Trump Assassination of Iranian General Soleimani - IRGC Counterstrike

If it wasn't an accident, the plane was shot down, that makes me wonder who died. If it was murder, it might be a warning / show of force, retribution and / or cover up. I noticed this list of people going to Canada:


Most are highly technically qualified in their various areas. That could be explained by those getting entry to Canada need to be more skilled and cashed up, especially when from a country classified as volatile in Western countries and has been sanctioned by them. So it must be a challenge to get any type of entry into Canada if you're Iranian. I imagine it would be highly sought after too - Iran I hear is much more repressive than places like Canada.

Trudeau had been seeking closer ties with Iran too:

After Prime Minister Trudeau was elected in October 2015, he promised to restore ties between Iran and Canada. He has also praised the Iran nuclear deal, calling it a “great outcome.”


Trudeau appears to help cement this narrative it was Iran's doing but also an accident. What if it wasn't either? For example, comes from within Iran, and done so as a cover up. Maybe one or more of those that died would have information that could be leaked?

I don't know, it's pure speculation, so please take with a grain of salt.
 
One interesting news bit that I think wasn't touched upon in detail was the claim of the Iranians at the beginning that the flight recorder/black box was severely damaged, so much so that retrieving information from it was apparently either very difficult or impossible. If that claim was true, the question naturally arises why and how it got damaged in that way. As far as I know, it is pretty difficult to destroy a black box in such a way, since they are built to withstand very heavy forces. Has anyone followed up on that?

The recorder/black box is shown at the 1:01 min. mark in this video.

Published on Jan 10, 2020 (2:23 min.)
 
Also, I haven't been able to find an answer, but does the TOR M1 even have the ability to receive and track ADS broadcasts?

I don't think ADS is really used in military for critical assessments. The system is designed as a secondary system, i.e. convenience and an additional layer of information/safety, as far as I can tell. If ADS-B was spoofed or tampered with, it must have been to fool the general public/investigators (i.e. those looking at the flightradar24 data). But I cannot imagine that someone in the Iranian military based his decision to shoot down a plane on a public, unencrypted system that doesn't even have authentication. Any kind of military "standard procedure" should rule out such a thing, IMO.
 
One interesting news bit that I think wasn't touched upon in detail was the claim of the Iranians at the beginning that the flight recorder/black box was severely damaged, so much so that retrieving information from it was apparently either very difficult or impossible. If that claim was true, the question naturally arises why and how it got damaged in that way. As far as I know, it is pretty difficult to destroy a black box in such a way, since they are built to withstand very heavy forces. Has anyone followed up on that?
This has been puzzling me too. Going back through my work history, and when black boxes were first used: they were designed to withstand any possible scenario that could happen to an aircraft, either in flight, or on earth. This was so that the data contained within could be easily contained and then accessed.
 
Here is another summary update from Bloomberg - it addresses several questions posed in this thread.

In the meantime, the Iranian people are taking to the streets to express their dissatisfaction with the current state of internal affairs. There are reports of riots, tearing down of Suleimani's posters and denouncements of the Ayatollah - which is a capital offence in Iran.

Perhaps, this was the ultimate objective of the assassination.


Multiple Failures Led to Iran’s Accidental Attack on Jetliner

By Alan Levin
13 January 2020, 11:21 GMT+10

1x-3.jpg
Rescue workers search the wreckage of Ukrainian International Airlines Flight 752 near Shahedshahr, Iran, on Jan. 8. Photographer: Ali Mohammadi/Bloomberg


Details about why Iran air defense forces mistook a Ukrainian airliner for a cruise missile early Wednesday remain murky, but one thing is clear: Safeguards for operating surface-to-air missiles are supposed to prevent that kind of mistaken identity and all of them failed.

The error, which killed all 176 people aboard the plane, is probably the result of multiple layers of failure, said Steven Zaloga, senior analyst for missile systems at the Teal Group.

“There’s any number of potential problems here,” Zaloga said. “This incident strongly suggests that the methodology has failed and the technology has failed as well. There should have been a methodology worked out to prevent fratricide.”

Iran has vowed to conduct a thorough investigation of what happened, and bring the “culprits” to justice. Among the questions that remain is why authorities allowed civilian flights to operate during the tense hours after its attack on the Iraqi bases.

Ukrainian International Airlines Flight 752 was flying in a very different manner than the cruise missile it was supposedly mistaken for. It was following the normal departure path from Tehran’s airport and was clearly transmitting its identity when it was taken down.

While a highly effective weapon against short-range threats, the SA-15 Tor missiles used in the strike early Wednesday have a guidance system that’s designed for use in war zones and can’t by itself easily distinguish between airliners, cruise missiles and other military aircraft.

