#2045: Marine Links Serco MH17 Body-Snatch Tags to Menzies Cargo Fraud, Obama DMORT Morgues
Plum City – (AbelDanger.net): United States Marine Field McConnell has linked Serco agents’ alleged use of body-snatch tags to launder 82 bodies through the MH Flight 17 crime scene to the apparent fraudulent switching of Malaysian Airlines cargo by Menzies Aviation in Amsterdam and Obama’s deployment of DMORT staff to bypass any autopsies of the missing 82 bodies.
Readers are invited to check the article below which suggests the Boeing 777-200 (Tail number, M9-MRD) aircraft allegedly shot down over Shaktarsk dropped its cargo – apparently loaded by Menzies at Schipol airport – to include aircraft parts and 82 decaying corpses salvaged from the Boeing 777-200 of MH Flight 370 (Tail number, M9-MRO) to be snatched, tagged and laundered in east Ukraine.
McConnell notes that Serco, Menzies and DMORT appear to have provided body-snatch laundry tags and a cargo-swapping mortuary service to ensure that the victims of the 7/7 London Underground bombing and the alleged sabotage of the New Orleans levees – 21 hours after Hurricane Katrina had passed 80 miles to the east of the City – were never autopsied.
McConnell invites researchers to Google “SOFDK” and check the cargo manifest for the plane which carried Samantha Cameron to New York on September 10, 2001, the day before the Twin Towers and WTC Building 7 were apparently demolished by incendiary devices in the elevators, and the DMORT body-snatch taggers began populating the Fresh Kills landfill with un-autopsied corpses.
Wrong Aircraft Identified As Malaysia Flt MH-17 Fuels Doubts
A previous post exposed the issue of foreknowledge when videos dealing with the aftermath of the alleged missile attack, were revealed to be produced prior to the crash of Flt MH-17.
On July 20th, the Corbett Report published a useful summary that discloses many irregularities in corporate media coverage and international governmental propaganda sources.
Now we look at more media propaganda published as perception management to global audiences.
EXHIBIT A: The aircraft allegedly shot down over Shaktarsk is a Boeing 777-200,(Tail number, M9-MRD) – the identical model aircraft that remains missing in the mysterious disappearance on Flt. MH-370 with tail number, M9-MRO).
Recent, “near conclusive” evidence reports that MH-370 (M9-MRO) was actually hijacked raising the possibility that aircraft parts from M9-MRO could have been salvaged, altered, re-painted and used to create the crash scene for MH-17 (M9-MRD).
Curious initial reports claim the smell of decaying corpses was evident by witnesses on initial encounter with the crash site. On July 18, ABC News reported:
“A top pro-Russia rebel commander in eastern Ukraine has given a bizarre version of events surrounding the Malaysian jetliner crash — suggesting many of the victims may have died days before the plane took off.”
Speculation is developing that 9M-MRO alias MH-370 may have been substituted for Flight MH-17 to create a False Flag event. In the evidence shown below, Flight Radar-24 reports that MH-17 was reported “canceled” by Malaysia Airlines. If the flight was canceled, the circumstances allow for the substitute of a “bogey” aircraft on a mission. This could explain the false photo story by a passenger at Amsterdam terminal as an attempt at “deception management”.
With the development of fly-by-wire and drone technology, it’s possible that passengers aboard MH-370 were already deceased when the missile struck the aircraft. It will be interesting to see how the allegedly deceased pilots and crew will be memorialized by the media.
EXHIBIT – A
EXHIBIT B: Mail Online reported the allegedly doomed Flight MH-17 carrying the tail number 9M-MRD was photographed by a passenger, Cor Pan, prior to boarding. Coser inspection of the nose gear (See also EXHIBIT A) reveals the aircraft carries the tail number 9M-MRC. This finding makes it impossible that the “doomed flight” photo was taken on the day of departure. Records available in EXHIBIT G show the previous departure of 9M-MRC from Amsterdam as Flt MH-17 occurred on 7/11/2014.
EXHIBIT – B
EXHIBIT C: Photos of the crash scene reveal key sections of aircraft wreckage that appear like landscape at “stone henge”. Of interest is the section of aircraft containing the tail number or “N” number that serves as a registration number to identify a particular aircraft in the Malaysia Airlines fleet.
The Tail Number for the allegedly doomed flight is 9M-MRD. The tail section apparently fell from the sky in a vertical position as a convenient opportunity for photographers to easily show the world this plane is not to be confused with tail number 9M-MRO from the missing flight MH-370 – the Malaysia airliner that is now revealed to have been hijacked.
EXHIBIT – C
EXHIBIT D: Prominent photo of tail section with Malaysia Airlines logo (livery) provides observers with hollow assurance that the aircraft was positively identified as 9M-MRD.
With the example of this “agent” walking all over the crash scene evidence, the media has already promoted the idea that the NTSB or designated crash scene investigators will not likely be able to carry out a competent investigation. After all, what would a thorough forensic analysis of the crash scene be obligated to report if it were allowed to take place?
EXHIBIT – D:
EXHIBT E: Alleged crash scene baggage seems too clean to be true. How likely is it that not one ripped, burnt, charred, shredded or blood-stained item can be detected in this photo?
