I hope Dutchy will tone down some of criticisms of me with respect, given that the Dutch Party of Freedom is now leading some opinion polls and is predicted to be the largest party after the next election! That puts Geert Wilders on course to be the next Dutch PM.

No comment on the Bush family, save that I am admirer of Bush 43. My only invite to the White House was during his presidency, although the invitation came from the Vice-President's office, and my meeting was in the Old Executive Office Building, swiftly adjourned to the Starbucks on 17th St. given the sensitivity of the topics being discussed!

'Psychonaut' can't have tried very hard. He or she showed no interest in seeing documentary proof I offered. The entry about me on Wikipedia is still an attack piece, containing large factual errors. However I have accepted Wikimedia Foundation's counsel's suggestion of mediation, which hopefully will resolve matters.

I am taking the Scotsman newspaper to the UK press regulator.

petertenthije wrote:

What motive could Germany possibly have to sabotage Challenger?

To remind NASA to pay up on their license for the SSME design from Mr. Ludwig Bölkow ?

IMU the US does not have a dedicatd sabotage subunit as the main purpose of their 3Letter Orgs
is _sabotage_ and sabotage alone and not much beyond.

Then a DVD would be, as all German intelligence related organisations, made available to the US at no cost.
( BND appears to work against Germany and its government, unsurprising as it was created by the precursor
of the CIA repurposing NAZI Abwehr people.)

Spyhunter wrote:

I hope Dutchy will tone down some of criticisms of me with respect, given that the Dutch Party of Freedom is now leading some opinion polls and is predicted to be the largest party after the next election! That puts Geert Wilders on course to be the next Dutch PM.

Err, no it does not. This is the Netherlands, not the UK. The Netherlands uses proportional voting, so being the biggest party means almost nothing. It's the size of the coalition that counts. On top of that, the polls you refer to only give the Freedom Party a slight lead primarily due to the major losses by the two biggest parties, not due to a significant growth of Wilders party. The Party of Freedom has also consistently drawn more support in polls than at actual elections.

Spyhunter wrote:

I hope Dutchy will tone down some of criticisms of me with respect, given that the Dutch Party of Freedom is now leading some opinion polls and is predicted to be the largest party after the next election! That puts Geert Wilders on course to be the next Dutch PM.

With all due respect to your person, but no, why should I tone down of criticism with respect to the PVV? I am Dutch, I am a close follower of Dutch politics since de mid '80, since I was about 11 or so. I have seen the rise and fall of the LPF, I have seen the populistic side of Dutch politics. I have seen the rise of mister Wilders since 2004-ish. I have followed the polls during campaigns and intermediate. I have voted in all elections since 1995, I was an active member of the VVD, and gave up my membership when they started working together with the PVV in 2012. So tell me your credentials, as a foreigner and not a 100% follower of Dutch politics? You show in this quote that you know nothing how the Dutch politics work and what role the PVV is playing in that. PVV will never be in the next government, never. All the parties, except VVD, has said they will not be in a coalition with the PVV. And the VVD has said it is not logical to form a coalition with the PVV because of the way the PVV splits society and because of the "minder, minder, minder" trail.

Just being the largest party doesn't mean that you get to play PM. There are presidents that the largest party isn't called upon to govern, PVDA in the 1977 springs to mind, Van Agt I was formed without the PVDA which was the largest party in that election.

Then you have the PVV / Wilders himself, he is being more extreme all the time, so he gets less acceptable for people. The PVV doesn't want to govern at all, just look at the program for next years election. Now lets look at the polls. This is the most reliable one: http://www.ipsos-nederland.nl/ipsos-pol ... -deze-week
It puts the PVV second and declining. I put the PVV on less then 20 seats in our parlement in the March election, probably between 15 - 17 seats. I know of no serious journalist or someone else that puts the PVV as a frontrunner for the 2017 elections.

But lets make it interesting. If you want to put your money were your mouth is, let's put a good bottle of wiskey on it, whether Wilders / PVV is going to be the largest party in the '17 Dutch national elections. Deal?!

Deal! Or would you prefer a bottle of Bols, if I lose? I still think PVV will be the largest party. I suspect I know a little more about Dutch politics than you might think,but equally I know a lot less than you! I do however understand that the Netherlands has PR for elections.

Speaking of the Netherlands the aviation writer for whom I have the greatest respect, Captain Jan Bartelski, was for many years a KLM pilot. He was obviously a very fine pilot, partly because he flew the Warwick in the war and survived! (The Warwick was an under-powered kite, sorely in need of power-boosted ailerons and all-metal flying control surfaces, and more developed Bristol Centaurus engines - they were very hairy when asymmetric, according to people I've known who had the dubious honour of flying them).

