August 16, 2015 By Joseph P. Farrell

The last couple of weeks have seen yet more interest in the mystery of Malaysia Air flight 370, and its still strange disappearance, with the discovery of allaged wreckage on the French island of Reunion. Well, now there is more debris washing up in the Maldives, northeast of Reunion island(this article courtesy of Ms. B.H):

Has MH370 debris washed up in the Maldives? Investigators examine items found where locals say they 'saw a low-flying jet' on the day the plane vanished

But... if you're reading closely, you'll have noticed a potential problem:

A photograph of one of the large pieces of metal found near the Banyan Tree resort on Vabbinfaru island bears a striking resemblance to the barnacle-covered wing part that washed up on Reunion island in July, a distance of 2,000 miles from the Maldives.

Maldives resident Mohamed Wafir, who posted the original photographs to Facebook, claimed that they were found on May 31.
(Emphasis added)

Now, in today's internet age, the fact that the Maldives debris was apparently known as early as the end of May, and is just now making the mainstream media, raises my suspicion meter into the red zone once again, for it prompts the obvious question, why is this only coming out now? My high octane suspicion and speculation remains what it was when the Reunion debris was reported: someone does not want the MH 370 story to go away, for whatever reason.

As the Daily Mail article also notes, there were apparently eyewitnesses in the Maldives who reported a low flying aircrat with markings similar to Malaysia air flying over their island the day of the flight's disappearance:

Islanders on a remote Maldives atoll have been insisting for months that they saw a large jet with the red stripe of Malaysia Airlines jets, flying low overhead on the morning MH370 lost contact - a phenomenon they had not witnessed before.

But their reports were dismissed by their own government as attention turned to a search area some 2,000 miles south west of Australia.

The recovery of a wing flap bearing a maintenance code number that matches Boeing 777 aircraft has led to increasing excitement that the first clue has been found indicating that the missing jet had crashed into the Indian Ocean and not in the Gulf of Thailand or the Bay of Bengal.

Maldive islanders have claimed that they of saw a low-flying aircraft head away from them in a south-westerly direction - towards Mauritius and La Reunion.

Ocean currents swirling in an anticlockwise direction, experts agreed, could have carried any debris from an aircraft crashing in the Maldives to the coast of La Reunion, where the wing part was found

All of this raises yet another question, namely, why was the crash site off Australia promoted in the first place, if there was significant indication, as there now appears to be, of a catastrophic even much rather away, near the Maldives?
As I suggested when the Reunion debris story first surfaced, it appears that someone very definitely does not want the story to go away, and the question now becomes: why? A partial answer may be implicated in the varioous conspiracy theories surrounding the flight, which the Daily Mail partially enumerates:
  1. the pilot hijacked his own plane;
  2. the co-pilot hijacked the plane;
  3. Vladimir Putin ordered the plane hijacked and flown to Baikonur cosmodrome;
  4. it was hijacked for a potential suicide attack on Chinese Navy ships in the region;
  5. the flight made a water born landing (no real conspiracy theory here);
  6. the USA shot the flight down fearing a terrorist attack on Diego Garcia.

While the Daily Mail points out the obvious flaws in these theories,I'd like to add that my own iniitial observations on the late Ms. George Ann Hughes' The Byte Show pointed out that the various theories like this would have been exposed by the other players in the story: if China suspected some sort of operation against it, particularly by the USA, it would have stated such; similarly, if the USA had suspected terrorist plots againist Diego Garcia, it would have had other means of averting the flight than shooting it down; and most importantly, if it had suspected Mr. Putin as having ordered the diversion to Kazakstan, the USA would have been shouting this from the rooftops.

So with the apparent discovery of more wreckage that could be from flight 370, we are chin to chin with the whole mystery once again, and now, this mystery must be plausibly explained. And yet, no one is stepping forward, in the light of this new evidence, to investigate the story.

And that may be what is behind the debris: the story now will not go away, and a narrative is going to have to be discovered from the evidence, or created in spite of it. And in either case, those preparing it know that it will be picked over by researchers.

Between you, me, and the doorpost(as my mother used to say), I suspect that once any narrative is agreed upon, that the mystery is only going to be enhanced. Why do I say this? Well, again, between you, me, and the doorpost, if one looks at the pictures thus far released of the debris, the debris does not seem to show evidence of sheer stresses such as one would expect of crash landings(unless there are pictures I have not seen), nor (as yet) any signs of shootdown. And that again, raises all sorts of question marks.

And, as if to emphasize those question marks, Malaysia is denying that the Maldives debris is from flight 370, while it affirms the Reunion debris is(our thanks to Mr. T.M. for sharing this article):

Malaysia says most of the debris found in Maldives not from plane; unclear if all examined

You'll note, that while the Maldives had eyewitnesses to a low-flying aircraft, Malaysia insists the Maldives wreckage is not from flight 370, but insists that the Reunion debris is from 370, while France has after two weeks yet to make a determination.

Looks like we might have to wait a bit for that "agreed upon narrative" folks. With all the geopolitical actors on the stage, if any one of them suspected the foul play of another as being involved, there would seem to be a curious silence of mutual denunciations in the media. And perhaps that means my "extraordinary disappearance theory" may not yet have "extraordinarily disappeared." Time will tell.

See you on the flip side...