The Passengers

Of the 227 passengers, 152 were Chinese citizens, including a group of 19 artists with six family members and four staff returning from a calligraphy exhibition of their work in Kuala Lumpur; 38 passengers were Malaysian. The remaining passengers were from 13 different countries.[28][36] Twenty passengers—12 of whom were from Malaysia and eight from China—were employees of Freescale Semiconductor.[37][38]

There is nothing about the passengers that give cause for concern other than two were traveling on forged passports.

The authorities discounted them being an issue very early on…. which has always puzzled me.



The Suspects

Suspect #1 See Pilot

Suspect #2

Secondly the two guys that were traveling on forged passports……………….


Discounted by all concerned very early on………………especially INTERPOL!

The headline in The Guardian read:

Iranians travelling on flight MH370 on forged passports ‘not linked to terror’

Read More Here

This bothered me because when you have lost an aircraft with no trace…… and after a couple of years you cannot establish anything of the aircraft……. Then some power that be says its not worth investigating? EVERY avenue is worth investigation!

A very important part that many of the public are not aware of is that although the two very grainy pictures above are purported to be these guys……. are they?

Try another couple of pics of them that were the official pictures given to the public.

Doctored 1Doctored 2

Now what do you see?… Look closely…. closer?

The lower portion of both pictures are from the same photograph….. they have been doctored by an official for someone or something.

And the whole thing was brushed aside.

Read More Here.

Can YOU think of any reason at all when an aircraft is lost with so many lives that someone would FAKE a photograph?

Not convinced???? These doctored photographs are actually the same as the ones at the top…. the very same photograph…..

Yet our famed police INTERPOL says they are not an issue because they were not linked to terror……..

Well me??? I am not too bright……. and I have a couple of questions……..

  1. How does anyone know these are the two guys that were on that plane? If all we have is a forged passport picture (by those in authority) to go on?
  2. Who forged these pictures?
  3. Who authorized forging those pictures?
  4. Why did they forge those pictures?

Because I cannot think of a single acceptable excuse.

Suspect #3

The four Chinese guys that worked for Freescale Semiconductor…….. (so did another 16 more that were on this flight)……. but this particular four were virtually millionaires and would have been a week after this flight.

Freescale Semiconductor is owned by The Rothchilds…. and these particular four guys were to have a patent registered when they returned from China… the following week.

That patent was for a cloaking device that could have rendered planes and vehicles invisible. A military device!

Read more here or Here or Here

They were on 20% shares each…… with these four dying before the patent was registered…. means the sole survivor is actually the patent owner. Rothchild!

Suspect #4

It would seem to me that these guys would also have been carrying a lot of information of this device, and in the hands of another country would prove very useful to their armies.

For such a thing to happen you would undoubtedly need the co-operation of many existing players in this event plus a couple more (such as Interpol) to cement the proceedings.

Can you think of a country that would have no qualms about downing an airliner killing hundreds of people to get it?



The Cargo

Another loose end of this flight is the Cargo………. Not a lot of problem other than no one will say what was contained in two and a half tons of cargo that was not on the manifest of cargo.

Read More here and here and here

What concerns me about the need to know about the cargo would indicate if it could possibly have been stolen…..

For instance…… if it were the case of the secret papers of four Chines guys its not a problem to acquire……. if on the other hand it were gold bars or say….. a working cloaking device that could be used by other actors on the world stage!

Where did the Cargo come from?

After this “highly suspicious” cargo was off loaded from MV Maersk Alabama, on 17 February, the GRU reported it was then transferred to Seychelles International Airport where it was loaded on an Emirates flight bound for Kuala Lumpur International Airport in Malaysia, after first stopping over in Dubai, where it was subsequently loaded onto Flight 370 on 8 March for its scheduled flight to Beijing.

(The GRU (Glavnoye Razvedyvatel’noye Upravleniye) is the main military foreign-intelligence service of the Russian Federation)

You possible may have heard of the MV Maersk Alabama, and may have seen the film on which it is based……………..Captain Phillips with tom hanks and its hijacking near Somalia? The ship i believe was acting in a covert status…. thats why you had the reaction you did from the USA when it was hijacked.

Read more here

What first aroused GRU suspicions regarding the MV Maersk Alabama was that within 24-hours of its off-loading this “highly suspicious” cargo load bound for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, the two highly-trained US Navy Seals assigned to protect it, Mark Daniel Kennedy, 43, and Jeffrey Keith Reynolds, 44, were found dead under “suspicious circumstances.”

Both these seals were found dead together one morning…….. Both worked for the Trident Group which is linked very closely to Blackstone.

Blackstone and Jacob Rothschild, beneficiaries of Malaysia Airlines flight disappearance ?

Read More Here

Google : Trident Blackstone.

Lets briefly go through what we have…….

Two navy seals (built like brick chisenhausen) pick up a cargo and take it to the Seychelles……. they go home and are found dead.

The cargo is put on MH 370 (not on the manifest) and the plane is lost…………

Personally I do not believe that two seals are gonna die at the same time in the same place ……… it just does not add up.

We still do not know what 2.4 tons of this cargo was…… which leads me to believe that you can put anything on Malaysian aircraft and no one will ask what it is!