It was Captain Bartelski who put me on to the DVD's setting up of the Tenerife Air Disaster. Captain Bartelski didn't say it was a set-up, but he clearly had his suspicions. A command 747 pilot, he understood that the official Spanish version of events was a phoney. Once the throttles were advanced to TOGA power on "Rijn", the KLM 747-206B, a wall of sound would have enveloped the control tower. There is no way that the tower did not know that Captain van Zanten was taking off.

He knew van Zanten of course, and was able to give a much more balanced account of his character than the media. He clearly was more worried about looking after his passengers, for whom there were limited facilities on Tenerife, than exceeding his hours. He was evidently a fine airman, and in my opinion does not bear primary responsibility for the disaster.

Once I found out about that Luftwaffe ground radar unit and worked out that the IED at Gran Canaria was a phoney, the rest was easy. I was very sorry to learn of Captain Bartelski's untimely death.

Wlederling is half-right, with respect. The Abwehr controlled the OSS, which helped set up the Gehlen network, which became the BND. Gehlen of course was ex-Abwehr and a senior DVD officer. He was also gay - an interesting chap.

The DVD largely controlled the CIA until Kennedy fired Dulles, following which the DVD fired Kennedy.

The BND, unless they're DVD assets inside the agency, are nice people. I've only ever had limited dealings with them, but they have invariably been pleasant. From a German perspective it must seem that they act contrary to German interests at times. That's because they are effectively controlled by the DVD, which has always been willing to sacrifice German lives, most notoriously in the disgraceful treatment of German civilians and POWs in the American Sector after May 1945, in order to divert suspicion away from their man Eisenhower.

Spyhunter wrote:

Deal! Or would you prefer a bottle of Bols, if I lose? I still think PVV will be the largest party. I suspect I know a little more about Dutch politics than you might think,but equally I know a lot less than you! I do however understand that the Netherlands has PR for elections.

Nope, no Jenever for me, don't like it, I prefer a smooth Scottish one .

No I have another good reason for hoping that the PVV isn't going to be the largest party .

What do you mean with PR?

Spyhunter wrote:

I still think PVV will be the largest party.

They may very well become the largest party, I doubt it, but it's not entirely unfeasible.

The nuance that Dutchy was referring to is your claim in your earlier message that "...Wilders (is) on course to be the next Dutch PM".

Being the largest party in the Netherlands does not necessarily make you the governing party.

The only advantage of being the largest party is that you are first to get the coalition forming proces going. That having been said, the most likely coalitions have for the most part already been discussed prior to the elections. Often even as part of party manifestos. Indeed several parties are already on record that they do not intend to make a coalition goverment that includes the PVV.

Barring a landslide victory the PVV's hands are tied, just remember that decisive victories very rarely happen in multi-party democracies. You will always need at least two parties to make a government. In fact, most of them are three party coalitions. The current goverment is the first two party government to complete their four year term since Lubbers III (1989-1994).

PR in the UK stands for proportional representation. I entirely accept the point that he may not become the PM even if the PVV is the largest party. If however they are the largest party by a fair margin, he may be end up as the PM. He has his supporters in the Dutch armed forces and intelligence community.

Spyhunter wrote:

It was Captain Bartelski who put me on to the DVD's setting up of the Tenerife Air Disaster. Captain Bartelski didn't say it was a set-up, but he clearly had his suspicions. A command 747 pilot, he understood that the official Spanish version of events was a phoney. Once the throttles were advanced to TOGA power on "Rijn", the KLM 747-206B, a wall of sound would have enveloped the control tower. There is no way that the tower did not know that Captain van Zanten was taking off.

He knew van Zanten of course, and was able to give a much more balanced account of his character than the media. He clearly was more worried about looking after his passengers, for whom there were limited facilities on Tenerife, than exceeding his hours. He was evidently a fine airman, and in my opinion does not bear primary responsibility for the disaster.

Disagree. The KLM was not cleared for takeoff (it only had takeoff clearance). Van Zanten was warned about that and that the Pan American was still on the runway. His ego, impatience, and poor judgement, combined with a lack of recent piloting due to training others in the sim, resulted in him making a very, very bad decision the resulted in many deaths. The primary responsibility for Tenerife lies with KLM poster boy Van Zanten and his poor airmanship. Van Zanten is responsible for the most deadly crash in aviation history. Better late than never.

