I recently came across Dave Emory's informative SpitfireList website and he recently posted an article concerning the Sentinel incident, along with his own commentary, which includes a question asking if someone in the U.S. may have been involved in the hijacking of the drones as well.
"COMMENT: The apparent capture and downing by Iran of a U.S. drone aircraft raises a number of interesting questions.
If the account presented in “Debka” can be believed, the possibility of some sort of “inside job” is one to be carefully considered. (“Debka” is an intelligence newsletter specializing in Middle Eastern and Israeli national security matters.)
With the Ptech/Islamist/Muslim Brotherhood links to the GOP and the Underground Reich un-interdicted, the possibility of GOP sabotage to prevent successful military action against Iran must be considered. (Mitt Romney said that if Obama is re-elected, Iran will get the bomb. Although that may very well be a done deal, it is interesting to note the proximity of the drone capture to the Romney’s remarks.)
Was Ptech technology involved here?
Might U.S. and/or Israeli national security interests have helped engineer this to forestall an Israeli attack on Iran, seen by many as a blueprint for wider devastation and disaster?
Might Islamists and/or Underground Reich personnel have been involved?
Might GOP personnel have been involved in bringing down the drone to cause embarrassment and or disfunctionality to the Obama administration, not unlike the U-2 incident and its effect on the Eisenhower summit with Soviet premier Khruschev or the October Surprise and its effect on the re-election campaign of Jimmy Carter?
Might right-wing Israeli elements have been involved, in order to generate pressure for an attack on Iran by Israel? Note that Debka has a strong bias toward the Israeli right-wing.
EXCERPT: Iran exhibited the top-secret US stealth drone RQ-170 Sentinel captured on Sunday, Dec. 4. Its almost perfect condition confirmed Tehran’s claim that the UAV was downed by a cyber attack, meaning it was not shot down but brought in undamaged by an electronic warfare ambush.
This is a major debacle for the stealth technology the US uses in its warplanes and the drone technology developed by the US and Israel.
The state of the lost UAV refutes the US military contention that the Sentinel’s systems malfunctioned. If this had happened, it would have crashed and either been wrecked or damaged.
The condition of the RQ-170 intact obliges the US and Israel to make major changes in plans for a potential strike against Iran’s nuclear program.
Earlier Thursday, Debkafile reported:
The Obama administration’s decision after internal debate not to send US commando or air units into Iran to retrieve or destroy the secret RQ-170 stealth drone which fell into Iranian hands has strengthened the hands of the Israeli faction which argues the case for striking Iran’s nuclear installations without waiting for the Americans to make their move.
Senior Israeli diplomatic and security officials who followed the discussion in Washington concluded that, by failing to act, the administration has left Iran not only with the secrets of the Sentinel’s stealth coating, its sensors and cameras, but also with the data stored in its computer cells on targets marked out by the US and/or Israeli for attack.
Debkafile’s military sources say that this knowledge compels the US and Israel to revise their plans of attack for aborting the Iranian nuclear program.
Like every clandestine weapons system, the RQ-170 had a self-destruct mechanism to prevent its secrets spilling out to the enemy in the event of a crash or capture. This did not happen. Tehran was able to claim the spy drone was only slightly damaged when they downed it.
The NATO spokesman claimed control was lost of the US UAV and it went missing, a common occurrence for these unmanned aircraft.
The enigmas surrounding its capture continue to pile up. How did Iran know the drone had entered its airspace? How was it caused to land? Most of all, why did the craft’s self-destruct mechanism which is programmed to activate automatically fail to work? And if it malfunctioned, why was it not activated by remote control? . . . ."
Please note that Dave's assertion about Debka's biases may be true to a point, but it is certainly wise to ask certain questions in times such as this(and hopefully, will not prevent meaningful discussion & debate on this forum).