My theory that the House Majority Leader's plane was bombed in 1972 and the CIA covered it up

Preface

Note – I cannot emphasize enough that this is a highly speculative theory with very little evidence to support it. That said, it's at least plausible so I'm posting here for my own reference in the future, for your feedback, and for others to build upon.

Background – If you aren't familiar with the story, a twin-engine Cessna 310 transporting two congressmen (one was the House Majority Leader) went missing somewhere between Anchorage and Juneau on October 16th, 1972.

Bomb Theory – The easy explanation is that it crashed due to weather, mechanical failure, pilot error, etc. That's still the leading theory but there is some evidence to suggest that the plane was bombed by the mob in an attempt to gain control over Alaskan politics during the lucrative oil boom that was happening at the time. Even if the wreck had been found, it would look like an assassination of the House Majority Leader (who also served on the Warren Commission) while the actual target (the congressman from Alaska) would be presumed to be collateral damage.

Sources – Everything I know stemmed from the recent Missing in Alaska podcast, which chronicles something like 7 years of the host investigating this story. I'm not part of the podcast, just a fan. If reading is more your thing, here is probably the most up-to-date and comprehensive article available: 1972 Cessna 310C Alaska Disappearance

---

Assumptions

My theory relies on the sole assumption that the plane should have been found. To quote the Missing in Alaska podcast, Tail End episode, 2:45 timestamp:

In 1972, Air Force Major Henry Stocker, the search commander, told reporters "95% to 99% of what we are looking for, we locate." "Of the previous 1,200 planes to disappear," one official said "only three had never been found." ... An Air Force document I obtained says ... "Their probability of detection of the aircraft, if intact in the search area, was in excess of 97%. The probability of locating aircraft wreckage or survivors without fires or signaling devices was in excess of 95% in all search areas and in excess of 99% in the highest probability area."

You could call the accuracy of the above statements into question but I'm going to take them at face value for the purposes of this theory, which leaves me with the possibilities below.

---

Possibilities

1. It's just bad luck that the plane was never found.

2. The plane crashed outside of the search area.

3. The plane was searched for less effectively than previous missing planes.

4. The pilot did not want to be found.

5. The plane was found but kept secret.

Here are my thoughts on each of those possibilities:

1. Bad luck – It is certainly possible that the plane simply crashed going through Portage Pass, slid into a crevice, and was never seen again. Some variant of crashing in a hard-to-find way is generally accepted as the most likely explanation. There was bad weather that would have contributed to a crash and also hindered search efforts. That said, the pilot was highly experienced and there's reason to believe that the plane may have had several de-icing and anti-icing devices. Not to mention this was one of the largest search efforts ever at the time. All of this is covered in great detail in the podcast so I won't dwell on it. Suffice to say, it is an unlikely combination that this particular plane crashed in the first place AND was never found during the massive search or in the 48 years since.

2. Outside search area – The pilot would sometimes stray from proper flight paths but the search area was expansive and as far as I'm aware, there's no reason to believe the plane crashed outside of the enormous search area.

3. The search was lacking – The search was exhaustive but it may have been inferior to other missing plane searches due to weather or if the plane crashed in a way that searchers weren't expecting. If it exploded due to a bomb, for example, the wreckage might be hard to recognize. Also, the plane probably didn't have an Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT) but the quote above specifically mentions a 95% or better chance of finding the plane wreckage even without signaling devices or survivors. All things considered, I think the search was at least as comprehensive as other missing plane searches, if not significantly more comprehensive.

4. Pilot didn't want to be found – This would either mean the plane landed somewhere and all four occupants lived the rest of their lives in secrecy or that the pilot was suicidal and crashed in a hard-to-find place on purpose, possibly outside the search area. I'm mentioning it here for completeness but there is no evidence at all to support either of these possibilities.

5. Plane was found but kept secret – In my opinion, this is the only viable explanation aside from #1 above. Possibility #1 is the simplest (Occam's razor) but it has already been explored in great detail by my sources.

For this theory, I will look at possibility #5.

---

Theory: The plane was found but kept secret.

