flight 93 shot down ??

auditek923

i always believed this plane was actually shot down. there was only ever a massive hole in the ground at the alleged crash site. not much plane debris etc. what does people think??

Captain Chaos

If it was shot down there would still be alot of it left on the ground. Air to air missiles are not like the movies where the entire plane blows up to nothing. Even small fighters can and have survived a hit by air to air and surface to air missiles but there are times when they go up completely. A medium sized airliner would still be largely intact after a hit or even two but it would not survive those hits most likely.

There would probably be a a trail of parts on the ground from when it was hit to when it crashed if it was shot down. Parts of the wing, engine pods etc.

The reason there would not be much of it left at the crash site is if it hit the ground going very fast, not the result of a shoot down. Not saying outright that it was not shot down, but using an observation that there was not much wreckage at the crash site does not support a shoot down theory or make a strong case for it. Still could have happened, not conclusive evidence from the crash site alone unless they found traces of the blast frag explosive warhead used on an AIM-9 or 120. Doubt a fighter would use the gun or close enough to use it and live with his/ her actions.

username2010

Watch Loose Change 9/11 people - alternative theories regarding these horrible events...

shamrock55

didnt donald rumsfeld say on live tv that it was shot down!!

Captain Chaos

shamrock55 wrote: »

didnt donald rumsfeld say on live tv that it was shot down!!

Yep, the clip is on youtube. And he does not correct himself either.

meglome

username2010 wrote: »

Watch Loose Change 9/11 people - alternative theories regarding these horrible events...

You do realise that one of the main people behind Loose Change now openly says he doesn't believe most to the conspiracies. That's aside from the fact it's full of crap.

jumpjack

auditek923 wrote: »

i always believed this plane was actually shot down. there was only ever a massive hole in the ground at the alleged crash site. not much plane debris etc. what does people think??

What we should really ask is "why the hell should NOT they have shot it???"
And: "Why the hell should passengers have crashed the plane by themselves?!?Because they were 44 heroes???"
Please.... :rolleyes:

There were around 4000 planes flying around, nobody could know how many were been hijacked, 3 of them already caused diasters, fighter planes were already on the route and they had not yet been able to prevent any of the "accidents" by shooting anything; then what's the latest news? "a possibile further hijacked plane is possibly going to White House or Congress"; what should they have done? Wait & hope? :eek: Wait for orders? From who?

I simply think the commander of the airbase where the fighters took off from ordered to shoot down the plane; or even that the two pilots decided by themselves, once they understood what was possibly going on, to shoot the plane.

Hence the "alternative explanation" to prevent scandal.

But it will be revealed only after 50 or 100 years, once nobody will care anymore.

The evidence of all of this?!?
How is it possible that a plane filled with fuel fallen in a forest does not burn all the surroundings, while similar plane crashing into a building burns the surroundings for hours?!? Please...
An airline plane filled with fuel and hit by a missile would literally explode in the air, it couldn't behave like a small military plane containing just "a few" gallons of fuel: an airline plane contains several THOUSANDS of liters of gasoline!

BTW:
It was not planned to take down the Twin Towers, it was only planned to hit them with planes causing some HUNDREDS of casualties. Getting them down was just a "plus".
I don't even think 20 persons were needed to set up all this mess: one single people was enough to hijack a plane before 9/11 (just hit the hostess and get in crew cabin, and you've done): 4 people set up a "new pearl harbour". Is it acceptable? Of course not, hence "let's find some arabic people in the passengers lists and let's "use" them to build up a story to save our dignity..." :rolleyes:

tfitzgerald

Jumpjack are you saying there was only four hijackers and that the others were only poor innocent Arabic people who happened to be on the planes?

jimbo00

a friend of mine works for the US airforce. A colleague of his loaded missles onto 2 fighter jets and when the jets came back to base the missles were gone. make of that what you will!

Monty Burnz

tfitzgerald wrote: »

Jumpjack are you saying there was only four hijackers and that the others were only poor innocent Arabic people who happened to be on the planes?