EXHIBIT – E
EXHIBIT F: Flight Radar-24 screen capture on the day following the crash (7/18) shows MH-17, (9M-MRD) as “canceled” on the date of the crash (7/17). Why is it reported that the “doomed” flight was “canceled” before it was struck by a missile?
As horrific as the crash was reported to be, why did Malaysia Airlines boldly resume normal scheduling for the following day (7/18) and before the risk of a repeated missile attack could be determined.? The screen-shot was captured after takeoff and while the aircraft (9M-MRL) was still in the air and presumably “safely” en route. When did Malaysia Airlines determine “business as usual” was more important than air safety?
EXHIBIT – F
EXHIBIT G: The record shows that from June 12 through July 17, thirteen (13) different B-777-200 aircraft were assigned to fly the MH-17 flight schedule for a total of 36 trips from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur.
Of special interest is the last flight for 9M-MRD on this route, prior to the alleged crash, occurred on June 18, 2014 – an unusually long interval of one month . During this time only 3 other aircraft flew the route only one time:
(1) 9M-MRM on 6/16, (2) 9M-MRF on 7/5 and (3) 9M-MRC on 7/11.
Two of the aircraft flew the route within 12 and 6 days, respectively with the probability both aircraft could fly the route again before approaching or exceeding a 30 day hiatus. This distinguishes 9M-MRD and 9M-MRM as the only two – out of 13 aircraft – to exceed a 3 week hiatus between scheduled service as Flight MH-17.
EXHIBIT – G”
“Handling an emergency situation such as a major fire or terrorist attack in which there may be casualties or even fatalities, is one of the most demanding situations central and local governments can be faced with.
Local Emergency Mortuary Arrangement
Under present regulations it is the responsibility and obligation of a local authority to deal with disasters in its area. The Local Emergency Mortuary Arrangement means the local government must be prepared to receive casualties within 24 hours at a nearby location.
This can be a very difficult task, particularly at a time when there would be so many other demands on local authority officials such as public order, caring for bereaved relatives, security, and forensic science issues.
Quick delivery of fully functional facilities
De Boer can provide all the essential facilities which may be required and amenities such as electricity, specific temperature control equipment, as well as special flooring to deal with chemicals and water.
Our extensive experience in handling disaster situations have enabled us to create a unique, affordable solution to provide requirements that can be operational anywhere at anytime, twenty four hours a day, every day of the year.
Previous assignments include:
– Mortuary Extension in London for tsunami repatriation casualties
– Emergency Mortuary in central London after the 7/7 bombs (click here to download HAC-video wmv 20MB)
– Emergency mortuary in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina
– Forensic facilities in the Midlands after warehouse fire.
‘’Amongst the visitors were members of the Royal Family, Government Ministers, Faith Leaders, senior officers and planners from the emergency services and many Category 1 and 2 agencies under the Civil Contingency Act . The Lord Chancellor who attended described the facilities as setting a “Gold standard” in the care of victims and the pursuit of forensic evidence’’.
(London Regional Resilience Report on events of 7 July 2005, page 47 )”
“Menzies Aviation/Menzies World Cargo proudly serves over 60 airlines from its stations at Schiphol and Rotterdam Airport in the midst of the air cargo community. Menzies’ warehouse, warehouse infrastructure, equipment and IT systems enable Menzies to provide quality and speedy cargo and aircraft handling services.
In the constantly evolving world of cargo and ground handling, Menzies aims to achieve efficiency for its own business as well as its clients on airside and landside. Being part of John Menzies plc, the company enjoys a steady and economically sound basis for its activities, enabling Menzies to build long-term relationships with airlines, forwarders and all other relevant players in the air cargo market.”
“Capita, Serco, G4S, government and the rise and rise of electronic tagging
Posted on September 12, 2013
Updates at the end of this post.
I rarely use the words “fascinating” and “press release” in the same sentence, but:
This fascinating press release appeared on the Capita website recently: “Capita [is the] preferred bidder for electronic monitoring contract.”
It seems that Capita has positioned itself (with three other companies) to take over the dire electronic tagging system run by Serco and G4S for the Ministry of Justice. By “dire,” I mean “very likely fraudulent”: Serco and G4S were recently slammed by PriceWaterhouseCoopers for charging the taxpayer tens of millions of pounds for people they claimed to have tagged, but who turned out to be dead or incarcerated. Serco will participate in an independent “forensic audit” as a result. G4S won’t: according to the MOJ, they told Grayling No and were referred to the SFO. G4S, amazingly, told Robert Peston that it opted to call in the SFO itself. I am not sure what the real situation is there. All I know is that we get to keep paying for it.
And paying for it. We now have Capita as preferred bidder for a large electronic monitoring contract. Unfortunately, it is a contract that sets many alarms off itself. Chief among these Capita’s plan to make £400m in its first six years of the contract and its reluctance to explain in detail (to me anyway) exactly how it proposes to do that. I hope that they have decided against targeting the dead. Of even greater concern, though, is the extent to which they apparently plan to target and tag the living. Their press release says that the £400m in those first six years will be generated on the basis of an “anticipated increase in the use of tags beyond the current numbers of monitored individuals.” Early days, I know, but £400m is a lot of money, so we’re surely talking a lot of monitored individuals.”