Did ISIS down a passenger jet?

Status
Not open for further replies.
JonathanRyan said:
Yes. That's what Mr Hammond said. It does seem a bit odd that they didn't mention it to that nice Mr el-Sisi (srsly it's ISIS backwards - why is nobody reporting this??) since he was on his way here at the time for a cup of tea and a hobnob.

I'm not suggesting there's no chance it was a bomb. Just that it seems a strange time to become unilaterally convinced that it was. Like that time they parked tanks at Heathrow.
Click to expand...

I share your cynicism too Jonathan, I find it difficult to believe anything our government tell us. However we have to assume they have intelligence to suggest this course of action but only time will tell...or maybe not.
 
Charlie Winter senior researcher at the anti-extremism thinktank Quilliam.

Increasingly, the signs seem to be pointing towards foul play. No evidence has been made public yet, but the British government has suspended all flights to and from Sharm el-Sheikh, leaving about 20,000 Britons stranded in the Red Sea resort town.

Until any concrete conclusions emerge, we are left with three working hypotheses: first, that Isis is freeloading off the publicity surrounding the crash; second, that ISIS did it; and third, that someone else is responsible.

The last option is the least likely, so let’s put it to one side.

Regarding the first hypothesis, the motivations for opportunism are replete – Isis’s claiming involvement has already thrust it to the forefront of the headlines, bolstered its perception of momentum, and ensured sustained relevance.

All of it has come – if this is the case – at next to no cost. Even if it turns out that Isis was not involved, the boons of publicity far outweigh the drawbacks to being outed as duplicitous.

If, however, it turns out that the flight was downed by Isis, the situation is markedly more complicated. It would make Isis – an organisation that has hitherto relied on high-profile self-starter terrorist attacks – responsible for the second deadliest terror attack since 9/11 (the first being Beslan).

Furthermore, it would mean ISIS had succeeded in pulling off something that its chief jihadist rival, al-Qaida, has tried and failed to do for years (blow up an aircraft mid-air).

If it does emerge that Isis caused the crash, we need to ask, first of all, how Isis came to this capability and, secondly, why it has persistently withheld any real evidence of its claims.

In answering the first question, the ability to pull off an operation like this could be a boon of Isis’s “caliphate” model and the internationalised operational capabilities it presents. For example, the attack could have been planned by Isis in Syria, the bomb could have been built by Isis in Egypt, and the operative who smuggled it on board could have been from ISIS’s Russian affiliate.

On the second question regarding the lack of evidence, there are a number of things that could be at play. First and foremost, obfuscation like this maximises attention. Just as it cultivated confusion surrounding the fate of the Jordanian pilot, Mu’adh al-Kasasbeh, earlier this year, Isis could just be drawing everything out with a view to milking the operation for all its worth. If – emphasis on if – this is the case, it is not beyond reason that Isis will release a high-profile video from one of its central propaganda outlets in the near future.

If the rumours of Isis’s sabotage become reality, the consequence would be huge. Among other things, Egypt’s tourism industry would be hit immensely hard; air travel the world over would suffer; and security restrictions would likely be revamped and maximised. Regarding Isis, in particular, the implications would be great, too. After all, it would mean that Isis had resolutely trumped al-Qaida, and would likely lead Russia to step up its anti-Isis military campaign – both things that would boost its recruitment efforts dramatically.

In any case, it is critical that, until the final crash analysis emerges, we keep our speculation rational and our assumptions grounded in real, physical evidence.

Taking Isis at its word and believing its claim on the basis of a few statements, as some have been guilty of already, is a potentially catastrophic error.
 
Last edited:
interesting, but i'm not entirely sure that ISIS are that bothered about trumping AQ - not least because IS and AQ are affiliated, and indeed IS started from "AQ in iraq" moving operations over the border into Syria
 
Byker28i said:
Lets not forget Isis claimed they shot down the jet, not used a bomb.
Click to expand...

Did they though? The original tweet was in Arabic (obvs) but all the news reports I can see translate it as "brought down" a plane. The editorials all spin it as shooting down but if that translation is accurate it could refer to a bomb.
 
