Is it just me...

[ffutures]

...that thinks that the press WANT the EgyptAir crash to be terrorism, and are sidelining all other explanations (such as a collision) despite the fact that there will probably be actual evidence recovered before long.

Comments

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

The speculation is insane. I wish they'd just cancel all of these rolling 24 hour news channels. The world would be a better place.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

Definitely.

[history-monk.livejournal.com]

Journalists are mostly lazy. If it were terrorism - and that is not, to be fair, implausible - they know who to ask for quotes, what kind of line their editor will want, and so on.

But if it's something different, that's more work.

The airline would prefer it was terrorism, because that avoids awkward questions about maintenance or crew skills.

The governments would prefer it was terrorism, for reasons very similar to the journalists.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

Makes sense. And apparently this time the Egyptians aren't denying the possibility of terrorism, which they usually do, probably because terrorism would in a way cause fewer problems for them too.

[ckd]

At that altitude, anything they hit should also have been big enough to be noticed that it's missing (or damaged), as with the Gol flt 1907/N600XL collision over Brazil.

(That said, while I suspect it was terrorism I'm waiting for the investigation.)

[twinfair.livejournal.com]

And this morning they seem to be saying there was a fire on board. Although the BBC is being careful to say that the cause of the fire could be malicious or accidental/mechanical, it does show that the printed press could have jumped to conclusions way too early.

The lack of anyone claiming responsibility for it makes me suspicious. Most groups are only too keen to make it known if they make a successful attack

Egypt could well want it to be terrorism to divert attention away from its own security lapses. "If France, with its recent terrorist atrocities, cannot stop terrorism in the skies, how can anyone?" sort of argument. All rather mute if it turns out to be a tragic accident.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

I'm not surprised; for some reason this doesn't feel right for a terrorist incident, at least to me, and the lack of anyone claiming "responsibility" is a big part of the reason.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

The trouble is that there is a lot of weird stuff in the sky these days - military aircraft and drones, for example. If something like that was the cause its owners might not want to admit it. Given the lack of anyone claiming "responsibility" and the eagerness with which the press jumped on this bandwagon I'm thinking it's some sort of coverup, possibly just of incompetence servicing the plane, but maybe something like a collision.