Spyhunter wrote:

If however they are the largest party by a fair margin, he may be end up as the PM. He has his supporters in the Dutch armed forces and intelligence community.

What on earth does that have to do with anything? Employees in the intelligence agencies and military get the exact same amount of influence as everyone else does. Even if all of them vote for Wilders, that's less than half a percent of the population. Are you suggesting that the military would coup themselves to power in the Netherlands?

petertenthije wrote:

Spyhunter wrote:

I still think PVV will be the largest party.

They may very well become the largest party, I doubt it, but it's not entirely unfeasible.

The nuance that Dutchy was referring to is your claim in your earlier message that "...Wilders (is) on course to be the next Dutch PM").

Well, that's why I made the bet a little bit more evenhanded, so it is now if the PVV is becoming the largest party after the elections. And I still maintain that even that is highly unlikely. Wilders I is just very unlikely.

petertenthije wrote:

The current goverment is the first two party government to complete their four year term since Lubbers III (1989-1994).

True, the last cabinet to complete their full term was Kok I / Paars I, 1998. The current parliamentary period will probably the next to complete the full term in march next year. Good for us.

In response to VSMUT the political class is so corrupt and vulnerable to bio-leverage that intelligence agencies have a greater say than you might think. AIVD, eg. will know who in Dutch politics is on the German payroll, who is mixed up with paedophile rings and so on. MIVD will also have their sources and the Dutch military may quietly voice an opinion behind the scenes. Of course they are not going to do a Mountbatten and launch a military coup (Mountbatten was a former CDS and German agent whose coup in '68, designed to get us in the EEC, was aborted at the last minute).

I am afraid 777 Jet is being a little unkind to Captain van Zanten. The clearance to the Papa Beacon was ambiguous, and intended as such. It allowed the Spanish to deny that he had take-off clearance but given his psychological profile was enough to persuade him that he had.

Obviously Captain van Zanten thought that Captain Grubb in the PanAm was clear, and that he had take-off clearance, which would only have been given if the other 74 was off the runway. With respect that was poor airmanship on van Zanten's part, and yes, he should have clarified his clearance, as it were, with the tower before rolling.

However, whilst fair, that criticism of the KLM captain does NOT absolve ATC of responsibility. As Captain Bartelski points out, the tower must have known that the KLM 747 was rolling and that their clearance had been understood by them as a take-off clearance. They were under an immediate duty to warn them that the runway was obstructed and also to warn Pan Am of an emergency, instructing the PanAm to apply power and if necessary go on to grass. The failure to give such warnings was inexcusable.

There is by the way evidence of jamming of the ATC frequency, further support for my analysis that this was a set-up.

My car had a puncture last week. It's now clear that this was the work of a DVD planted nail.

With respect, Spyhunter, I think you need help.

Spyhunter wrote:

I am afraid 777 Jet is being a little unkind to Captain van Zanten. The clearance to the Papa Beacon was ambiguous, and intended as such. It allowed the Spanish to deny that he had take-off clearance but given his psychological profile was enough to persuade him that he had.

Captain van Zanten should not have started if he had an ambiguous clearance for starting at a runway which he couldnot oversee because of fog, whilst knowing there might be an aircraft on the runway and after getting a clear warning from his co-pilot after he stopped him the first time. Captain van Zanten made a mistake with dire consequences.

You have spoken big words about Dutch politics and the AIVD / MIVD perhaps you can give us some prove of that?

Dutchy wrote:

You have spoken big words about Dutch politics and the AIVD / MIVD perhaps you can give us some prove of that?

Good luck with that!

Nothing, absolutely nothing, that Spyhunter has posted on this site has an gram of evidence to support it. Speaking with 'authority' doesn't make anything he says factual in the slightest. Quite the opposite, the more he posts, the more ridiculous he sounds. With respect.

scbriml wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

You have spoken big words about Dutch politics and the AIVD / MIVD perhaps you can give us some prove of that?

Good luck with that!

Nothing, absolutely nothing, that Spyhunter has posted on this site has an gram of evidence to support it. Speaking with 'authority' doesn't make anything he says factual in the slightest. Quite the opposite, the more he posts, the more ridiculous he sounds. With respect.

with respect of course.

Spyhunter wrote:

I am afraid 777 Jet is being a little unkind to Captain van Zanten. The clearance to the Papa Beacon was ambiguous, and intended as such. It allowed the Spanish to deny that he had take-off clearance but given his psychological profile was enough to persuade him that he had.

