Swissair111.org    forums.swissair111.org    Discussion  Hop To Forum Categories  SR111 Messages    SwissAir 111 "talk"

Moderators: BF, Mark Fetherolf
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
SwissAir 111 "talk"
 Login/Join
 
posted
I attended a "talk" last night at the Blandford Historical Society monthly meeting. The guest speaker was Paul Palango. Paul is along time journalist who was contacted by ex-RCMP Sgt Jude. Paul claims to have a copy of the some 13,000 pages of notes/evidence generated by Sgt Jude during the "investigation". The biggest piece of evidence that was not acknowledged by anyone "in authority" was the amounts of magnesium found in the wreckage. Sgt jude is of the opinion that a "magnesium explosive device' was likely the cause of the "fire". Here is the link to the video made with Sgt jude in it:
http://vimeo.com/11230471

The whole evenig left me with a lot more questions than answers.
 
Posts: 9 | Registered: Thu October 20 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/media...0003/mi-a98h0003.asp

That's where I think you'll find the most accurate information about the swissair tragedy, but thanks for your post.

Barbara
 
Posts: 2533 | Location: USA | Registered: Sun April 07 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
I did want to respond to one of your quotes on twitter where you say, 'the only plane to crash from wiring'. I take it that you or Juby feel that this somehow would lead one to believe that it must have been terrorism that brought down the plane because wiring wasn't a plausable explanation.

Swissair 111 was one of only a few planes to have an 'entertainment system' (IFEN) wired into it by a bunch of amateurs. It drew so much power from the plane that it had to be wired into an essential bus. The pilots were unable to turn it off without using the circuit breakers. It often overheated the cabin so the flight attendants were instructed to turn up the air conditioning. Please take the time to read this site. I think you will find far more relevant information than you will from a conspiracy theory by one individual.
 
Posts: 2533 | Location: USA | Registered: Sun April 07 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
quote:
That's where I think you'll find the most accurate information about the swissair tragedy,


I did read some of that report. In it they claim to have tested some of the bodies for certain things. Many claim that a plausible test can not be done from "body pieces". So in the report they make sevral claims that my be kind of stretching things. There ws only one body found intact and it was not tested in any way,and subsequently creamated. If they had been able to test a "complete body" they could have determined what the passengers where breathing at the time of the incident.
 
Posts: 9 | Registered: Thu October 20 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
According to Paul Palango, who has done a lot of reasearch on that incident. There has been a lot of fires due to that wiring. BUT there has only been one plane that crashed because of that. Hasen't been one since either.
 
Posts: 9 | Registered: Thu October 20 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
Maybe they haven't crashed from general aircraft wiring, but this plane was unique. It had a poorly designed, improperly installed, power eating, accident waiting to happen, entertainment system wired in. The investigators found arcing on the entertainment system wiring. Please have a look at the photos on the front page of this site.
 
Posts: 2533 | Location: USA | Registered: Sun April 07 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
quote:
So in the report they make sevral claims that my be kind of stretching things.


That's exactly what I believe Juby has done.
 
Posts: 2533 | Location: USA | Registered: Sun April 07 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
You seem to be really quick to dismiss any thing the Sgt said. I wish you could have been at the presentation. The gentleman talked steady for about 2.5 hours and then answered questions. In fact he asked before he started what people thought of the incident. I actually said that maybe his was another "conspiracy theory". This gentleman gave what I believe to be facts. To bad you couldn't have been there to hear what he had to say.
 
Posts: 9 | Registered: Thu October 20 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
I shadowed the swissair 111 crash investigation, not only as Chairman of the International Aviation Safety Association, but also as the wife of one of the passengers on that 'flying coffin' - Raymond M. Romano.

I was interviewed for the Fifth Estate piece, but (apparently) because I stood by the TSB's findings, my portion wasn't included in what CBC aired on TV, but as a side interview posted on their website. Certainly, no fair and balanced presentation. I'll leave it at that, but I could go on for hours about how I felt this subject was covered by CBC/Fifth Estate.

I was fortunate enough to be granted many meetings with Vic Gerden, Larry Vance and a host of others involved in the investigation. I base my opinion on the facts that were presented to me during the investigation, not speculation on the part of a retired RCMP who hasn't, to date, proven any of his theories/speculations. It might be time for him to show - proof positive - rather than continue on this path. Not only for his sake, but for the sake of all those personally involved.

I dare say that isn't possible, so to continue to bang this drum serves no useful purpose...or none that I can see anyway.

