Maduro repeals the Laws of Physics

0
Because, as everyone knows, planes shot down in mid air land with their engines side-by-side...
Because, as everyone knows, planes shot down in mid-air land with their engines perfectly aligned side-by-side…

Look at this photo closely. Does this look to you like a drug plane that’s been shot down by an F16 fighter jet?!

Because that’s the crazy story General Godfather (that really is his name!) is hawkin’ on Twitter…

1 COMMENT

  1. Guess it all depends how it was brought down, but presumably with a Vulcan cannon. The plane evidently attempted an (unsuccessful) landing, whether crippled or not. I suppose you have reason to doubt the claim that it was shot down? Suppose it could all be a PR attempt of course, or a cover-up? Not sure what Occam’s razor has to say about this.

    In my opinion the best part is that they claim to have used a paternalistic weapon system produced by the imperialist military-industrial complex and acquired under corrupt previous administrations. Where are the sukois?

    Viva la full frontal revolucion, baby, yeah!

      • It’s not farfetched that it’s some sort of coverup or other crazy stunt. But it’s also not farfetched that the aircraft was intercepted without disintegrating in the air (or was destroyed on the ground) then burned to a crisp while retaining a fairly intact shape. There were likely no bomberos around to help. Perhaps some helpful GN with a little cheap gas? Perhaps…

        Looked at some other crashes: bit.ly/15I2XJt
        Morbid.

        • That’s certainly very plausible, but when the PSUV has SO MUCH TO GAIN from a successful false flag operation such as this one, you have to harbour great suspicion.

      • Is easy to ascertain what happened to the airplane just by looking at it.

        Had the airplane being shot down on the air, the debris would be all over the place, quite possible in a much larger area, Yet the debris are all gathered almost in one single place.

        Furthermore the two propellers are almost in the exact position of the original configuration, side by side along with the fuselage. That seems to be very odd for some airplane that were shot down.

        One could argue that the military took the time to gather all the pieces and the debris of the crippled airplane and decide to organize all the pieces just for show. Which brings me to the final question, what about the soil below the debris? Again a shot down airplane would have have been scattered all over the place in an uncharacteristic pattern, and the vegetation and soil would be burned too!

        BTW I loved one of the comments in twitter, “So much money wasted on Sukhois and all you needed was kerosene to “shot down” one airplane, loved your medals BTW”

  2. Let’s play the devil’s advocate here. What the general says in that tweet is that the aircraft was inmobilized, not shot down. Inmobilized means that it was rendered inmobile. F16 planes also have ground attack capabilities and its not crazy to think (due to the photograph) that the plane was shot on the ground maybe using the rotary cannon the airccraft has (no need to waste expensive ordnance on a static ground target without need of a precise attack). The fact that he says “incursoras” doesn’t mean directly that they were moving, either. The problem is that the media (including the government media) has made echo of the news blaring it has been shot down. Come on guys, we all know this people has zero credibility, but a small excercise in reading comprehension never hurts!

    • Interceptado implies that they were moving.

      The charitable explanation is that F16s escorted them to a landing strip, where soldiers set fire to them. Either way, the tweet is clearly meant to deceive.

      • He never uses the word intercept, anywhere:

        “Vladimir Padrino ‏@vladimirpadrino 12 oct
        Defensa aeroespacial integral @ceofanb detecta e inmoviliza dos aeronaves incursoras asociadas narcotrafico al sur estado apure. Venceremos!”

        “Vladimir Padrino ‏@vladimirpadrino 13 oct
        Uno d los 2 aviones incursores inmovilizados por formacion d combate F-16 anoche sur de Apure. La lucha es frontal! pic.twitter.com/1jm6Z1TkGK”

        • El presidente de la Asamblea Nacional, Diosdado Cabello, informó hoy del derribo de una aeronave presuntamente vinculada a actividades de narcotráfico y de la inmovilización de otra en el estado Apure (suroeste).

          “Violaron el espacio aéreo venezolano, les hicieron el aviso (…) venían dos aviones, uno no hizo caso y bueno, disparó el F-16 y lo derribaron”, dijo Cabello durante una rueda de prensa que ofreció como dirigente del gobernante Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela (PSUV).

          Más temprano, en una alocución transmitida por el estatal VTV, el jefe del Comando Estratégico Operacional de la Fuerza Armada Nacional Bolivariana (Ceofanb) Vladimir Padrino López, informó de la “inmovilización” de dos aeronaves que penetraron el espacio aéreo del país.

          “Este fin de semana,(…) dos aeronaves incursoras penetraron nuestro espacio aéreo, no le prestaron atención a nuestros indicadores, a nuestra legislación aérea y tuvimos que activar (…) nuestros aviones F-16 quienes los interceptaron en el sur de Apure (suroeste)”, dijo.

          Padrino López explicó que la operación se realizó haciendo uso de la Ley para la Defensa Integral del Espacio Aéreo.

          “Pretenden también usar ese territorio como plataforma, con pistas clandestinas para aterrizar y transportar también todo lo que es las drogas”, señaló.

          Horas antes Padrino López había difundió parte de la información a través de un mensaje en su cuenta de Twitter en el que señaló que las aeronaves fueron inmovilizadas por “formación de combate”, escrito que acompañó de una fotografía de los restos quemados de una avioneta.

          Una fuente del Ceofanb dijo a Efe que “inmovilizar” una aeronave es obligarla a aterrizar y señaló que en lo que va del año se ha forzado el aterrizaje de 82 avionetas que ingresaron al espacio aéreo venezolano presuntamente vinculadas al tráfico de drogas.