Obviously Captain van Zanten thought that Captain Grubb in the PanAm was clear, and that he had take-off clearance, which would only have been given if the other 74 was off the runway. With respect that was poor airmanship on van Zanten's part, and yes, he should have clarified his clearance, as it were, with the tower before rolling.

However, whilst fair, that criticism of the KLM captain does NOT absolve ATC of responsibility. As Captain Bartelski points out, the tower must have known that the KLM 747 was rolling and that their clearance had been understood by them as a take-off clearance. They were under an immediate duty to warn them that the runway was obstructed and also to warn Pan Am of an emergency, instructing the PanAm to apply power and if necessary go on to grass. The failure to give such warnings was inexcusable.

There is by the way evidence of jamming of the ATC frequency, further support for my analysis that this was a set-up.

Indeed, I am not going to be kind to the man responsible for the most fatal accident in aviation history (9/11 doesn't count).

The ambiguous clearance. The fog - almost zero visibility. Knowing that the other plane still could have been on the damn runway - the KLM pilots would have heard that the Pam Am pilots were confused and should have even been more hesitant. Being told to stop by the FO. This guy's negligence resulted in mass murder.

Then you state: ""There is by the way evidence of jamming of the ATC frequency, further support for my analysis that this was a set-up.""

That is laughable, with respect. Just because two people tried to speak at the same time over the channel and the communication got botched is not evidence of a jamming of the frequency. The same problem still happens - all the time.

777Jet wrote:

jpetekyxmd80 wrote:

Now now guys, please! I hope you gentlemen will refrain from personal attacks in this thread as if this were to carry on, it will run a very high chance of being locked. This thread is specifically for Spyhunter's theories, so I beseech you guys to treat it with respect. Thank you and have a nice day.

Here:

atcsundevil wrote:

Typically a thread concerning a user would be deleted, but if its intention is to discuss the theories of a published individual who also happens to be an a.net member, then I find it acceptable provided the thread isn't used for any form of personal attacks. If it's to examine and discuss theories that are loosely aviation related but intertwined with politics, then the non av forum is the perfect place. We would prefer threads in civ av to be more factually based and as politically neutral as possible, although in many cases, that's far easier said than done.

Provided SpyHunter has no objections and this thread remains respectful, I see no reason that this cannot be a worthwhile thread.

atcsundevil ✈️

Thank you Neutrino! Of course I am aware of radio interference, but I think it was more than that. I am not defending Captain van Zanten's decision to take off, indeed I have said it was poor airmanship on his part, but there is more at play here. I note that no-one is challenging Captain Bartelski's opinion that the tower must have known that van Zanten was rolling. So why didn't they stop him?

Spyhunter wrote:

Thank you Neutrino! Of course I am aware of radio interference, but I think it was more than that. I am not defending Captain van Zanten's decision to take off, indeed I have said it was poor airmanship on his part, but there is more at play here. I note that no-one is challenging Captain Bartelski's opinion that the tower must have known that van Zanten was rolling. So why didn't they stop him?

I'll challenge it. I've been in several control towers at major airports and they are, in my experience, pretty well sound-proofed. The tower at Tenerife is a mile from the threshold of runway 30, so I doubt very much they would have heard the "wall of sound" you allege. If they heard anything, it would have been too late to do anything about it.

As usual, you offer nothing in the way of evidence to support your fanciful claims. You should seek help.

neutrino wrote:

777Jet wrote:

jpetekyxmd80 wrote:

Now now guys, please! I hope you gentlemen will refrain from personal attacks in this thread as if this were to carry on, it will run a very high chance of being locked. This thread is specifically for Spyhunter's theories, so I beseech you guys to treat it with respect. Thank you and have a nice day.

I will, with respect, treat Spyhuter's thread with respect.

I wish everybody, with respect of course, including jpetekyxmd80, a good weekend.

scbriml wrote:

Spyhunter wrote:

Thank you Neutrino! Of course I am aware of radio interference, but I think it was more than that. I am not defending Captain van Zanten's decision to take off, indeed I have said it was poor airmanship on his part, but there is more at play here. I note that no-one is challenging Captain Bartelski's opinion that the tower must have known that van Zanten was rolling. So why didn't they stop him?

I'll challenge it. I've been in several control towers at major airports and they are, in my experience, pretty well sound-proofed. The tower at Tenerife is a mile from the threshold of runway 30, so I doubt very much they would have heard the "wall of sound" you allege. If they heard anything, it would have been too late to do anything about it.

As usual, you offer nothing in the way of evidence to support your fanciful claims.

I'll second that.

