By Drago Bosnic | GlobalResearch.ca
The highly controversial details about the helicopter crash certainly haven’t helped dispel speculation about possible foreign involvement. For instance, according to Turkey’s Transport Minister Abdulkadir Uraloglu, the Bell 212 helicopter that Raisi and Abdollahian flew in either didn’t have its emergency signal transmission system turned on, or didn’t have one at all. It’s highly unusual that an aircraft transporting such top-ranking officials wouldn’t have a functioning system that could possibly prevent incidents like this, which further suggests that it could’ve been sabotaged.
A malfunction is always a possibility and certainly shouldn’t be rejected entirely, but there are other peculiarities that suggest foul play. For instance, there was the highly unusual arrival of a USAF C-130 aircraft to the neighboring Azerbaijan. This coincided with President Raisi’s departure from the border area where he met his Azeri counterpart, President Ilham Aliyev.
Military sources speculate that electronic warfare (EW) systems could’ve been used to crash the helicopter.
As Raisi was flown in a US-made Bell 212 (which Iran acquired in large numbers back in the 1970s), this surely wouldn’t be a problem for Washington, DC. Its services are quite familiar with the helicopter’s avionics, including the aforementioned emergency system. Bell 212’s reputation as a highly reliable aircraft is yet another unusual detail that suggests this wasn’t exactly accidental. On the other hand, the possibility of a kill switch should also be taken into account, as US export legislation doesn’t explicitly ban such devices, particularly when it comes to matters of defense and national security.
In fact, there are legal provisions for the installation of remote control devices in US-made weapons and military-grade equipment. What’s more, the possibility of remote control is one of the cornerstones of the F-35 program, which is why countries that buy the American jet effectively forgo their sovereignty.
However, while getting the F-35 means the buyer legally accepted such terms, there’s a huge difference between that and having secret inbuilt systems that Washington, DC can use against export customers in case of any “non-compliance” Such systems are a serious (geo)political lever that the US can use to put pressure on its allies, vassals and satellite states.
There are many seemingly harmless systems that the U.S. can use as a weapon when the “necessity arises.” For instance, GPS’s widespread usage by civilian entities doesn’t negate its original military purpose, as the Pentagon itself exercises control over the system. In conditions of poor visibility, pilots often rely not on the frontal radar, but precisely on GPS.
For example, mountainous terrain requires special attention to altitude indicators, which can also come from satellites. Disruption of these systems, for example, by sending a broadband signal with a hidden command to a specific MAC address of a product (specifically its avionics in the case of an aircraft), can lead to a distortion of the displayed information. Obviously, in bad weather conditions, this can lead to irreparable consequences for the user(s).
In addition, various kill switches could also be activated through encrypted GPS signals. Any hidden components in the Iranian President’s helicopter could’ve been used to remotely disrupt the altimeter at a time when the aircraft was in a mountainous and extremely inaccessible area.