This must be the strangest theory yet.

jumpjack

tfitzgerald wrote: »

Jumpjack are you saying there was only four hijackers and that the others were only poor innocent Arabic people who happened to be on the planes?

Yes.
This is the first thing I thought on 9/11/2001 looking at that mess, and I'm still convinced this is the truth. Whoever would have ever thought of attacking the strongest military power of the world and would have ever thought of succeeding? A moron version of Bin Laden? Please... :rolleyes:
Four mad persons.
Four lucky persons (2996 casualties rather than a couple of hundreds)
Now four "heroes" (arabic heroes).
One happy arabic leader.

Probably 5 out of 100 is the usual percentage of arabic people in american airlines passengers! Put 4 flights together, ~60 seats on each one, and you get 240 people, and more than 10 of them are arabic. (at least this ws possibile before 9/11).

jackiebaron

Well wasn't one of the engines of flight 93 found over a mile away from the main crash site? That would suggest that the engine came away from the plane in mid-air and continued on its parabolic trajectory through the air until it landed over a mile away from where the body of the plane umpacted the ground.

And this crap about a few passengers (Let's roll! :pac:) storming the cockpit and flying the plane into the ground is positively laughable. Who makes this stuff up?

jumpjack

jimbo00 wrote: »

a friend of mine works for the US airforce. A colleague of his loaded missles onto 2 fighter jets and when the jets came back to base the missles were gone. make of that what you will!

"ops, I dropped them."

ctrl-alt-delete

jimbo00 wrote: »

a friend of mine works for the US airforce. A colleague of his loaded missles onto 2 fighter jets and when the jets came back to base the missles were gone. make of that what you will!

So is he looking to sell them then? I might know somebody who is interested in them.

jumpjack

BTW, I don't know American history, but how has Pearl Harbour disaster been justified by historians? Was it a conspiracy? Did anyone betray his Country?

jackiebaron

jumpjack wrote: »

BTW, I don't know American history, but how has Pearl Harbour disaster been justified by historians? Was it a conspiracy? Did anyone betray his Country?

The US never acted in a neutral manner prior to entering the Second World War. Remember that war had been raging in Asia for years prior to Pearl Harbour as well as for at least 2 years in Europe. The US needed an excuse to enter the war. They had been constantly targeting German vessels in the Atlantic prior to 1941.
They had been doing the same to the Japanese in the Pacific. The US wanted control of the resources of the Pacific theatre, resources such as oil, lumber, rubber, etc. The Japanese knew that the US were going to enter the war sooner or later so they (the Japs) really had no choice but to slow them down by bombing their Pearl Harbour fleet. The US let it happen, it was no surprise.
It's basically like if you know that a bully is going to target you on the way home from school. He knows it, you know it so all you can really do is swing one at him and hope for the best. If he's a coward it may send him running but if he's just a plain mental bastard he'll use the pretext of you thumping him to justify beating the crap out of you.

Monty Burnz

Bear in mind though that the Japanese were attempting to build an empire in Asia and had already conquered China and Korea and had carried out untold atrocities in the process. They had plenty of their own Doctor Mengeles - and these guys were never brought to justice by the Japanese authorities after the war as far as I'm aware. Their plans to control the whole Pacific Ocean required that they neuter the US first.

It's not like the nasty USA were about to bully poor little Japan for no good reason.

enno99

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Bear in mind though that the Japanese were attempting to build an empire in Asia and had already conquered China and Korea and had carried out untold atrocities in the process. They had plenty of their own Doctor Mengeles - and these guys were never brought to justice by the Japanese authorities after the war as far as I'm aware. Their plans to control the whole Pacific Ocean required that they neuter the US first.

It's not like the nasty USA were about to bully poor little Japan for no good reason.