We're all welcomed to believe what we'd like, but it's alway best to go with the facts. Kapton wiring, mixed with the softer wires types used in the shoddy installation of the IFEN, brought that aircraft down after arc tracking took place. The Mylar insulation blankets were instrumental in the spread of that fire. Again, I could go on and on, but I believe I've made my point.

Barbara and I were very outspoken before and after the "documentary" aired, both in print interviews as well as radio. I believe we've explained our positions fairly well, but there will always be those who simply cannot resist a 'good' conspiracy theory.

Lyn S. Romano
Former Chairman IASA
Wife of Raymond M. Romano
Passenger on swissair flight 111
Seat 9F
 
Posts: 11 | Location: New York | Registered: Tue April 09 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
The human brain reaches conclusions based on the "data" that it receives. If that data is complete, and correct, then the brain will reach the correct conclusion. But what if not all the data was input?

No way is there any more data! After such a complete invesigation what possible data could there be. ex-Sgt Juby has, he says, has 13,000 pages of data. He claims that his superiors continually tried to get him to change his "notes". (Which I understand is illegal in Canada). He kept trying to tell them that the incident should be investigated as a "criminal activity". They refused to listen, and eventually ordered him to change his notes. This was done by a letter which he had to sign, and claims to have a copy of. Why would they do that?

The references in his notes to magnesium is what they wanted "changed". Magnesium, according to the Sgt, would explain the very high temperatures that caused so much damage, so quickly.

How does Paul Palango, the journalist, fit in here? He was approached by the ex-Sgt because he had already written a book about the RCMP. Juby wanted the truth to be known.

Can the Sgt, a career RCMP member, a well respected investigator, be believed? Well, maybe someday we will see the evidence he claims to have. I invite you to review the video again with these questions in your mind.
If I have done nothing else here, I would like you to remember these two gentlemen's names.

Mayhap we will hear more from them down the road.
 
Posts: 9 | Registered: Thu October 20 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
Your point about the human brain doesn't apply to Juby? He contends his data is correct and there is no room for any other thought process on his part. Basically, your point works both ways so it really doesn't add all that much to the conversation.

Could it be that he was asked to change his notes because those notes were based on his speculations and not facts? Just a question that comes to mind - no one, aside from those directly involved can answer that...but that is the other side of the coin, so to speak.

A wire that arc tracks produces extremely high temperatures and with the Mylar insulation in close proximatey, I fail to see how that combination can be so easily dismissed.

I continue to scratch my head wondering why, if it was vital for Juby to have the truth told, didn't he come out with his information when he was convinced it should be a criminal investigation. I do believe every news outlet in Canada would have given him a forum to speak and share his findings - but sadly, he missed his opportunity by waiting 13 years. I suppose he had his reasons for not speaking up sooner - just trying to point out he really missed his chance to bring whatever information he claims to have to the forefront early on.

Mr. Palango and Juby are the perfect team actually. A book deal is no doubt in the offing so maybe we'll all learn more when/if we purchase the book.

Certainly you are not suggesting a group of well respected TSB investigators cannot be believed and I am not suggesting he's lying, not by any means...what I am suggesting is maybe his brain reached a conclusion based on the 'data' it received - correct or not - and that is what he is basing his theory on. Just another point of view to consider. Not sure what he believes he can accomplish at this point. As far as I can tell there would be no way to prove his theory, but maybe that's something that will be explained in the book as well.

One final point, about remembering the two names. I didn't want to come off as insensitive by pointing out you originally mis-spelled Juby's name, and now that it has been corrected, I probably shouldn't bring it up at all.

Just my humble opinion but if it's names we should be remembering? I suggest the passenger/crew list from the flight, containing 229 names.

Honestly? those are the names that are most important to me.
 
Posts: 11 | Location: New York | Registered: Tue April 09 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
As I see it there are three ways to look at this. You believe Sgt Juby, you don't believe Sgt Juby or one can sit on the fence and see what, if anything, comes of this.

If you don't believe him then you are happy with the conclusion you came to after considering all the facts. The facts that were known at the time. End of discussion.

If you believe the Sgt, then does that mean that all the media reports, all the investigatve reports, all the documentaries and all the books were incorrrect? Certainly, and absolutely not!They were correct with respect to the facts as they knew them. But believing him begs a lot of new questions. It means that if he is telling the truth, then what happened to "short-circuit' the invesigation? It means that someone, or persons, in the higher echelon of the RCMP knew the significance of the unexplained excessive amounts of magnesium that Juby found. They chose not to investigate the incident as a criminal activity.Juby, according to Palango, states that at least one memeber of the TSB knew about the magnesium as well.Why would Juby come along after so many years? Very good question. But, if what he says is true, and can be proved, then the time span becomes unimportant.

