Julie · @nihonmama
17th Nov 2014 from TwitLonger
What did JACC do with @drewrat81's image that the FBI forwarded to AMSA? #MH370
Nihonmama
Posted November 16, 2014 at 8:43 PM
Jeffwise.net: "MH370 Evidence Points to Sophisticated Hijackers"
In the wake of the disappearance of MH370, there were legions of people searching through images on the Tomnod (owned by Digiglobe) website, in the hopes of finding possible wreckage. And like many on Twitter, I was bombarded with Tomnod photos from people (with the best of intentions) asserting that the images were unquestionably debris from MH370. The problem with the images I saw is that I could never see what the presenters claimed they showed – most were too far away (and unclear) to be even remotely discernible. So like most everyone else, I eventually threw up my hands and refused to look at one more thing from Tomnod.
But a few days ago, I happened upon a Twitter conversation (involving @drewrat81 , @dizzyoz1, @kstaubin) that caused me to take note. What stopped me specifically was @drewrat81’s (aka Michael John, who I’ll refer to hereinafter as ‘MJ’):
1. IMAGE – of what pretty clearly appears to be an AIRPLANE (or what’s left of one),
OFF THE COAST OF THE ISLAND OF SUMATRA, INDONESIA — WEST OF BANDA ACEH.
https://twitter.com/drewrat81/status/532257581272936448
The coordinates MJ provided for that image are as follows:
LAT: 4.629154
LONG: 90.72408
Remember (even though it defies credulity): Indonesia says it’s radar didn’t *see* MH370. But radar data from Indonesia has not been made available for analysis. Moreover, the radar narrative warrants (as I’ve said previously) ruthless scrutiny. Something (or a few things) don’t add up.
2. STORY — namely, that MJ submitted his Tomnod find (tagged on March 18) to the FBI, who told him that if the images were good, they’d be passed on — which the FBI apparently did, because one Debra Galwey (from AMSA) then contacted MJ and asked him for more. MJ says that was around the 18th or 19th of March; he had ‘daily conversations’ with Galwey, who told him that the images were ‘positive’. I asked MJ if AMSA/Galwey qualified or explained what positive meant, but he said she did not. Moreover, he says that once JACC got involved, all of the communication about the ‘positive’ images he’d submitted stopped. After asking Galwey why the communication had ground to a halt, MJ says her final reply (about three days after the SMH article was published) was “your images are still being analysed”.
Now, it would be reasonable to assume that JACC didn’t communicate with MJ because upon further inspection, the image(s) may have been found not to be MH370. But if they weren’t MH370, why wouldn’t JACC have just sent MJ a quick note saying that? After all, he had been going back and forth with AMSA. The simple answer is that JACC was probably swamped and didn’t bother. After all, being non-responsive is how bureaucracies typically behave and why vary on the theme when there’s an airplane missing?
But there’s more.
In the course of our Twitter convo, @kstaubin (Ken) brought up the March 21 Sydney Morning Herald article by Peter Hartcher:
Missing Malaysia Airlines plane: US satellite the unspoken source that sparked search for MH370
I posted a link to that same article on this board (see November 3, 2014 at 3:29 PM in “Where is the Debris?”) to make the point (which had been disputed by some commenters) that US satellites were the source of images being used in the search:
“The images were from a US satellite. The Australian Maritime Safety Authority’s John Young did not mention this to the media.
When asked, he avoided the question.
And when reporters phoned Australian defence officials to ask the same question, they were given a firm “no comment” or ‘we can’t discuss'”.
BUT, when I re-read that article in the context of the convo with MJ, Ken and DizzyOz, THIS next bit jumped off the page:
“This may seem odd, because the satellite’s owners, the US company DigitalGlobe, were only too happy to tell the media.”
So, while the Australians refused to comment on the source of the images, Digiglobe was announcing (to the media) that its images were being used in the search for MH370. Note that this is the same company whose subsidiary (Tomnod) told MJ that they couldn’t comment on the images he’d found — for “legal” reasons. Well if that’s the case, wouldn’t the parent (Digiglobe) have been bound by the same legal restrictions? Even more interesting: MJ says Tomnod also told him to “stop searching for more debris as they were closing down” after his find.
And where was the LOCATION of the debris in those images that we now know came from Digiglobe? According to the SMH, 2260 kilometers south-west of Perth. Well, a whole lot assets were sent to look over there and we know how that turned out.
So let us ask: what happened to the (per AMSA) ‘positive’ Tomnod images that MJ found? And what did AMSA’s Debra Galwey mean exactly by ‘positive’?
Please read carefully through the conversation thread in the aforementioned URL. MJ also tweeted an email with AMSA (Debra Galwey), additional images (NB the green and orange shot) and measurements of things in another image he tweeted (how accurate, I cannot attest), compared to what would be corresponding parts on a B777.
A search is currently underway (again) in the SIO, and as of yet, not even a seat cushion from MH370 has popped up. Anywhere. So while we’re all waiting to see what might emerge, and before dismissing this out of hand, I’d suggest that it might be prudent for those following MH370 (and the families and NoK in particular) to take a look at MJ’s image(s) and chat with him and the others who’ve been trying to get attention on that specific image. Add AMSA’s Debra Galwey too.
BTO, BFO and other ‘canonical’ data notwithstanding, it may be that the plane we’re all searching for is right under our noses.