The Pilots

  • The pilot in command was 53-year-old Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah from Penang. He joined Malaysia Airlines as a cadet pilot in 1981 and, after training and receiving his commercial pilot’s licence, became a Second Officer with the airline in 1983. Zaharie was promoted to Captain of Boeing 737-400 in 1991, Captain of Airbus A330-300 in 1996, and to Captain of Boeing 777-200 in 1998. He had been a Type Rating Instructor and Type Rating Examiner since 2007 and had 18,365 hours of flying experience.[16]:13[32][33]
  • The co-pilot was 27-year-old First Officer Fariq Abdul Hamid. He joined Malaysia Airlines as a cadet pilot in 2007 and became a Second Officer on Boeing 737-400 aircraft. He was promoted to First Officer of Boeing 737-400 aircraft in 2010 and later transitioned to Airbus A330-300 aircraft in 2012. In November 2013, he began training as First Officer on Boeing 777-200 aircraft. Flight 370 was his final training flight and he was scheduled to be examined on his next flight. Fariq had 2,763 hours of flying experience.[16]:14[34][35]

Read More Here

Although Captain Zaharie was estranged from his wife, there is no record of animosity or violence.

But the undeniable fact is that he was in charge (not necessarily control) of the aircraft, and it changed course and turned the transponder off.

The difficulty with either pilot downing this aircraft on his own would mean he would have to incapacitate the very guy that knew as much as the other on how to avert this happening.

Normally not a huge problem on its own….but when you are trying to hide an aircraft on your own from prying eyes that monitor you …….would be a daunting task both together at once!

I am getting old I guess

In the Daily Mail today there is a piece about a ‘poly-amorous’ family that live together Here

Nothing strange about multiple partner arrangements as that has been going on forever in history in one respect or another…… but this one is very different.

These three young people have a different view on who and what they are…………….


The Daily Mail treats it with some seriousness that I fail to understand…………….

One of the people is Nic, then there is Zander and Rachel.

Nic, who was born male and initially lived as a transgender woman, but now identifies as gender neutral and prefers the pronouns ‘they’ and ‘them,’ has always been mainly polyamorous – first dating multiple people during high school.

Then, around a year ago, the TV station worker met delivery driver Rachel, who is a transgender female, through OKCupid, a dating site.

Initially, the pair dated monogamously – or as a ‘closed couple.’ Then Nic met Xander, a transgender male, through work, and the trio now live together and share a king size bed. 

So we have…………………..
Nic —– Born male—– was a transgender woman——-and is now gender neutral
Rachel—- Born male—- and is now a transgender woman.
Xander—- Born female—– who is now a transgender woman.
Transgender people are those who have a gender identity or gender expression that differs from their assigned sex.[1][2][3] Transgender people are sometimes called transsexual if they desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another. Transgender is also an umbrella term: in addition to including people whose gender identity is the opposite of their assigned sex (trans men and trans women), it may include people who are not exclusively masculine or feminine (people who are genderqueer or non-binary, including bigender, pangender, genderfluid, or agender).[2][4][5] Other definitions of transgender also include people who belong to a third gender, or else conceptualize transgender people as a third gender.[6][7] Infrequently, the term transgender is defined very broadly to include cross-dressers,[8] regardless of their gender identity.
For my own view….. I have none at all on what these people wish to see themselves as….. it is…quite simply none of my business.
But I do have some very serious concerns as to what society forces us to see these people as……… which violates a very simple but exact process…called science!
It is now fact that…………..
The NYCHRL [New York City Human Rights Law] requires employers[, landlords, and all businesses and professionals] to use an [employee’s, tenant’s, customer’s, or client’s] preferred name, pronoun and title (e.g., Ms./Mrs.) regardless of the individual’s sex assigned at birth, anatomy, gender, medical history, appearance, or the sex indicated on the individual’s identification. See here
Even though we have very definitive accepted study that would say that this is simply not true.
From Live-science and The National Library of medicine…. Here

Chromosomes are thread-like molecules that carry hereditary information for everything from height to eye color. They are made of protein and one molecule of DNA, which contains an organism’s genetic instructions, passed down from parents. In humans, animals, and plants, most chromosomes are arranged in pairs within the nucleus of a cell. Humans have 22 of these chromosome pairs, called autosomes.

Humans have an additional pair of sex chromosomes for a total of 46 chromosomes. The sex chromosomes are referred to as X and Y, and their combination determines a person’s sex. Typically, human females have two X chromosomes while males possess an XY pairing. This XY sex-determination system is found in most mammals as well as some reptiles and plants.

There are now more than 200 accepted (by some) as alternative genders including some sub groups of the same gender.

What seems to me as being traditional, scientifically proven, and without doubt……. is now apparently no longer in question…. it is now Law …….

Your gender is no longer what what it is, but what you or the system wants it to be regardless of other individuals feeling or rights which are now dictated to you.

There is enough fact in this particular law to see that if the system disrupts the norm of society we become very easy pawns to be manipulated and accepting of obscure laws no matter how ridiculous and anti everyone………. they may seem.