Myself, I am on the fence. I would like to believe that a career RCMP Sgt should be believed. But I do not automatically believe him, nor to I automatically disbelieve him either. So what is his agenda then? I have no way of knowing. But that is not important, IF what he says is true.
What about the agenda of the journalist? Who cares? he is not the key anyway. Sgt Juby is.

The era when the incident took place was pre-911. Terrorism was not viewed the same way it is today. Today's "accidents" are looked at a lot more closely now. Perhaps, just perhaps, this accident may have been looked at differently had it occured today.

Do I have an agenda? No matter what I say, whether I do, or whether I do not, is again not important. I do not want to say anything that will cause others to ask themselves if i am a bad person or just someone who wants to do what is on the home page of this website "discuss .....".

This brain here can not begin to imagine the horror of those that were on that flight. No matter what the cause, they were innocent victims of a terrible air incident. I trust they are safe now in the hands of their Maker.
 
Posts: 9 | Registered: Thu October 20 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
First off, I'd like to address the comments you made regarding being viewed as a bad person of "just someone who wants to do what is on the home page of this website "discuss": Not sure I understand why you felt the need to point this out, but that's precisely what I thought was going on...a discussion. I can't speak for anyone else here but myself and because we may or may not agree, doesn't mean I consider you a bad (or good, for that matter) person. We are having a discussion - no more, no less. Just had to make that clear and only because you seem concerned about it.

I can understand that you would be on the fence, far more than myself. I stood in that reconstructed cockpit, I viewed each and every piece of the debris (wires included) that was brought up and I met with the TSB on regular intervals. I have far more of an insight, so that's the reason I find it difficult to lend lots of credence to Juby's claims. I am certainly not claiming to be an expert in anything, but I can say, I do have plenty more insight than the average individual. You will say I was able to view the facts as they were presented..I would say I was able to view the facts as they were. Basically, I question those who put down the TSB as a bunch of inexperienced investigators, but hold Juby up to the highest standards...mostly (as far as I can tell) because he was an RCMP. The same organization that he's putting down now. Hope you see from where my confusion stems.

Lets remember also, there were a myriad of parties involved in this investigation, which included boeing, and swissair - to name just two. It begs the question, why didn't any one of those parties step up to the plate (then or now) if they had any question about this investigation being criminal and not 'accidental'? <I place "accidental" in quotes only because I do not believe it was an accident, but an accident waiting to happen>.

Certainly they were far more intimate with the investigation than I was, so one has to wonder why no one, other than Juby and one scientist, are the only ones stepping up 13 years later.

Trust me, if boeing or swissair felt there was any validity (whatsoever) of an incendiary device being responsible for taking that a/c down, they would have been speaking up long before 13 years after the fact. I just can't help but question how Juby is really the only individual with proof of this cover up - most especially, when so many parties were involved.

At the end of the day I do not see how Juby could ever prove his theory/speculation or conjecture - not at this stage of the 'game'. So, what is the purpose of coming out now? I simply do not understand what he thinks should happen at this point. Maybe if he didn't wait 13 years, we would be talking about a totally different story. Maybe if anyone else stepped up to the plate, making the same claims, there would be reason for those not as closely associated to the investigation to wonder.

I hope I've made my points in an educated way. I respect the fact that you are "on the fence" (and say so) and I hope you are able to respect the fact that I am not.
 
Posts: 11 | Location: New York | Registered: Tue April 09 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
Since my last post here i have been able to do some more reading about this whole incident. I totally agree that it does seem strange that Juby is just now coming forward, even though he claims to have tried to give the info to all. Mr. Palango at his talk had many many answers, whether or not they are true is not known to me. He sure talks a good talk though! I'm still on the fence, but starting to lean! Is Juby lying? Heavens knows, the vast amount of data seems to not to be on his side.

I spent 25 years in the military and I know it is very very had to "buck the system". Not good for one's career. Mr. Palango says that that is what happened to Juby as a result of his dealings with his superiors. Can be done, but very hard, and shouldn't be that hard once he is out of the RCMP.

I wish that some of those on this site had been able to attend the "talk" by Mr Palango, and to question him at the end when he asked for questions. Surely would have made for a "lively discussion"!