Consider the following timeline, all times in Alaska Time and sources cited at the end:

• Oct 16, 8:59am – Cessna 310 departs Anchorage for Juneau (NTSB Aircraft Accident Report)

• Oct 16, 9:09am – Last known communication with the plane (NTSB Aircraft Accident Report)

• Oct 16, 1:45pm – Search efforts for the aircraft begin (NTSB Aircraft Accident Report)

• Oct 17, 4:30pm – A tipster in California calls the Coast Guard, saying his friend has access to experimental electronic equipment and that the plane is close to Malaspina Glacier. The tipster is very specific, describing the exact location and even the number of survivors. This tip was followed up on and taken seriously due to his rational demeanor and military ties (Missing in Alaska podcast, The Search episode, timestamp 36:45 + email correspondence with the host to clarify the likely time of the call)

My theory is that the California tipster was leaked the location of the crash by a friend in the CIA or some other member of the US Intelligence Community. In 1972, the Cold War was in full force and the US Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS) network was well developed, including hydrophone arrays along the California coast as well as Adak, Alaska. This is the same Pacific Ocean network that was used to locate the Soviet submarine K-129 four years earlier. From the SOSUS Wikipedia page:

Acoustic data from four Air Force AFTAC sites and the Adak, Alaska SOSUS array triangulated a potential event location to within 5 nautical miles, a site hundreds of miles away from where the Soviet Navy had been searching.

In addition to this network, there appear to be many other SOSUS-related projects that were being tested in the waters surrounding Alaska during that time. This makes sense with how close it is to Russia. Of particular interest are:

• PARKA II & Sea Spider

• Missile Impact Locating System (MILS)

Some of these hydrophone projects may even remain classified to this day, since submarines near the US mainland are still very much a military concern. For that reason, it's impossible to know how sensitive the sensors might be and how close they might have been to the crash site. That said, I think it's plausible that the plane would have been picked up by one of these sensors if it crashed into the water. A good portion (if not most) of the flight path crossed over the water. The CIA wouldn't bother to pour through hydrophone data for any other missing plane but with the House Majority Leader missing, it's almost certain that they would have. They pulled out all the stops for this search, including the SR-71 spy plane and highly classified spy satellites:

• GIF showing 3 groupings (72 photos in total) of the search area taken two days after the plane's disappearance by a KH-9 spy sat. That area of Alaska wasn't photographed by a KH-9 again until four photos were taken in 1976 and the area was never photographed in such detail again during the entire run of the KH-9 program, which ended in 1984.

---

Why was it kept secret?

So if the CIA knew where the plane was, why didn't they tell anyone? Well here are the possibilities, assuming the CIA found the plane:

1. There was a bomb on the plane and it was planted by the CIA. The mob had nothing to do with it and the CIA kept the plane secret to cover their operation.

2. There was a bomb on the plane and it was planted by the CIA. The mob was manipulated to make it look like they did it and the CIA kept the plane secret to cover their operation.

3. There was a bomb on the plane. The CIA directly worked with the mob to facilitate the bombing and then kept the plane secret to cover their operation.

4. There was a bomb on the plane. The CIA didn't communicate with the mob but took steps to ensure that the bombing happened and then kept the plane secret to cover their operation.

5. There was a bomb on the plane. The CIA were aware of the plot but let it happen because it benefited them in some way. They kept the plane secret for fear that the high-profile assassination of the House Majority Leader would be blamed on them.

6. There was a bomb on the plane. The CIA was unaware of the plot and kept the plane secret for fear that the high-profile assassination of the House Majority Leader would be blamed on them.

7. There was not a bomb on the plane. The CIA found the plane and kept it secret for an unknown reason.

So it boils down to whether there was a bomb on the plane, how involved the mob/CIA was in the bomb plot, and the CIA's motivation for keeping the plane wreckage a secret. Again, I am listing all possibilities for completeness but I think #6 and #7 are by far the most likely. It's possible the CIA actually conspired to bomb the plane but that's a pretty serious accusation. And let's be clear, this is all under the huge umbrella assumption that the CIA found the plane in the first place, which I fully admit is a dubious and unsupported claim.

If the CIA did find the plane, though, I don't think they had any idea it was going to go missing. For evidence of this, look at the GIF I linked to above. You can see that they didn't photograph the Prince William Sound part of the search area between Anchorage and Cordova. That makes me think that they missed the opportunity to photograph that area, since the 16th and 17th would have been the only chance, due to the satellite's orbit. If they had been privy to the bombing ahead of time, surely they would have photographed that area as well.

