by Scott Creighton
A new story has broken in the tragic tale of the downing of Metrojet Flight 9268.
An unnamed “senior defense department official” has supposedly told the CIA’s Mockingbird asset at NBC, Jim Miklaszewski, that a defense satellite image caught a heat signature in the air in the area where Flight 9268 dropped off the radar. That implies that the plane blew up mid-flight, in the air and broke up at that same time. Not really any news there since it’s been obvious for two days that an explosion caused the crash.
A senior defense official told NBC News late Monday that an American infrared satellite detected a heat flash at the same time and in the same vicinity over the Sinai where the Russian passenger plane crashed. NBC “news”
This is certainly not news. We have been writing that the plane blew up in midair for quite sometime. The charred remains on the ground, the wide-spread debris field, the engines having been detached from the wings… all of these things indicate the plane experienced a massive explosion which caused it to crash.
What is news is how the CIA asset Miklaszewski goes on and on trying to squash any suggestion that a missile took out the plane. But pay close attention to what he supposedly rules out… and what he doesn’t.
While many have speculated that a missile may have struck a Russian commercial airliner that went down over Egypt’s Sinai peninsula, U.S. officials are now saying satellite imagery doesn’t back up that theory…
According to the official, U.S. intelligence analysts believe it could have been some kind of explosion on the aircraft itself, either a fuel tank or a bomb, but that there’s no indication that a surface-to-air missile brought the plane down.
That same infrared satellite would have been able to track the heat trail of a missile from the ground.
“The speculation that this plane was brought down by a missile is off the table,” the official said. NBC “news”
So the missile theory, according to the unnamed military official, is “off the table”
Notice he keeps saying they could tell it wasn’t a missile fired from the ground and that proves all missile theories are wrong. What he’s doing there is a legal trick. He can state they didn’t see a missile fired from the ground with confidence because they didn’t. But what he’s not saying is they didn’t see one fired from the air. However, they think this conclusion of theirs will be vague enough to keep folks from suggesting ANY missile could have hit the plane… because of their statements about ground based ones.
Here’s another cute aspect of this… I wonder if this unnamed “senior defense department official” was one of the ones taking part in the Blue Skies drills in the Israeli desert right next to the location where the plane was shot down.
It’s apparently really important to someone in the defense department that they keep us simple folks out here from talking about missiles in conjunction with the downing of Flight 9268.
Does that remind anyone else of how they squashed all that witness testimony from folks who saw a missile track and destroy TWA Flight 800?
They are working diligently to stamp out that kind of theory very early on aren’t they? Makes you kinda wonder, doesn’t it?