Slightly off topic. Mr Paul Palango, Investigative Journalist.
I am currently reading one of his books about the RCMP. In it there is a vast amount of what i would consider "inside information." It really boggles my mind how one man can come up with so much info. If it is all true? I really have much less faith in him than Juby. He claims to want to write a book about SwissAir 111, but can't find a publisher (for various reasons). If he ever does get to publish one it should make great "fictional" reading. My mind says that it would like to believe Sgt Juby, but perhaps you are correct he became obsessed with the magnesium angle.

I well imagine that the TSB is well aware that there are still theories around that are in conflict with their conclusions. I am not saying they are wrong, but every now and then they should be "questioned", just to keep them honest.
 
Posts: 9 | Registered: Thu October 20 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
I'm glad you did more investigating on this subject, because it shows you really are interested in learning the facts and not merely glued to one way of thinking.

I'm not suggesting that Juby is lying, but more, that he jumped the gun on some of his feelings...but feelings were never what this investigation hinged on,the facts, as the investigation unfolded were.

Another theory could be that because Juby has an axe to grind with the RCMP, for what he believes was a slight back then, is what brought him to 'attack". One can't really know for certain, but it's worthy of consideration.

Mr. Palango (not certain if that's the correct spelling) phoned me over a year ago, to discuss this entire topic, so I did have the opportunity to ask my questions and I was not impressed with the responses. He said he would send me the information, so I could review it - but I never received anything - another reason for my questioning the validity of these claims.

I just happened to hear Mr. Palango's interview with Rick Howe, moments before Barbara and I were to go on air with our interview with Rick. He made a huge mistake when he mentioned he felt the reason I didn't take any of this seriously was because it didn't go along with my livlihood in aviation safety.

Thankfully I did hear him say that, because I was able to CORRECT the record for anyone still listening to the program. I have never profited from ANYTHING associated with this horror and if he mis-spoke, than in my humble opinion, that calls into question his professionalism.

As a journalist, I should think he would place weight on all of his words. The fact that he is looking to publish a book and profit from that, leads one to wonder who...exactly...has more to gain from a theory such as the one they are putting forth.

I have just taken part in another documentary, far and away more credible than the Fifth Estate piece (which did not include my entire interview, but merely placed some of it on their website). I contacted the gentleman that interviewed me for that piece, asking why I wasn't included in the on-air piece, or why my entire interview wasn't placed on their website. Never did get an answer as to why my interview wasn't included in what was aired, but I have a feeling it was because I didn't buy into the theory that the program was (obviously) pushing.

Such a shame they decided to go with only one side of the 'story', rather than deliver an opposing position. To me? real journalism doesn't take sides, but rather, airs both sides.

Maybe if you catch the episode of Seconds From Disaster (Nat Geo), which will air in the spring of 2012, some additonal information will be forth coming. I didn't speak about this theory, but Larry Vance might - I really have no way of knowing. I stuck to the facts as I know them and wasn't "up" for even mentioning these claims.

I appreciate the opportunity you've given for me to deliver my feelings, that wasn't always possible when Barbara and I were out there in the early days.
 
Posts: 11 | Location: New York | Registered: Tue April 09 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
It looks like "theories" have, and will continue for some time yet. This is surely not the first time this has happened after an "incident", nor will it be the last. Sometimes, just sometimes, they prove to be correct in the long run. Maybe this one will, but one should not hold their breath. Thank you for your frank and courteous disscusion. Perhaps a reminder here about the video upcoming in the spring when you know a date.
 
Posts: 9 | Registered: Thu October 20 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
Eastriver, I find it odd that Juby says that nobody would listen to him for 13 years. This board has been here for a long time, and another one before it, yet we never heard from him at all. He could have always said his piece here. I personally do not buy his theory at all, but that's besides the point.
 
Posts: 2533 | Location: USA | Registered: Sun April 07 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
posted Hide Post
Just as one example, we had a guy that showed up on the board as IFEN_guy. He was from the FAA and posted information about the entertainment system. We respected his anonymity & appreciated his information.

Lyn Romano had an aviation safety organization called IASA and would have been glad to take his information at the time. Both of us gave serious consideration to inquiries, etc., that made sense.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BF,
 
Posts: 2533 | Location: USA | Registered: Sun April 07 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

Swissair111.org    forums.swissair111.org    Discussion  Hop To Forum Categories  SR111 Messages    SwissAir 111 "talk"

© YourCopy 2002