Never brought to justice by the US either they covered it all up even the torture of American prisoners so they could get the research

Many of the scientists involved in Unit 731 went on to prominent careers in post-war politics, academia, business, and medicine. Some were arrested by Soviet forces and tried at the Khabarovsk War Crime Trials; others surrendered to the American Forces.

On 6 May 1947, Douglas MacArthur, as Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, wrote to Washington that "additional data, possibly some statements from Ishii probably can be obtained by informing Japanese involved that information will be retained in intelligence channels and will not be employed as 'War Crimes' evidence."[7] The deal was concluded in 1948.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsOC3UWBgLs

Ciaran500

jackiebaron wrote: »

Well wasn't one of the engines of flight 93 found over a mile away from the main crash site? That would suggest that the engine came away from the plane in mid-air and continued on its parabolic trajectory through the air until it landed over a mile away from where the body of the plane umpacted the ground.

It tumbled downhill for quite a distance, doesn't mean it came off mid air.


The US have openly said they sent fighter jets with no live munitions on board to take down United 93 and they were preparing jets with live munitions to shoot it down if they failed. Why would they not admit to shooting it down?

Di0genes

1) The four hijackers purchased tickets under their own names and boarded the plane. One was randomly selected for and passed additional security screening. Ziad Jarrah was a licensed pilot and had recent training on professional large jet flight simulators. United flight 93 was scheduled to depart at 8:00 am, but left 42 minutes late due to airport traffic. Aboard were 33 passengers, 7 crew members, and 4 hijackers.

2) Several passengers and crew called from the plane, spoke with loved ones, described the hijackers' attack, and related their plan to try to retake the plane so that it would not be used as a suicide weapon against a populated area. All but two of these calls were made using the plane's seatback Airfones.

3) The cockpit voice recorder recorded the hijackers' attack and apparent murder of the pilots and a flight attendant. Air traffic controllers heard a radio transmission by a man with an Arabic accent, warning of a bomb on board. Passengers reported that one of the hijackers had what appeared to be a bomb strapped to him.

4) After learning about the other attacks, passengers and cabin crew attempted to retake the cockpit but were apparently unable to gain entry. The sound of their attempts was recorded on the CVR. The CVR also recorded the hijackers' decision to end the flight, followed by repeated shouts of "Allahu Akbar!" ("God is greatest.") until the plane crashed. Families of victims heard the CVR recording.

5) Flight 93 was tracked by radar until it went down.

6) Many people in Pennsylvania saw the Boeing 757, traveling at low altitude and high speed, roll to the right and plummet upside-down, nose first, towards the ground. Many people witnessed the subsequent enormous explosion and fireball. Val McClatchey photographed the mushroom cloud.

7) Hundreds of first responders (mostly volunteer firefighters) and crime scene investigators were quickly on the scene. They saw human remains, aircraft wreckage, personal effects, jet fuel, etc.
The cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were recovered and had usable data, all of which is consistent with the other evidence.

8) The remains of every victim was positively identified. Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller personally collected many remains and made 12 identifications through fingerprints and dental records. Personal effects of most passengers and crew were recovered and returned to their families.

9) Hijacker identification documents and personal effects were recovered, along with the remains of four people identified as the hijackers through the process of elimination.

10) Nearly all of the aircraft was recovered by professional investigators and by civilians. The debris was returned to United Airlines after being examined for evidence of explosives use.

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page1

Eyewitness accounts of the plane going down, supported by radar telemetry, and the voices in the CVR, makes it fairly conclusive that United 93 crashed due to the brave actions of the passengers.

jumpjack

Di0genes wrote: »

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page1

Eyewitness accounts of the plane going down, supported by radar telemetry, and the voices in the CVR, makes it fairly conclusive that United 93 crashed due to the brave actions of the passengers.

Yes, and I myself can "eyewitness" I saw a big hole in the ground near the trees, in pictures.
Unfortunately, it's a fake hole, just like the fake mushroom cloud (promptly withdrawn from internet).
Green grass on a plane crash site?!? (with the plane being filled with fuel). A dozen of burnt trees?!?