JonathanRyan said:
I've not been watching the news. What past form is this? Have they used bombs in this way before?
Click to expand...

c'mon john this is ST4 logic we are talking about - they use bombs on busses etc ergo they also use them on aeroplanes... as far as i know there has never been an islamic state inspired plane bombing, and the last successful 'islamic' inspired plane bombing was probably lockerbie (if you count the gaddafi regime as islamic rather than anarchic)

of course there have been unsuccessful ones like richard reid , and AQ did try to shoot down an egyptian airline with grails in the early 2000s (they reportedly failed because they used training missiles ones without heatseekers installed)
 
big soft moose said:
c'mon john this is ST4 logic we are talking about - they use bombs on busses etc ergo they also use them on aeroplanes... as far as i know there has never been an islamic state inspired plane bombing, and the last successful 'islamic' inspired plane bombing was probably lockerbie (if you count the gaddafi regime as islamic rather than anarchic)

of course there have been unsuccessful ones like richard reid , and AQ did try to shoot down an egyptian airline with grails in the early 2000s (they reportedly failed because they used training missiles ones without heatseekers installed)
Click to expand...

Shoe bomber, bus bomber, 9/11, Lockerbie. Train shooter. Killing people on public transport is a Muslim terrorist MO.
 
ST4 said:
Shoe bomber, bus bomber, 9/11, Lockerbie. Train shooter. Killing people on public transport is a Muslim terrorist MO.
Click to expand...

its a terrorist MO tbh - look at the anarchists releasing sarin on a tokyo subway on the IRA bombing the london underground and the blackwall flyover - but that said bombng aircraft is not an IS MO specifically
 
ST4 said:
Shoe bomber
Click to expand...

Not a (successful) bomb. Not ISIS.

ST4 said:
bus bomber
Click to expand...

I'm not sure which of the many bus bombers you mean (surely not the IRA) but not a plane. And not ISIS.

ST4 said:
9/11
Click to expand...

Not a bomb, not ISIS.

ST4 said:
Lockerbie.
Click to expand...

Congratulations! This was a bomb that took down a plane. Sadly for your argument, not ISIS.

ST4 said:
Train shooter.
Click to expand...

Nope, you've lost me. You mean the one in France? Possibly ISIS, not a bomb, not a plane. Also, not successful.

ST4 said:
Killing people on public transport is a Muslim terrorist MO.
Click to expand...

Killing people is a terrorist MO. Claiming credit for stuff you haven't done is a terrorist MO.

In fact it would be a very new (and pretty scary) thing if ISIS have started killing people on planes. It's totally unlike anything they have done before. Apart from it being, you know, terrorism.
 
boyfalldown said:
Chechen rebels suicide bombed a couple of Russian Jets and caused them to crash in the early 2000s. Now theres another conspiracy theory
Click to expand...

this is true - i'm not sure if i'd put them as islamically inspired though - Its like the debate about whether the IRA are christian inspired - russia invaded chechnya, chechens want them out and to be independent... islam is a side issue
 
I imagine that by bus bomb steve means on 7/7 also not isis
 
big soft moose said:
I imagine that by bus bomb steve means on 7/7 also not isis
Click to expand...

Oh yes. That one. Another one by the enemies of ISIS rather than actual ISIS. (We all know that ISIS and al Qaeda are actually at war with each other, right?)
 
JonathanRyan said:
. (We all know that ISIS and al Qaeda are actually at war with each other, right?)
Click to expand...

well yes and no as i said earlier ISIS have their origins in 'AQ in Iraq' so like everything to do with the middle east is a bit of a f*** up they are at war with some of each other, but also sympathise with some of each other and in some cases work together or even have cells who are part of both organisations, or third party organisations affiliated to both. What the Middle east is not is simple.
 
ST4 said:
Successful or not, killing people in public is a muslim terrorist mo.

This stinks of jihad
Click to expand...

So christian, anarchist, marxist, hindu, jewish , atheist, (etc) terrorists don't kill people publically ? only the muslims .. riiight
 
ST4 said:
Successful or not, killing people in public is a muslim terrorist mo.

This stinks of jihad
Click to expand...

Derek bird, Michael Ryan, Thomas Hamilton all killed people in public. Can't remember them being muslim. it's not the religion, people hide behind religion as an excuse, it's just bad people all over the world do this.
 
