MH370: Malaysian Airlines Flight to Beijing carrying 239 people is lost over sea.

  • Thread starter Furinkazen
  • 1,507 comments
  • 80,923 views
FACEPALM

Mirror Online
MH370 conspiracy: Does rapper Pitbull predict Malaysia Airlines plane will go missing in 2012 track Get It Started?

Lyrics include: "Now it's off to Malaysia" and "Two passports, three cities, two countries, one day."

Rapper Pitbull predicted that Flight MH370 would go missing two YEARS ago, it has been suggested.

Conspiracy theorists have been drawing comparisons between the lyrics of his 2012 track Get It Started and the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of the plane on March 8.

Lines in the song, which features a guest appearance from Colombian singer Shakira, include: "Now it's off to Malaysia" and "Two passports, three cities, two countries, one day."

Viewers on YouTube are convinced the two passports is a reference to the stolen Austrian and Italian passports used by two Iranians to board MH370.

They also believe the three cities refer to the capital cities of Malaysia, China and Vietnam and the two countries are Malaysia and Vietnam.

Furthermore, they assert the lyrics "No Ali, No Frasier, but for now off to Malaysia" are a reference to Mr Ali, the man who bought tickets for the two Iranians to travel on board MH370.

One YouTube fan wrote: "This song is related to the mh370 incident.. OMG!!!"

Other conspiracy theories aired include that the plane was shot down by the Americans and that it was hijacked by terrorists and forced to land in Afghanistan where the 239 passengers and crew are being held hostage.

It's almost as bad as when Courtney Love claimed she found the plane :rolleyes:

I know she meant well but it started a whole new meme.
 
Last edited:
"...Mr Ali, the man who bought tickets for the two Iranians to travel on board MH370."

Did this actually happen, or is it just conspiracy BS???
 
"...Mr Ali, the man who bought tickets for the two Iranians to travel on board MH370."

Did this actually happen, or is it just conspiracy BS???

It happened, but in many parts of the world you can buy dodgy tickets/ID, or so it seems. In that part of the world dealing with a Mr Ali wouldn't be unusual.

I thought travelling on a fake passport by air would be much harder to do but research since this event shows that we can't, apparently, be arsed to try to stop it properly.
 
Not a hard task to be honest. :rolleyes:

I believe it's just pure coincidence that the lyrics match up but then again, One mans coincidence is another mans base for a conspiracy.
 
It surely is no coincidence that the late, great John Denver never wrote "Arriving on a Jet Plane".

Suddenly it's eerily obvious what he was trying to tell us despite his absurd cardigan. It wouldn't surprise me to find that the passengers had spent a night in the forest somewhere.
 
Err. No. It's only crazy when a respected news service does that. Not the Daily Fail or any other joke news service reports things like that. Take with a truck load of salt.
 
Jay
But but that's a classic B737-400 not a [NG] B737-800 :P



Malaysia_Airlines_Boeing_737-800_Prasertwit-1.jpg


'ere we go FFF
AT least he tried, that much better than a damn 777 being used in place of a 737, what's next DC-10 in place of Airbus pictures cause media thinks "one plane is the same as another right?:dopey:"

Good picture though such a lovely plane.
 
The reason that many theories are still credible is until an ELT signal was picked up there was no evidence at all to suggest even a vague location for the plane. As I said earlier (in response to a really mad theory) I'm not aware of a system that matches a particular ELT to a plane - if you hear one you go and look for it, that's all they do. That means that we can't exclude the possibility that this ELT signal was deliberately placed. I think that's highly unlikely but it isn't excludable.

For now, however, the spotlight has turned on @Dotini and about time too.
 
Just admit that you are working on a personal remake of the Langoliers.

I'll admit to long ago reading and watching Stephen King's Langoliers.

As entertaining an explanation as Langoliers might be, I'll proffer one even more exciting and realistic: hijacking by US military as authorized, justified and explained by the following:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/07/obama-china-targets-cyber-overseas
Obama orders US to draw up overseas target list for cyber-attacks
Exclusive: Top-secret directive steps up offensive cyber capabilities to 'advance US objectives around the world'

Read the secret presidential directive here
  • Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill
  • theguardian.com, Friday 7 June 2013 15.06 EDT
    Link to video: Obama defends internet surveillance programs
    Barack Obama has ordered his senior national security and intelligence officials to draw up a list of potential overseas targets for US cyber-attacks, a top secret presidential directive obtained by the Guardian reveals.

    The 18-page Presidential Policy Directive 20, issued in October last year but never published, states that what it calls Offensive Cyber Effects Operations (OCEO) "can offer unique and unconventional capabilities to advance US national objectives around the world with little or no warning to the adversary or target and with potential effects ranging from subtle to severely damaging".

    It says the government will "identify potential targets of national importance where OCEO can offer a favorable balance of effectiveness and risk as compared with other instruments of national power".

