarsat-statement-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370/

Sorry

Irn no news on link re plane....... unless it is me

gerber wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:Inmarsat statement on Malaysia Airlines flight MH370

14 March 2014: Inmarsat has issued the following statement regarding Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

Routine, automated signals were registered on the Inmarsat network from Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 during its flight from Kuala Lumpur.

This information was provided to our partner SITA, which in turn has shared it with Malaysia Airlines.

Reported on Sky as 5 hours after it left Malaysian air space.

http://www.inmarsat.com/news/inmarsat-statement-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh370/

Sorry

Irn no news on link re plane....... unless it is me

The statement is there Gerbs.

The 5 hours bit about the signals being received was just revealed on the BBC News about 10 minutes ago. I said sky by mistake.

Dozens of Planes Have Vanished in Post-WWII Era. Maybe this is more common than we think.

http://www.bloomberg.com/infographics/2014-03-13/vanishing-planes-mapped-since-1948.html

Irn Bru wrote:

gerber wrote:

Sorry

Irn no news on link re plane....... unless it is me

The statement is there Gerbs.

The 5 hours bit about the signals being received was just revealed on the BBC News about 10 minutes ago. I said sky by mistake.

Ta muchly......

just seen this also but on CNN

Missing Malaysian plane: Could it have landed?

From Jethro Mullen, Barbara Starr and Jim Sciutto, CNN
March 14, 2014 -- Updated 1417 GMT (2217 HKT)

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/14/world/asia/malaysia-airlines-plane/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

gerber wrote:If it crashed into the jungle surely smoke could have been monitored by satellites..............

And wouldn't the " Black box " kick in and send a signal ?

Wouldn't permission be needed to fly in to anyone else's airspace though ?

maybe it hasn't crashed at all and its landed and they are negotiating , there is a lot of secrecy with the officials   

VOD(original) wrote:

gerber wrote:If it crashed into the jungle surely smoke could have been monitored by satellites..............

And wouldn't the " Black box " kick in and send a signal ?

Wouldn't permission be needed to fly in to anyone else's airspace though ?

maybe it hasn't crashed at all and its landed and they are negotiating , there is a lot of secrecy with the officials   

I have a feeling in my water you may just be right. I so hope so.

I do hope so too Gerber

Tonight on channel 5 at 9-00, missing plane special.

has anyone seen this image of the two men supposed to have stolen passports look at their legs

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=malaysian+passengers+stolen+passports+image&rlz=1C1CHWA_enGB577GB577&espv=210&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&imgil=qHZk-Dgow5Y2MM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcS-fMr9N3MV3XKLC4W2V9qcm5sZoMkO5zzGHfJXVXvMu-VLTRzeEA%253B620%253B387%253BVQToNXjrIULlmM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%25252Fnews%25252Fworldnews%25252Fasia%25252Fmalaysia%25252F10691602%25252FMalaysian-Airlines-mystery-stolen-passports-Iranian-pair-migrants-not-terrorists.html&source=iu&usg=__2OEeUh7lz9_2MVAT0uR2Q7MTjn8%3D&sa=X&ei=F3AjU8boKeGm0QXXnoGACg&ved=0CD0Q9QEwBw#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=qHZk-Dgow5Y2MM%253A%3BVQToNXjrIULlmM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi.telegraph.co.uk%252Fmultimedia%252Farchive%252F02848%252FMalaysia_2848267b.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%252Fnews%252Fworldnews%252Fasia%252Fmalaysia%252F10691602%252FMalaysian-Airlines-mystery-stolen-passports-Iranian-pair-migrants-not-terrorists.html%3B620%3B387

Ffs...without meaning to sound biased, they do look as if they would 'fit the bill' of terrorists...
That sounds terrible, but I'm just saying what first came to my mind, although, perhaps shallow as It may be...

I do hope I'm wrong.

It's wrong JD, the security forces cleared them, not only because they verified where they were going (final destination Frankfurt) and have spoken to the people they were going to meet, but they also know that they had to change their tickets at the last minute. If you are going to hijack a plane you have to plan it in advance.

Sassy wrote:It's wrong JD, the security forces cleared them, not only because they verified where they were going (final destination Frankfurt) and have spoken to the people they were going to meet, but they also know that they had to change their tickets at the last minute.   If you are going to hijack a plane you have to plan it in advance.

..ah gotcha sassy...pheew!

Joy Division wrote:Ffs...without meaning to sound biased, they do look as if they would 'fit the bill' of terrorists...
That sounds terrible, but I'm just saying what first came to my mind, although, perhaps shallow as It may be...

I do hope I'm wrong.

look at their feet though notice anything unusual JD

Sassy wrote:It's wrong JD, the security forces cleared them, not only because they verified where they were going (final destination Frankfurt) and have spoken to the people they were going to meet, but they also know that they had to change their tickets at the last minute. If you are going to hijack a plane you have to plan it in advance.

If you were going to hijack a plane, you would need to......... get on a plane!


Any plane would do!

So you wouldn't need a plan of where you were going to land it and how you were going to get past all the radar it appears to have avoided by a very convoluted route etc etc etc   

VOD(original) wrote:

Joy Division wrote:Ffs...without meaning to sound biased, they do look as if they would 'fit the bill' of terrorists...
That sounds terrible, but I'm just saying what first came to my mind, although, perhaps shallow as It may be...

I do hope I'm wrong.

look at their feet though notice anything unusual JD

Both wearing the wrong coloured shoes .........

They look totally innocent........  

Anyone remember the photos that were released of the London Tube bombers before the attack ?

This BTW will be watched by the US spy agency

Where are they at the moment......  They monitor so many phones, i devices, computers.......  And so far have been silent.  Everyone blasted them for the covert interference.... and now ?

gerber wrote:

VOD(original) wrote:

look at their feet though notice anything unusual JD

Both wearing the wrong coloured shoes .........

They look totally innocent........  

Anyone remember the photos that were released of the London Tube bombers before the attack ?

This BTW will be watched by the US spy agency

Where are they at the moment......  They monitor so many phones, i devices, computers.......  And so far have been silent.  Everyone blasted them for the covert interference.... and now ?

their legs are the same on both of them   

VOD(original) wrote:

gerber wrote:


Both wearing the wrong coloured shoes .........

They look totally innocent........  

Anyone remember the photos that were released of the London Tube bombers before the attack ?

This BTW will be watched by the US spy agency

Where are they at the moment......  They monitor so many phones, i devices, computers.......  And so far have been silent.  Everyone blasted them for the covert interference.... and now ?

their legs are the same on both of them   

Will look again.....

VOD(original) wrote:

gerber wrote:


Both wearing the wrong coloured shoes .........

They look totally innocent........  

Anyone remember the photos that were released of the London Tube bombers before the attack ?

This BTW will be watched by the US spy agency

Where are they at the moment......  They monitor so many phones, i devices, computers.......  And so far have been silent.  Everyone blasted them for the covert interference.... and now ?

their legs are the same on both of them   

Yes VOD, and if you click on the bit that says go to page, you will see photos of them with other people, they were travelling together, looks like they are wearing a type of 'uniform', perhaps they were part of a group.