Bartelski's opinion is just that - an opinion. There is nothing to back it up. You have zero evidence, yet again, to back up your claim that it was set up.

Also, there were plenty of other aircraft parked on the apron near the tower, some I assume would have been starting their engines, making noise that could have easily covered the noise of the throttling up KLM over a mile away.

Your suggestion that the ATC folks somehow set this up by allowing it to happen is nonsense.

Spyhunter. Are you aware of Dugway Proving Ground, in the US? Haven't some of their chemical or biological weapons trials gone out of control? Could you tell us about that, if you have some details?

Can't assist re Dugway!

Re Tenerife, yes the tower is about a mile from the threshold of Runway 30, but it was not a particularly modern building and not particularly well sound-proofed. The airport had been upgraded in the 60s to handle Iberia's DC-8s, but it was not really set up to handle 747s. The backlog had cleared, so there were no other aircraft starting up at the time to mask the noise of the KLM 747. Four JT-9Ds at TOGA power make a LOT of noise - I respectfully agree with Captain Bartelski's opinion. He knew the airport and was president of the international airline pilots association, with access to the opinion of plenty of pilots. He also knew 747s. The KLM had to have been heard in the tower.

A mile, as well all know, is only 1,760 yards. It's not a big distance, and the tower was comparatively close to the runway, unlike most airports, due to the terrain. Los Rodeos is basically perched on the side of a hill, in a wildly unsuitable place for an airport handling heavy jets.

My analysis is that the DVD set it up, and used a Luftwaffe ground radar unit. ATC were forced to go along, probably with an armed Spanish intelligence officer in the tower. Don't forget Spain had been a fascist dictatorship up until a few years before. It was and still is a major conduit for South American cocaine into Europe and the UK, Franco's boys took a cut and made sure that ATC kept silent about narcotics flights.

We know the ATC tapes were tampered with, probably to remove the noise from the KLM aircraft and any comments from the intel guy or guys in the tower. Why tamper with the tapes?

The tapes weren't the only phoney - the group which planted the IED at Gran Canaria were never heard from again and were obviously an intel front, set up for the operation and not used again. Why force the 747s to use an unsuitable airport in IFR conditions? Indeed, why was Captain Grubb ordered to land at all? He had plenty of fuel and wanted to wait until Gran Canaria re-opened.

And why was the PanAm 74 ordered to backtrack down Runway 30? She didn't need to - Gran Canaria had re-opened after the phoney bomb and most of the waiting planes had departed.

And why weren't the PanAm passengers rescued sooner? The Spanish claim was they didn't know that two 74s had collided on their small airport, both laden with fuel!! Of course they knew. Don't try this at home, but flying a fuel-laden 747-200 into another fuel-laden 747 at around V1 makes a LOT of noise and causes a large fireball. They probably heard the crash on Gran Canaria, never mind in the tower. Aircraft crashes are NOISY. Think car crash and multiply by a 100. The passengers were mostly Jewish and were left to burn to death - straight out of the Franco playbook.

No fewer than two British airliners, a Comet 4 and a 727, were directed by Spanish ATC into high ground during the Franco years.

I stand by my analysis of the Tenerife Air Disaster.

So... according to your analysis has there actually ever been any aviation accident that WASN'T some sort of set up? You seem to have an alternative analysis for everything.

Was the 727 brought down over San Diego by a German operative in a light aircraft? Did a super secret splinter cell cut the fuel line on the Air Transat A330? And how about some pesky CIA agents chucking a dodgy fan blade into UA232?

EDIT: damn autocorrect

BlueberryWheats wrote:

EDIT: damn autocorrect

Do keep up with the show here, you should blame the DVD instead if autocorrect.

Spyhunter wrote:

Can't assist re Dugway!

Re Tenerife

My analysis is that the DVD set it up, and used a Luftwaffe ground radar unit. ATC were forced to go along, probably with an armed Spanish intelligence officer in the tower.

We know the ATC tapes were tampered with, probably to remove the noise from the KLM aircraft and any comments from the intel guy or guys in the tower.

You should make a movie about this!

Spyhunter wrote:

And why was the PanAm 74 ordered to backtrack down Runway 30? She didn't need to - Gran Canaria had re-opened after the phoney bomb and most of the waiting planes had departed.

There were still many planes on the ground at time of Pan Am/KLM's departure, including a Sabena 747 & a BA L-1011 blocking taxiway C2, hence the reason for having Pan Am to backtrack to Runway 30. This was corroborated by several witnesses & I believe there's photographic evidence of the Sabena 747.