---

Watergate and public perception of the CIA

To recap, I think the most likely of the seven possibilities above is that the mob bombed the plane and that the CIA was able to find it afterwards using high-tech equipment. But that equipment was all highly classified at the time. Even the implication that SOSUS existed would have been a threat to national security. They could have tipped off the rest of the search organizers anonymously but then they wouldn't get any credit for the find. In fact, they would get the opposite since evidence of a bomb on the plane could make it look like the CIA played a part in the demise of the House Majority Leader. In 1972, the CIA was already cast in a bad light because of their role in the Watergate scandal, just four months before the plane went missing. From the CIA Wikipedia page:

Hastening the CIA's fall from grace was the burglary of the Watergate headquarters of the Democratic Party by former CIA officers, and President Richard Nixon's subsequent attempt to use the CIA to impede the FBI's investigation of the burglary.

The botched 1961 Bay of Pigs Invasion was also lingering and the 70s were generally peak CIA underwater craziness. Case in point, Operation Ivy Bells in 1971 and Project Azorian in 1974. I even checked to make sure they wouldn't have used this occasion as a test run for Project Azorian but the Glomar Explorer didn't leave the East Coast until 1973 (page 22 of this document). No matter though, I'm pretty sure they only would have needed a discrete tugboat with a crane to retrieve a Cessna 310 from the Alaskan waters. The area near Malaspina Glacier (and almost everywhere along the flight path) is very remote and they could have recovered the wreckage without scrutiny. It would have been an absolute cake walk and good salvage practice for the CIA, even without the Glomar Explorer.

---

Problems with this theory:

1. First and foremost, the much simpler explanation is that the plane crashed in a hard-to-find place. I realize that but I think I've shown that my CIA theory is at least mildly plausible.

2. I wasn't even alive in the 70s so I won't pretend to know whether the CIA would have been properly motivated to cover up a House Majority Leader plane crash in the way I'm suggesting. I think it's plausible but someone more knowledgable could weigh in on that. I just know they did some crazy stuff back then.

3. The California tipster gave the location of the crash AND the number of survivors. I wouldn't think SOSUS could detect whether there were survivors, much less the number of survivors. Maybe there was a hydrophone very close that was able to sense footsteps. Maybe they detected the initial crash with SOSUS and zeroed in with the SR-71 spy plane. Maybe the tipster embellished to give his claim a sense of urgency. Maybe he just misspoke. I don't have the original document so it's hard to look into it any further.

4. There is evidence to suggest that the plane didn't make it out of Prince William Sound, which is only about 100 miles from where it took off in Anchorage, Alaska. The strongest support of this is that there was no radio call later when there should have been if the plane was still flying. There's a few plausible reasons why there wasn't a radio call though and it's really anyone's guess as to exactly how far the plane got. For a detailed breakdown of where the plane might have gone down, see the Missing in Alaska podcast, Tail End episode, 4:37 timestamp.

---

Conclusions:

• I believe it is possible that the Cessna 310 that went missing in 1972 with the House Majority Leader on board might have been located by underwater hydrophone sensors that were highly classified at the time.

• If the cause of crash was a bomb, I believe the CIA might have been motivated to recover the sunken wreckage without alerting the public or the rest of the searchers.

• This would fit the reputation of the CIA at the time and it would explain why nothing was ever found.

• It could even explain the discrepancies in the NTSB Aircraft Accident Report, which didn't list the plane as having any ice equipment, as well as the lack of news coverage of the event. The CIA may have tampered with the investigation and suppressed the story.

• I'm speculating here but I think a bomb timer would have been set to go off half way through the flight time, which is approximately where Malaspina Glacier lies along the flight path.

• It's possible that the unconfirmed tail/empennage that was recovered near Hinchinbrook Island in the 80s drifted in the ocean currents into Prince William Sound over the years before being found: Alaskan ocean current map.

• This theory unifies the two unlikely events that the plane went missing in the first place and that it was never found. If this theory is correct, a bomb caused the crash and that same bomb is also the reason that the recovered wreckage was never disclosed to the public.

• Here's my previous post on this topic, if anyone is interested.

---

Discussion points:

1. Do you think the plane should have been found by now?

2. Do you think there was a bomb on the plane?

3. Do you think there was CIA involvement?

4. Any related theories, evidence, ideas?

---

Once again, this is a highly speculative theory with little evidence to support it.

submitted by /u/Intro24
[link] [comments]

source https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracytheories/comments/lt2zlg/my_theory_that_the_house_majority_leaders_plane/