As most of you will probably know, I no longer see WK's posts. I see from the thread that he is still active in his 'theory'. I would not be surprised if he was still endorsing the need for us to 'go walk on the Mull to see the cloud'
Some time ago I did a ball-park statistical analysis of the chances of such a plan failing due to circumstances and the likelihood of a major political uproar resulting from 'discovery' of this 'plot'. I cannot recall the numbers, but the probability of an embarrassing failure was high. I now wish to add further degrading statistics -
1) The ?US NAVY seals? (was it?) would need to have been positioned in the area before the event
2) They would have to have known that a Chinook MkII with this kit was to be used for the flight
3) They would have to have known the pax details
4) They would have to have known the planned route
5) Someone would have had to 'arrange' a fly-by/stop at this 'landing-site'
6) They would have to have known TOT in order to get into position
If anyone wishes to add these factors to my other factors it is my firm opinion that the whole idea is farce. HOWEVER, if WK is SO convinced it is true, one might assume he must have detailed knowledge of it, and then according to his assurance a while back, would have presented the evidence to the enquiry (presumably 'in camera') and thus it will be in the considerations of the enquiry.
That should be enough. I again make a plea that posters do not feed this theory by responding. There is no point and it distracts from the aim of the campaign. IF, in the unlikely event it is found to be true, it should automatically over-turn the verdict - QED?