As a matter of fact, it was discussed right here last year - viewtopic.php?t=583009

Spyhunter wrote:

We know the ATC tapes were tampered with

No, you claim the tapes were tampered with - big difference. As yet, you have not offered one bit of proof - actual proof, not more claims - about any of your stories. Please present your evidence, and maybe some will start to believe you.

Spyhunter wrote:

My analysis is that the DVD set it up

As in all good criminal investigations, you have to answer the question why? What has the DVD to gain by this plot?

If I would go writing about a Jewish secret organisation being responsible for all evil in the world, this thread would be long closed. I personally think this threat has become a line of insults by a person who seems to be stuck in a WW2 world view.

seahawk wrote:

If I would go writing about a Jewish secret organisation being responsible for all evil in the world, this thread would be long closed. I personally think this threat has become a line of insults by a person who seems to be stuck in a WW2 world view.

Well there is no need for you to read it, that is your choice. It is not like you don't know what kind of theories are being discussed here.

Well it started with MH370 and MH17 being shot down by Iranians or Chinese under leadership by the mystical DVD, but now it seems like every aviation accident in history is blamed on the DVD and to be honest the TFN story now puts very specific blame on real organisations including the German Armed Forces, who were a conscription based force at the time and under full control of the real German government and NATO.

I just come here to read how mighty powerful my home country is....

tommy1808 wrote:

I just come here to read how mighty powerful my home country is....

Good that you saw this topic then, abeit your country did started two wold wars . I always thought we were the 51th state of America, but it turned out we, the Netherlands, are beter of as a Bundesländer.

Dutchy wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

I just come here to read how mighty powerful my home country is....

Good that you saw this topic then, abeit your country did started two wold wars . I always thought we were the 51th state of America, but it turned out we, the Netherlands, are beter of as a Bundesländer.

Don't mess with us! According to spy hunter we have the technology to cause Tsunamis, and I am sure we developed that specifically to keep you Dutch under control....

My Blue miles membership is therefore purely sarcastic.

And since this is an aviation forum, should I go to the skylounge in Atlantas concurs E or F?

Best regards

tommy1808 wrote:

And since this is an aviation forum, should I go to the skylounge in Atlantas concurs E or F?

Isn't it a public secret that all Germans should fly through Denver?

petertenthije wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

And since this is an aviation forum, should I go to the skylounge in Atlantas concurs E or F?

Isn't it a public secret that all Germans should fly through Denver?

Delta didn't offer me that option! Conspiracy against me? !?!

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

And since this is an aviation forum, should I go to the skylounge in Atlantas concurs E or F?

Isn't it a public secret that all Germans should fly through Denver?

Delta didn't offer me that option! Conspiracy against me? !?!

Best regards
Thomas

Probably, or you might be a DVD agent

Any word on the Denver airport, Spyhunter?

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

There were still many planes on the ground at time of Pan Am/KLM's departure, including a Sabena 747 & a BA L-1011 blocking taxiway C2, hence the reason for having Pan Am to backtrack to Runway 30. This was corroborated by several witnesses & I believe there's photographic evidence of the Sabena 747.

Correct.

Dutchy wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

petertenthije wrote:

Isn't it a public secret that all Germans should fly through Denver?

Delta didn't offer me that option! Conspiracy against me? !?!

Best regards
Thomas

Probably, or you might be a DVD agent

Any word on the Denver airport, Spyhunter?

Spyhunter is based at the not so secret military base located a few hundred feet under the DEN airport, so let's hear what he has to say about DEN

My main thoughts about Denver International Airport are that (a) the Hertz lot is too far from the terminal and (b) it could do with a rail link to Denver Union station and downtown. It does have some good bars, however.

Last time I flew out of DIA I had just been to see NASA at JPL. One of the topics was Einstein's error about the speed of light (C) being a limiting velocity, which was pure bollocks. NASA were aware by then, partly thanks to Hubble, I think, that entire galaxies were moving further away from our own faster than C, thereby disproving Einstein's theory. I explained to the boys that Einstein was for many years the chief scientific adviser to German Intelligence, and that the error was almost certainly deliberate. My colleagues on the Cox Powertrain board and I had flown into LAX on Virgin's Upper Class, courtesy of an upgrade from Sir Richard Branson, which was kind of him. I remember getting some strange looks as I prepared for my meeting with NASA on the flight by going through my copy of the Special and General Theory of Relativity again, making notes.