    -------

    The directive's publication comes as the president plans to confront his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping at a summit in California on Friday over alleged Chinese attacks on western targets.

    Even before the publication of the directive, Beijing had hit back against US criticism, with a senior official claiming to have "mountains of data" on American cyber-attacks he claimed were every bit as serious as those China was accused of having carried out against the US.

    Presidential Policy Directive 20 defines OCEO as "operations and related programs or activities … conducted by or on behalf of the United States Government, in or through cyberspace, that are intended to enable or produce cyber effects outside United States government networks."

    Asked about the stepping up of US offensive capabilities outlined in the directive, a senior administration official said: "Once humans develop the capacity to build boats, we build navies. Once you build airplanes, we build air forces."

    --------------

    Among the possible "significant consequences" are loss of life; responsive actions against the US; damage to property; serious adverse foreign policy or economic impacts.

    The US is understood to have already participated in at least one major cyber attack, the use of the Stuxnet computer worm targeted on Iranian uranium enrichment centrifuges, the legality of which has been the subject of controversy. US reports citing high-level sources within the intelligence services said the US and Israel were responsible for the worm.

    In the presidential directive, the criteria for offensive cyber operations in the directive is not limited to retaliatory action but vaguely framed as advancing "US national objectives around the world".

    The revelation that the US is preparing a specific target list for offensive cyber-action is likely to reignite previously raised concerns of security researchers and academics, several of whom have warned that large-scale cyber operations could easily escalate into full-scale military conflict.

    Sean Lawson, assistant professor in the department of communication at the University of Utah, argues: "When militarist cyber rhetoric results in use of offensive cyber attack it is likely that those attacks will escalate into physical, kinetic uses of force."

    An intelligence source with extensive knowledge of the National Security Agency's systems told the Guardian the US complaints again China were hypocritical, because America had participated in offensive cyber operations and widespread hacking – breaking into foreign computer systems to mine information.

    Provided anonymity to speak critically about classified practices, the source said: "We hack everyone everywhere. We like to make a distinction between us and the others. But we are in almost every country in the world."

    --------------

    Obama further authorized the use of offensive cyber attacks in foreign nations without their government's consent whenever "US national interests and equities" require such nonconsensual attacks. It expressly reserves the right to use cyber tactics as part of what it calls "anticipatory action taken against imminent threats".

    The directive makes multiple references to the use of offensive cyber attacks by the US military. It states several times that cyber operations are to be used only in conjunction with other national tools and within the confines of law.

    When the directive was first reported, lawyers with the Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a Freedom of Information Act request for it to be made public. The NSA, in a statement, refused to disclose the directive on the ground that it was classified.

    In January, the Pentagon announced a major expansion of its Cyber Command Unit, under the command of General Keith Alexander, who is also the director of the NSA. That unit is responsible for executing both offensive and defensive cyber operations.

    Earlier this year, the Pentagon publicly accused China for the first time of being behind attacks on the US. The Washington Post reported last month that Chinese hackers had gained access to the Pentagon's most advanced military programs.

    The director of national intelligence, James Clapper, identified cyber threats in general as the top national security threat.
 
Last edited:
I'm always a bit suspicious of top secret documents with a URL... :D

But how does it justify/explain the hijacking?

This is one of the secret docs that doesn't reveal the existence of much more than you'd expect. Cyber operations mimic territorial operations and War Plans reflect that.
 
Last edited:
AT least he tried, that much better than a damn 777 being used in place of a 737, what's next DC-10 in place of Airbus pictures cause media thinks "one plane is the same as another right?:dopey:"

Good picture though such a lovely plane.

Heh yeah I know I was just messing around :)
 
BBC news reporting a Virgin Atlantic plane diverted to Bali after a "passenger tried to gain entry to the cockpit thereby triggering a hijack alert". I only mention it here because it's bound to cause some mention of the MA flight.

There's no indication that this WAS a hijack attempt rather than some mental passenger "doing one" but airlines normally have a zero-tolerance approach to bad behaviour onboard.

Except Ryan Air, who excel at it.
 
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/mi...ble-mh370-wreck-site-found-3-000-miles-n92171

Claims of Boeing 777 wreckage being seen in the Bay of Bengal south of Bali.

I saw this on the Beeb earlier, they seemed to imply that it was actually a chemical trace analysis that turned up substances/materials normally associated with an aircraft wreck. The surveyors said they weren't saying they'd found the MA flight but that they still thought the source should be investigated.

I don't know how accurate that report was but given that it hasn't really taken off all day (no pun intended) it's probably not going to fly (I admit that one).
 
I think they already denied it being linked to the missing 777 anyway. The plane is probably somewhere below 15,000 feet below the surface, and there's nothing man-made that can go that far below the surface and cope with the pressures, so until something is made that can survive that depth, the plane will probably never be found.
 
Back