Shut up yer load of plonkers ,to most people with half a brain it was always likely to be a bomb planes dont break up mid air very often ,and given the circumstances it's highly unlikely it would have been a Russian one .
Secondly Germany has now joined the flight ban .
But the best statement I heard on the news today was a normal British holiday maker saw the chink in the security armour that no one else has spotted ,on your last day on holiday you are required to check out of your room at midday ,if your flight is not until the late evening then you leave your cases in a communal area ,it's the normal procedure with these big hotels ,this gives any terrorist the opportunity to place a bomb in someone's luggage .
The hotels for instance in nabq Bay Area of sharm all have super front door security with walk through metal detectors and armed guards ,but you can simply walk down any service road beside the hotels and enter from the unguarded beach area ,any security guards in that area are more interested in looking at the tits on the Russian dolly birds than doing there jobs .
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
the black fox said:
But the best statement I heard on the news today was a normal British holiday maker saw the chink in the security armour that no one else has spotted ,on your last day on holiday you are required to check out of your room at midday ,if your flight is not until the late evening then you leave your cases in a communal area ,it's the normal procedure with these big hotels ,this gives any terrorist the opportunity to place a bomb in someone's luggage .
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Though they would then have to go through scanners designed to detect, erm, bombs.

This is always a good read on airport security. But maybe not if you're flying soon.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-reasons-tsa-sucks-a-security-experts-perspective/
 
the black fox said:
Shut up yer load of plonkers ,to most people with half a brain it was always likely to be a bomb planes dont break up mid air very often ,and given the circumstances it's highly unlikely it would have been a Russian one .
Click to expand...

you speculate. We do know however that the plane in question suffered severe damage during a tail strike. And aircraft which have been involved in tail strike before have suffered break ups in flight years afterwards. Not saying thats the cause, but pointless coming with Sun editorials either

the black fox said:
Secondly Germany has now joined the flight ban .
Click to expand...


I thought that was Lufthansa? An airline (and its subsidiaries) isn't a country

the black fox said:
But the best statement I heard on the news today was a normal British holiday maker saw the chink in the security armour that no one else has spotted ,on your last day on holiday you are required to check out of your room at midday ,if your flight is not until the late evening then you leave your cases in a communal area ,it's the normal procedure with these big hotels ,this gives any terrorist the opportunity to place a bomb in someone's luggage .
Click to expand...

Thats the world over.....its never a problem elsewhere
 
Last edited:
boyfalldown said:
you speculate. We do know however that the plane in question suffered severe damage during a tail strike. And aircraft which have been involved in tail strike before have suffered break ups in flight years afterwards. Not saying thats the cause, but pointless coming with Sun editorials either
Click to expand...
It was repaired to a high standard and flew many times, it was well monitored and well repaired due to tight regulations. Jihadists have brought down planes in the past, your point is what. You speculate too, actually I'd say clutch at straws??
 
ST4 said:
It was repaired to a high standard and flew many times, it was well monitored and well repaired due to tight regulations. Jihadists have brought down planes in the past, your point is what. You speculate too, actually I'd say clutch at straws??
Click to expand...

It's tail hit a hanger roof again on 8th October during a parking incident.
 
ST4 said:
Because of stringent civil aviation regulations.
Click to expand...


You don't have access to the maintenance records for the plane then? Don't those stringent regulations apply to security too?
 
A message to you Putin Pig

This plane is a message Putin Pig

god willing we will get to you all


On TV earlier a video posted by the muslim extreamist organisation islamic state
Above is a message from Islamic State to The Russian President and the people of USSR. I am starting to fear this situation is going to get very close to home as the USSR step up the efforts as VP will need to...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
boyfalldown said:
You don't have access to the maintenance records for the plane then? Don't those stringent regulations apply to security too?
Click to expand...

The aircraft was Irish owned, the regulations that apply to its maintenance are some of the highest in the world. Consider the news link I posted earlier about the lax security in the airport in Eygpt. It would appear a bomb would have easily been able to have been placed on the plane....
 
LASTOLITE said:
A message to you Putin Pig

This plane is a message Putin Pig

god willing we will get to you all


On TV earlier a video posted by the muslim extreamist organisation islamic state
Above is a message from Islamic State to The Russian President and the people of USSR. I am starting to fear this situation is going to get very close to home as the USSR step up the efforts as VP will need to...
Click to expand...

damned jihadists....
 
ST4 said:
The aircraft was Irish owned, the regulations that apply to its maintenance are some of the highest in the world. Consider the news link I posted earlier about the lax security in the airport in Eygpt. It would appear a bomb would have easily been able to have been placed on the plane....
Click to expand...


No, you don't then
 
I've had16 years in the aircraft industry I can safely say not all maintenance yards are the same and not all work to the same standard.
I've seen some frankly shoddy work on US and UK jets.

A mistake could easily be missed or deliberately covered up.
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
The aircraft was Irish owned, the regulations that apply to its maintenance are some of the highest in the world. Consider the news link I posted earlier about the lax security in the airport in Eygpt. It would appear a bomb would have easily been able to have been placed on the plane....
Click to expand...

Just as easily had a botched fix too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top