Word spread round NASA, it would seem, and I was button-holed in a bar in the spacious DIA terminal by a nice rocket-scientist, who was at pains to tell me that Einstein was right. From memory I had Einstein's book (my copy has both books on relativity in the one volume) in my hand luggage, pulled it out and showed the rocket scientist the errors in Chapter 12, where Einstein (the idiot!) treats a constant as a variable, the only way he could 'prove' that C was a limiting velocity. This was all new to the rocket scientist, who was in intellectual awe of Einstein. Our conversation was monitored by the nice barman, who was a Trekkie, and seemed to be quite fascinated. After the rocket scientist left to catch his flight back to LAX the barman asked if one day we could reach the stars, to which my answer was yes, if we get our act together.

I have never suggested that ALL plane crashes are set up. The great majority are not. My points are that (a) German Intelligence was not shut down at the end of WWII (b) the new German agency was called the DVD and (c) it has a specialist Sabotage Section, who are very skilled at bringing down aircraft and covering their tracks. Those are all facts. Readers are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts, with respect.

PSA Flight 182 went in because of poor airmanship, with respect on the part of the 727 crew, a failure by the Cessna pilots to adhere to their flight plan, substandard ATC work, including a failure to alert both planes to a conflict warning and frankly dangerous rules about mixing IFR and VFR traffic in a terminal area. It was a tragedy, but it was waiting to happen, and demonstrated the importance of good airmanship at all times. The time to relax is on the ground. In the air, you stay alert. At least one crew member should have been asked by the captain to maintain continuous observation of the 172, which was close and posed a potential hazard to his aircraft. Once the 727 crew lost sight of the Cessna, in the absence of positive radar confirmation from ATC that the converging aircraft no longer posed a threat, the 72 should have levelled off, gone to TOGA power and overshot, alerting ATC to the collision avoidance manoeuvre.

The No 2 CF-6 engine on UA232 probably had been sabotaged - GE are better than that, and we know they have been penetrated by the DVD. Sabotage a turbine disc and you're likely to cause a disaster at some point. Remember the DVD are still fighting WWII - the Germans have no concept of peace, and only surrendered their military forces in 1945. Their intel assets and main intel agency (the DVD was set up in 43/4, anticipating Germany's defeat) were not surrendered. Do you really think they had no agents in place in Britain or America? How come we never had any espionage trials following Germany's defeat? What happened to the intelligence yield? We got zip.

Yes, 777 Jet, the true story of the Tenerife Air Disaster would make a good movie, but getting the funding to tell the true story would be very difficult.

Responding to Flying Disk, I said MOST aircraft had departed, not ALL! A couple of other aircraft were still at Los Rodeos, I agree.

Moose, the ATC tapes were examined and tampering was confirmed - see Bartelski, the most thoughtful analysis of Tenerife in print.

As for motive, Dutchy, why did the Germans invade your country? They didn't all leave, you know. The Dutch bureaucracy largely carried on in 1945 afrer Seyss-Inquart, most senior officials reporting to the German stay-behind agency in Den Haag. AIVD know about them. Never been to Den Haag without having lunch!

I've never flown through Atlanta, I'm afraid, although I have flown Delta and even have a SkyMiles account. I cannot therefore advise on lounge access at Atlanta, although I would definitely recommend using a lounge.

Spyhunter wrote:

As for motive, Dutchy, why did the Germans invade your country? They didn't all leave, you know. The Dutch bureaucracy largely carried on in 1945 afrer Seyss-Inquart, most senior officials reporting to the German stay-behind agency in Den Haag. AIVD know about them. Never been to Den Haag without having lunch!

Of course the Dutch bureaucracy carried on, as it did when the Germans invaded us in 1940.

But now you give us an easy verifiable fact: AIVD and were it's located, I am afraid you are wrong, they are located in Zoetermeer since 2007 and before that in Leidschendam, since 1993. The MIVD is located in The Hague though.

Spyhunter wrote:

One of the topics was Einstein's error about the speed of light (C) being a limiting velocity, which was pure bollocks. NASA were aware by then, partly thanks to Hubble, I think, that entire galaxies were moving further away from our own faster than C, thereby disproving Einstein's theory. .

Nope and no and nope again. There is no indication that any galaxy we can see moves with a local speed higher than the speed of light. Some galaxies appear to move faster than the speed of light, because space itself between us and the galaxy is expanding, and that expension has no speed limit, as it doesn't move matter or information. We are receding from those galaxies with the same spead greater c, but we are resonant sure that the milky way is not moving at warp speed.
We know pretty well how hard it is to get close to light speed, we've build enough particle accelerators to know that this part of the theory appears correct.