Iran Protests Turning Violent in Ongoing Anger Over Downed Jet

As a result, nations that deploy the Tor typically link them into a broader air-defense command system capable of tracking civilian planes, Zaloga said. In those circumstances, soldiers operating missile batteries aren’t supposed to fire them without approval from higher authorities.

Flight 752, a Boeing Co. 737-800, was transmitting its position for civilian radars and the newest flight tracking system that uses global-positioning data, according to data posted by FlightRadar24.

While the Tor’s radars might not have been been able to discern between civilian and military targets, other systems in Iran were tracking the plane and that information should be available to missile battery commanders, he said.

Iran has offered changing explanations for why it shot down the jet in the pre-dawn darkness.

A statement released early Saturday said that the plane had turned toward a military base.

FlightRadar24’s track for the Boeing 737-800 showed it flying a normal profile. About two minutes after becoming airborne, it made a slight turn to the right, which is typical for departures from that runway. When it climbed to about 7,900 feet (2,408 meters) altitude, it suddenly stopped transmitting its position, most likely as it suffered damage from the missile.



IranAdmits It Shot Down Boeing Jet, Reversing Days of Denials

At least two other planes that departed that morning followed nearly identical paths and several others flew nearby, according to the company’s data.

“Even without having been made directly aware of this flight, a SAM operator crew should have easily been able to identify that this flight pattern and radar profile was completely at odds with any suspected U.S. missile or combat aircraft strike package,” Justin Bronk, a specialist in military technology at Britain’s Royal United Services Institute, wrote in a post on the think tank’s website.



A later statement by Amir Ali Hajizadeh, commander of Iran’s Aerospace Force, said the jet was identified as a cruise missile.

The U.S. versions of those self-guided drones are designed to hug the ground to avoid detection, often flying within 100 feet of the surface, Zaloga said. The Ukrainian plane was rapidly climbing and was several thousand feet higher.

The missile operator was supposed to obtain approval before commanding a strike, but communications were disrupted and he only had 10 seconds to decide, Hajizadeh said.

Frank Admission

Despite criticism of Iran’s explanations of the missile attack, the regime was praised by some for not attempting a broader cover-up.

“Not withstanding two days of denials, this is an admirably frank admission of guilt,” Bronk said in a tweet. “Will help avoid further escalation with the West, help the victim’s families grieve, and prevent years of conspiracy rubbish. Well done.”


The apparently mistaken missile firing came just hours after Iran launched several ballistic missile barrages on bases in Iraq at which U.S. troops were stationed and Iran’s air-defense system was on high alert. An earlier U.S. attack in Iraq that killed Iran’s top general also heightened tensions.



“We accept full responsibility for this action and we will obey any decision taken by the authorities,” Hajizadeh said.

Iran’s Civil Aviation Organization, which had initially adamantly denied a missile was involved, said it hadn’t received any information on the plane being shot down despite repeated requests for information from military authorities.

Civilian Flights

Among the questions that also remain is why authorities allowed civilian flights to operate during the tense hours after its attack on the Iraqi bases.



The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, which had imposed several flight restrictions on U.S. carriers in the region in recent months as tensions rose, reissued those warnings prior to the Tehran crash. The FAA became more aggressive in issuing such warnings in the wake of the 2014 loss of the Malaysian Airlines plane.

There are relatively few surface-to-air missile systems operating around the world that are sophisticated enough to take down a jetliner and they typically aren’t activated unless there’s an imminent threat, Zaloga said. But last week’s incident shows better controls are needed.

“That is something that needs to be discussed at an international level,” Zaloga said.

It wasn’t the first such case of tragic mistaken identity. In 1988, an Iran Air Airbus SE A300 was shot down by the U.S. Navy over the Persian Gulf, killing 290 people. Its crew mistook the jet for an Iranian fighter jet. In 2014, a Russian-made Buk missile downed Malaysia Airlines Flight 777 as it flew over eastern Ukraine, where fighting was occurring between rebels and that country’s forces.

Iranian officials may have allowed flights to continue because they didn’t want to signal to the U.S. that it was involved in the missile attack against the Iraqi bases, Zaloga said.

The result put those planes as risk, Simon Petersen, a director of missile defense issues at Terma A/S, said in a tweet. “So basically every passenger on every civil plane was used as human shields,” he said.


— With assistance by Yasna Haghdoost, Arsalan Shahla, and Aoyon Ashraf
 
One interesting news bit that I think wasn't touched upon in detail was the claim of the Iranians at the beginning that the flight recorder/black box was severely damaged, so much so that retrieving information from it was apparently either very difficult or impossible. If that claim was true, the question naturally arises why and how it got damaged in that way. As far as I know, it is pretty difficult to destroy a black box in such a way, since they are built to withstand very heavy forces. Has anyone followed up on that?