          • So, that shines a different light. Still, the final explanation of the ceofanb source gets closer to reality than what Cabello said (talking bullshit of it being shot down). Besides them always lying, one of the main short-legs of their credibility has always been that they seem to be unable to handle the same exact information or agreeing on it (Chavez sickness case was the top example).

          • Lord knows the regime, and in particular, the military, would not tolerate an airplane linked to narcotrafficking operating in Venezuelan airspace. Imagine that!

  3. How odd, the propellers seem to be intact as well. What’re they made of, adamantium?
    No mention at all of the amount of bodies recovered from the crash or how many “drugs” were found, crashy-boom-boom fires notwithstanding.

  4. Well if they shot it down…this is according with the behavior of Venezuelan militaries …dispare primero, pregunte despues…Can they say something about how many people where in the plane 1? 2? How they are going to identify them…pura paja…paja quemada in this case.

  5. Heard a person interviewed on the radio explain that for years Airforce planes were not allowed to fly with live amunition ( “artillados”) because of Chavez fears that their fire might be turned against Govt targets . That sometime ago the airforce had forced a plane suspected of drug trafficking to land in an isolated strip , that a dispute over control of the landed airplane had arisen between the guardia nacional and the airforce so that the plane had remained desserted and unused where it had landed , and that recently the desserted airplane had been put to fire probably to demonstrate that Maduros recent threat of downing ‘pirate’ planes was no idle threat but something quite menacing !!

  6. Just a few observations. As Wellborn81 mentioned the props are straight. If they were turning at impact they would be bent back and to the right. As Francisco mentioned the engines are correctly positioned to the rest of the airframe. The engines contain more concentrated mass than the rest of the airframe and therefore more momentum at impact. They would have traveled farther away from the impact site than the main fuselage. And if you notice the small round shape between the engines. It appears to be the wheel for the nose gear. It seems to be in the correct position for being deployed when the aircraft burned. If it were up, or if it was deployed at impact it would be further to the rear of the airframe debris field.

    My opinion, the aircraft was burned while stationary.

  7. Not only General Godfather, but General Vladimir Godfather. A cousin to Stalin Gonzalez? Or at least it is likely their parents were ideological cousins. [According to White Pages, there are 100 people named Stalin Gonzalez in the US or Canada..]

    • Better to be Vladimir than to be Hitler. You know how many Hitlers we have in Venezuela!
      Would you like to meet the twins Stiven Jesús and Stalin Jesús? They live in Puerto Cabello…or at least vote there: 14108154 and 14108155

  8. don’t those f16 have cameras?, the release of the recording would put an end to any speculation and would be pretty impressive propaganda.

    also, anyone else have any moral concern about the armed forces having the authority to shoot down civilian planes at will? they could just shoot a non-drug related private plane by “accident” and just claim that it was trasspassing, it’s pretty similar to the US drone strikes policy they criticize daily on telesur.

    • Related to that, from what I’ve read there’s no mention to *who* was in the plane. If they actually shot it down they have to answer for the pilot and other possible occupants.

    • Or the recording of the transmissions the Guardia sent to the planes. I have to assume that they communicated beforehand with the pilots demanding identification and proper clearance to fly over our airspace, and that when they didn’t respond, that the GN sent them multiple warnings of interception and the use of force to ground their aircraft,… If F16s have cameras, then the release of that footage along with the transmissions would be infinitely more justifiable for shooting the plane down, if that was the case…but instead, we get tweets and naught but Gen. Padrino’s word.

  9. Here is what happened to the pilot (barrowed from a blogger at ND):

    “Disociado Camello dijo:

    El piloto de la nave impactada por el misil del F16, saltó al vacío desde una altura aproximada de 15 mil pies. Presumiblemente sin paracaidas. Al caer a tierra, seguramente corrió hasta perderse en la maleza. Con él llevaba 700 kilos de cocaina de alta pureza y siete fusiles de asalto calibre 7 y pico, según me informó el Cartel anoche.

    El piloto del F16, Tte. Coronel Alfonso “ÑICO” Rodriguez, dijo que el piloto de la nave derribada seguramente iba vestido con un diseñito camuflageado de Ralph Lauren o Tommy, porque después de dar 25 vueltas en los alrededores, no pude ubicarlo. “

  10. Surprising that a shot-down airplane would not have left a lateral path in the grass, since its forward momentum would be very substantial. At the very least there would be numerous gouges along the “landing path” of such a vehicle. They do not fall straight downward.

    • The photo shows the vegetation surrounding the plane totally intact . no way was that plane shot down !! the only believable story is that the plane was burned on the ground while stationary !! the absence of any pictures or film or press releases showing the captured pilot or any one else connected with the presumably crashed plane appears to confirm that the whole story is a crass charade !!

    • feathering would be standard procedure in landing with engine cutoff, for example, if there is risk of fire. Also, many engines nowadays have automatic feathering.

      What is clear is that the blades did not touch the ground while the engine was turning. If feathered, the blades would be bent. If not feathered, they would probably have been broken. Since the propellers did not touch the ground, it must have been a perfect landing despite the non perfect landing terrain.

  11. In any case the tail has been ripped from the rest of the fuselage indicating a large force due to either a deliberate explosion or a crash.

  12. Back to basics. It landed on its wheels in a flat area. It was not upside down. The pilot or tow truck driver had full control of the airplane until it stopped and then was able to leave the plane. Thus, it was not blown to pieces in the sky. The fire spread after the landing.

    My best conjecture was that the plane carried drugs and had to be quickly destroyed.

  13. A fascinating discussion is worth comment. I do think that
    you ought to publish more about this issue, it might not be a taboo matter but
    typically people don’t speak about these subjects. To the next!
    Many thanks!!

Leave a Reply