Best regards
Thomas

Leidschendam is almost a suburb of Den Haag, Zoetermeer is just a few clicks east, and The Hague has rather better restaurants! Leidschendam and The Hague have the same telephone area code, 070. When I first bumped into the boys and girls (they are very nice people) my telephone and fax numbers for them had a 070 code.

The fact the German occupiers found the Dutch bureaucracy congenial should tell us something, Dutchy! It would be interesting to know how many were being blackmailed or paid by the Abwehr prior to the invasion. Holland and the Dutch East Indies were left virtually undefended for a reason. When the Japs invaded the East Indies I doubt they faced a single working radar, and the fighters, from memory, included the Fokker D.XXI, scarcely state of the art in 1939, let alone 1941.

Actually Thomas, they did exceed C at the Large Hadron Collider and announced it. Under political pressure they then retracted, claiming they got their timings wrong, as though they had been using a cuckoo clock! The reason some distant galaxies appear to moving away from the Milky Way at faster than C is because they are! Of course the space between us expands as a proportionate rate - they are moving away from us. When I overtook Golf GTis in my old Bentley Turbo R the reason the space between my car and the GTi expanded is because I was leaving them behind. The rate at which the space between my Bentley and the VDub expanded matched the greater speed of the Bentley.

So, Einstein was wrong! In fairness, he got some stuff right however, e.g. his equations for energy and mass, which generally hold good.

Spyhunter wrote:

Of course the space between us expands as a proportionate rate - they are moving away from us.

please look up what "expanding space" means... when you pass a car, there is no expanding space.....

So, Einstein was wrong! 8/quote]

He probably was, but not regarding light speed. At least there is zero evidence for it...

Actually Thomas, they did exceed C at the Large Hadron Collider and announced it. Under political pressure they then retracted, claiming they got their timings wrong, as though they had been using a cuckoo clock!

Well, when you can´t repeat an experiment, you got it wrong the first time..... when you can identify the error, like they could, you definatly know you got it wrong the first time.

best regards
Thomas

I was referring of course to the expanding space between the cars after the Bentley overtakes the VW!

It wasn't a question of not being able to repeat the experiment - there was nothing so scientific about the LHC's resiling from their claim to have pushed a stream of sub-atomic particles faster than the speed of light. It was politically upsetting to the DVD, the EU and Germany and they were forced to deny the result of their bold experiment.

In fact the LHC, at my suggestion, relayed via NASA, were repeating an earlier experiment by two German physicists, from memory at the University of Karlsruhe, to whom the honour of being first belongs.

Remember Einstein probably only had an IQ of about 160, perhaps 170.

Spyhunter wrote:

Once the throttles were advanced to TOGA power on "Rijn", the KLM 747-206B, a wall of sound would have enveloped the control tower. There is no way that the tower did not know that Captain van Zanten was taking off.

Then wouldn't the Pan Am have also heard the great sound and realized that a 747 under TOGA power was coming straight towards them thus prompting them to try to turn off of the runway much sooner? Despite the very thick fog, the Pan Am still saw the KLM before they heard it...

*delete*

Spyhunter wrote:

I was referring of course to the expanding space between the cars after the Bentley overtakes the VW!

It wasn't a question of not being able to repeat the experiment - there was nothing so scientific about the LHC's resiling from their claim to have pushed a stream of sub-atomic particles faster than the speed of light. It was politically upsetting to the DVD, the EU and Germany and they were forced to deny the result of their bold experiment.

In fact the LHC, at my suggestion, relayed via NASA, were repeating an earlier experiment by two German physicists, from memory at the University of Karlsruhe, to whom the honour of being first belongs.

Ok, I haven't an IQ of 150plus, so probably I am too dumb to understand, but please, with respect, explain to me how a trained barrister knows so much of physics that he is in a position to help NASA were trained people in physics are not.

Please try this thought experiment, if someone came to you with this story, helping an government agency in a specialized field, with no formal training, with no verifiable facts to back it up, would you honestly believe him?

Spyhunter wrote:

Remember Einstein probably only had an IQ of about 160, perhaps 170.

Are you suggesting that you are better then Einstein because you might have a 10 or 20 IQ points more then Einstein? Well mister Spyhunter, claim your rightful place at number at number 8. http://listovative.com/top-12-people-highest-iq-world

My last post seems to have been deleted! Of course Einstein was a better physicist than me - as I tried to explain, perhaps inelegantly, his errors in Chapter 12 were deliberate. He was on the payroll of the Imperial German Secret Service, indeed was their chief scientific adviser.

Having a higher IQ than somebody doesn't make you better than them, only smarter!