Yes, I did.

The black box does not appear to be severely damaged judging from the available videos - a few of them have been posted in this thread. Also, there should be two of them - one for voice and one for data. Their location tends to be in the tail end of the plane where they are more likely to survive a crash. So that claim by Iran does not exactly add up.

The missile hit the plane's cockpit from below, killing the pilots instantly and disabling the plane's positional beacons. This is why there was no mayday and why the positional data suddenly stopped.

More information here; black box videos in previous posts:

_45996239_black_box_loc_v2_466_v2.gif
Where_is_black_box.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think that there is enough evidence to say that the most likely explanation is that it was spoofed.

Well, maybe it was already discussed and discarded, but could a drone be blamed for a mistake in identity? At least that's one of the theories that Russian experts propose.

That there were a bunch of them flying around, and one was spotten not long before in the area. Apparently they like using civilian aircraft as a shield.
 
Last edited:
I think that there is enough evidence to say that the most likely explanation is that it was spoofed.



Yes.
I try to understand the word "spoofed". I checked at the dictionary but I still don't know the sense you give in this situation.:-[
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe
One of the interesting facts about this situation is that of all planes it was a Ukrainian one. Moreover, the plane belongs to Ukraine International Airlines owned by the famous Ukrainian oligarch Igor Kolomoisky.

Igor Kolomoisky is the one who brought the current Ukrainian president Zelensky to power. Kolomoisky has a dual citizenship of Ukraine and Israel.

In 2014, it was the airport of Dnepropetrovsk owned by Igor Kolomoisky that was determining the flight pass of MH17 over Donbass when the plane got shot down.

Interesting coincidences.
 
I think that there is enough evidence to say that the most likely explanation is that it was spoofed.



Yes.
In a game of chess an experienced player will think a few steps ahead also when attacking. In a military strategy an actor will consider counter attacks and prepare the responses to counter attacks, which then becomes potential counter- counter- attacks. A normal organisation would not consider a passenger airline as a possible pawn that could be moved, but if the actor is not a "normal entity" that bothers about international law and common decency and it sure enough it will not be found out, then the limits are few. Some of the players, in the Middle East, including Israel and some level of NATO and the US Government probably have a set of such moves, they can use, as they consider it expedient to turn a situation in their favour.

If we consider the possibility that the complications of this incident of this plane crash is even partially the result of a conscious move, then it unsettles the enemy and lowers the moral.

Among non-standard weapons and options would be space based weapons as the earth-quake inducing capability mentioned in this Session.
(L) I have a question. I've been waiting for somebody to ask it, but since nobody is going to ask it, I want to ask it: Was the Haiti earthquake an induced earthquake, or was it totally natural?

A: (Planchette swirls on board) INDUCED! Bet you didn't expect that, did you?!

Q: (L) Frankly, I didn't. Because I've already gone on record saying it wasn't. I just poo-pooed the whole idea as too far out there. (laughter) So now I've gotta...

(Joe) Well, it was the Russians who said that, wasn't it?

A: No!

Q: (Joe) Didn't you tell us the Russians reported that?

(L) The question I want to ask is, how do they induce earthquakes? (To Ark) How do you think they induce earthquakes? (Joe) Space-based satellite

(Ark) Well, just search the internet! (laughter) Yeah, it's on the internet. You create special waves that go into the earth and propagate in the right direction...

(L) I don't believe it. They don't have enough power to do that.

(Joe) I want to know who induced it?

A: U.S.

Q: (Joe) At the government level, or super-secret nonsense?

A: Secret gov.

Q: (L) And how did they do this? Was this from some kind of waves that Ark is talking about?

A: Close. And notice that no one is arguing with them right now!

Q: (L) In other words, you've got something that can do that, nobody's gonna mess with you.

(Ark) But the main question is, did they really want to induce it in the neighborhood of Haiti, or it was a mistake?

A: Yes, the prep was done.

Q: (Andromeda) So they intentionally did it to Haiti.

(Ark) What I would do, I would use a submarine and go near the fault, and do the job using these submarines as a so to say amplifiers for something. There are these faults under the ocean. It's enough to move this fault in the right direction with the right frequency, and you get it.

A: Too dangerous that way because the pulses would also destroy the sub. Better to use triangulated space-based weapons.

Q: (Belibaste) Why did they target Haiti specifically?

A: Close to South America. Convenient, oil, other factors of imperialistic nature.

Q: (Andromeda) Was it like a test?

A: No.

Q: (Burma Jones) Not a test, so they've used this thing a lot before?

(Joe) They used it on the Columbia.

A: Once or twice.
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom