Quite a three pipe problem.
I’ve always wondered why there has been an air of secrecy and ‘gag’ around the 370 event. It’s uncommon, to the point of rarity: take any of the major accidents in recent history as a yardstick, all available information out there and the majority of FOI answered. The 370 story went almost ‘dark’ pretty much from when AMSA were dumped. Why?
If a question cannot be answered, that, in the 370 case is fair enough – “sorry, we just don’t know” would be a reasonable answer. When a question can be answered, then why not respond – even if it is an answer qualified with a rider “based on the best information available” etc.
The whole episode was shrouded in its own mystery and puzzling enough for the most determined of sleuths and conspiracy clubs. So why compound the mystery by gagging folk who may have a valid opinion, or idea. ATSB threatened jail for speculation outside of closed doors. Why? To what purpose.
But what could be so secret about a passenger flight, lost ‘at sea’ that the military would go to extreme lengths to prevent a media interview of a Defence scientist? This is the sort of behaviour which simply feeds ‘conspiracy theorists’ and promotes suspicion. In all probability, the named Group expert Neil Gordon only has his own ‘theory’ based on information available, same as everyone else. Unless there is something to hide and there is information which is not being shared. If so, what is it and why?
It ain’t ‘suspicious’ but it is ‘cock-eyed’. Why should ATSB prevent open discussion with accredited crash investigators – it’s a fair bet there would be ‘dissention’ in the ranks, which, in the name of ‘investigation’ can only be healthy. Why should any Defence scientists be gagged; not allowed to openly and publicly present their ‘theory’; where’s the harm in discussion?
I don’t ‘get-it’ – if there’s nothing untoward to hide, then why prevent discussion which may stimulate resolution of the ‘mystery’. If there’s nothing to hide, then why go to extreme lengths to prevent open discussion? There can only be four, perhaps five major causes of the disappearance; it should be possible to refine those to a probability or two. In the beginning this event was land based; the solution is on the ground; someone, somewhere knows exactly what happened; one of the 1886 known satellites may hold a clue; one of the clever radar sites may provide an inkling; who knows. But what is as yet unknown is how, in this modern age can a passenger aircraft just vanish without a trace. Threats of jail and gags don’t help find the aircraft; just fuel the flames of conspiracy and suspicion, where there should be none. Why?
ET rules OK.
I’ve always wondered why there has been an air of secrecy and ‘gag’ around the 370 event. It’s uncommon, to the point of rarity: take any of the major accidents in recent history as a yardstick, all available information out there and the majority of FOI answered. The 370 story went almost ‘dark’ pretty much from when AMSA were dumped. Why?
If a question cannot be answered, that, in the 370 case is fair enough – “sorry, we just don’t know” would be a reasonable answer. When a question can be answered, then why not respond – even if it is an answer qualified with a rider “based on the best information available” etc.
The whole episode was shrouded in its own mystery and puzzling enough for the most determined of sleuths and conspiracy clubs. So why compound the mystery by gagging folk who may have a valid opinion, or idea. ATSB threatened jail for speculation outside of closed doors. Why? To what purpose.
But what could be so secret about a passenger flight, lost ‘at sea’ that the military would go to extreme lengths to prevent a media interview of a Defence scientist? This is the sort of behaviour which simply feeds ‘conspiracy theorists’ and promotes suspicion. In all probability, the named Group expert Neil Gordon only has his own ‘theory’ based on information available, same as everyone else. Unless there is something to hide and there is information which is not being shared. If so, what is it and why?
It ain’t ‘suspicious’ but it is ‘cock-eyed’. Why should ATSB prevent open discussion with accredited crash investigators – it’s a fair bet there would be ‘dissention’ in the ranks, which, in the name of ‘investigation’ can only be healthy. Why should any Defence scientists be gagged; not allowed to openly and publicly present their ‘theory’; where’s the harm in discussion?
I don’t ‘get-it’ – if there’s nothing untoward to hide, then why prevent discussion which may stimulate resolution of the ‘mystery’. If there’s nothing to hide, then why go to extreme lengths to prevent open discussion? There can only be four, perhaps five major causes of the disappearance; it should be possible to refine those to a probability or two. In the beginning this event was land based; the solution is on the ground; someone, somewhere knows exactly what happened; one of the 1886 known satellites may hold a clue; one of the clever radar sites may provide an inkling; who knows. But what is as yet unknown is how, in this modern age can a passenger aircraft just vanish without a trace. Threats of jail and gags don’t help find the aircraft; just fuel the flames of conspiracy and suspicion, where there should be none. Why?
ET rules OK.