That said I do not wish to seem old fashioned in these modern days……….. so……. Wiskas (my cat) has decided he is now Boris (my new Great Dane).

This my friends is just a short step away……. destroy the basics of society…….. and our demise is so very easy to arrange……..

Boris….. BORIS…… come here boy………………



So much talk about marijuana these days……

So as prescriptions are so easy to actually get you may conclude that around 85% of the American population can legally use Marijuana.


  • Short-term memory problems
  • Severe anxiety, including fear that one is being watched or followed (paranoia)
  • Very strange behavior, seeing, hearing or smelling things that aren’t there, not being able to tell imagination from reality (psychosis)
  • Panic
  • Hallucinations
  • Loss of sense of personal identity
  • Lowered reaction time
  • Increased heart rate (risk of heart attack)
  • Increased risk of stroke
  • Problems with coordination (impairing safe driving or playing sports)
  • Sexual problems (for males)
  • Up to seven times more likely to contract sexually transmitted infections
    than non-users (for females) 22,32 & 33


  • Decline in IQ (up to 8 points if prolonged use started in adolescent age)
  • Poor school performance and higher chance of dropping out
  • Impaired thinking and ability to learn and perform complex tasks
  • Lower life satisfaction
  • Addiction (about 9% of adults and 17% of people who started smoking as teens)
  • Potential development of opiate abuse
  • Relationship problems, intimate partner violence
  • Antisocial behavior including stealing money or lying
  • Financial difficulties
  • Increased welfare dependence
  • Greater chances of being unemployed or not getting good jobs.33

Now can you think of a better way of making someone a slave than the use of it?

Or here

Everything you could possibly want in member of society is absent while you have a use of Marijuana…… In fact what you really achieve is dependence on the state….in every way.

Once dependent on the state you are easily pliable to what the state wants.

This is one of probably the most important items that the state is happy to be in control of…….. and assures your vote and compliance. its not by accident…. its by design!

One in every five young adults’ deaths in the US is an opioid overdose, study suggests

Opoid deaths.jpg

So they do what??? They legalize it….. going according to plan? It used to be 1 in 25 deaths……….

Antisocial behavior is another attribute which benefits many sections of government. It allows the police to increase their armament to drastic levels. They can now monitor the cell phones with little or no oversight.Your mail being looked at by the government whenever they chose.

To make an individual anxious perhaps is one of the strongest benefits of the use of Marijuana……. to make them believe there is an enemy within.

What better reason to monitor their rights , introduce more invasive identifications, make more areas off limits to the public….. Its what they want.

With this list of side effects we do not ban it…. we legalize it… which will give more users more dependency on the state.

Now I would ask you again…. What better way to make people slaves to the system than legalizing marijuana……??

Break down society…….. and the res is easy……….Like……….Here


Premonition or Mistake?

One of the most remarkable reports on 9/11 came from Jane Stanley, who according to the BBC was in New York at the time of the attacks.

The controversy  with this report is that it came twenty minutes early………………………

The trouble with this report for me personally……. and generally very worrying is that Jane clearly refers to the two towers that have already collapsed…….. and up to this point I could find no news channel that made a reference to Building 7 before its collapse.

Another piece some hours later also adds to the worry of these BBC reports.

BBC's Jane Standley - Audio cuts-out when asked about WTC7

Another ‘mistake’ from the BBC?

The BBC eventually commented on this years later……Did you get that ???? 6 years later!

Part of the conspiracy?

Richard Porter | 17:12 UK time, Tuesday, 27 February 2007


The 9/11 conspiracy theories are pretty well known by now. The BBC addressed them earlier this month with a documentary, The Conspiracy Files, shown within the UK.

BBC World logoUntil now, I don’t think we’ve been accused of being part of the conspiracy. But now some websites are using news footage from BBC World on September 11th 2001 to suggest we were actively participating in some sort of attempt to manipulate the audience. As a result, we’re now getting lots of emails asking us to clarify our position. So here goes:

1. We’re not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on September 11th. We didn’t get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn’t receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.

2. In the chaos and confusion of the day, I’m quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate – but at the time were based on the best information we had. We did what we always did – sourced our reports, used qualifying words like “apparently” or “it’s reported” or “we’re hearing” and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving.

An image of the website hosting the alleged BBC World footage

3. Our reporter Jane Standley was in New York on the day of the attacks, and like everyone who was there, has the events seared on her mind. I’ve spoken to her today and unsurprisingly, she doesn’t remember minute-by-minute what she said or did – like everybody else that day she was trying to make sense of what she was seeing; what she was being told; and what was being told to her by colleagues in London who were monitoring feeds and wires services.

4. We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I’d love to get hold of it. We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don’t help clear up the issue one way or another.

5. If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error – no more than that. As one of the comments on You Tube says today “so the guy in the studio didn’t quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves conspiracy… “


Does it seem logical to you that the great BBC would no longer have tapes of their reports of probably the biggest attack on US soil in history?

Media contact page here

But the more I think about this the more I am resigned to believe she was another reporter that did not do her homework. Why? Because there is no possible useful reason for anyone to bring further people into what must have been a huge plot anyway!

A mistake!