Please!! Are we dumb?!?

I also studied flight recorder data, clearly absurd in last 3 minutes of the flight (of course, as the plane had been hit and it was fallin apart in pieces).

Di0genes

jumpjack wrote: »

Yes, and I myself can "eyewitness" I saw a big hole in the ground near the trees, in pictures.

Oh Dear, Didn't read the link did we.

Bob Blair was completing a routine drive to Shade Creek just after 10 a.m. Tuesday, when he saw a huge silver plane fly past him just above the treetops and crash into the woods along Lambertsville Road.

Blair, of Stoystown, a driver with Jim Barron Trucking of Somerset, was traveling in a coal truck along with Doug Miller of Somerset, when they saw the plane spiraling to the ground and then explode on the outskirts of Lambertsville.

“I saw the plane flying upside down overhead and crash into the nearby trees. My buddy, Doug, and I grabbed our fire extinguishers and ran to the scene,” said Blair. Source



"It was low enough, I thought you could probably count the rivets. You could see more of the roof of the plane than you could the belly. It was on its side. There was a great explosion and you could see the flames. It was a massive, massive explosion. Flames and then smoke and then a massive, massive mushroom cloud." Source


Then Peterson said he saw a fireball, heard an explosion and saw a mushroom cloud of smoke rise into the sky.

Peterson rushed to the scene on an all-terrain vehicle and when he arrived he saw bits and pieces of an airliner spread over a large area of an abandoned strip-mine in Stonycreek Township.

"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning," Peterson said. Strewn about were pieces of clothing hanging from trees and parts of the Boeing 757, but nothing bigger than a couple of feet long, he said. Many of the items were burning. Source

Rob Kimmel, several miles from the crash site: He sees it fly overhead, banking hard to the right. It is 200 feet or less off the ground as it crests a hill to the southeast. "I saw the top of the plane, not the bottom." [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, p. 210-211]


Tom Fritz, about a quarter-mile from the crash site: He hears a sound that "wasn't quite right" and looks up in the sky. "It dropped all of a sudden, like a stone," going "so fast that you couldn't even make out what color it was." [St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01]


Terry Butler "It dropped out of the clouds." The plane rose slightly, trying to gain altitude, then "it just went flip to the right and then straight down." [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01]

Terry Butler: He sees the plane come out of the clouds, low to the ground. "It was moving like you wouldn't believe. Next thing I knew it makes a heck of a sharp, right-hand turn." It banks to the right and appears to be trying to climb to clear one of the ridges, but it continues to turn to the right and then veers behind a ridge. About a second later it crashes. [St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01]


Lee Purbaugh, 300 yards away: "There was an incredibly loud rumbling sound and there it was, right there, right above my head – maybe 50 feet up.... I saw it rock from side to side then, suddenly, it dipped and dived, nose first, with a huge explosion, into the ground. I knew immediately that no one could possibly have survived." [Independent, 8/13/02]


Linda Shepley: She hears a loud bang and sees the plane bank to the side. [ABC News, 9/11/01] She sees the plane wobbling right and left, at a low altitude of roughly 2,500 feet, when suddenly the right wing dips straight down, and the plane plunges into the earth. [Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01]


Kelly Leverknight in Stony Creek Township of Shanksville: "There was no smoke, it just went straight down. I saw the belly of the plane." It sounds like it is flying low, and it's heading east. [Daily American, 9/12/01, St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01]


A witness told WTAE-TV's Paul Van Osdol that she saw the plane overhead. It made a high-pitched, screeching sound. The plane then made a sharp, 90-degree downward turn and crashed. Source


Tim Thornsberg, working in a nearby strip mine: "It came in low over the trees and started wobbling. Then it just rolled over and was flying upside down for a few seconds ... and then it kind of stalled and did a nose dive over the trees." [WPIX Channel 11, 9/13/01]


Paula Pluta of Stonycreek Township was watching a television rerun of “Little House on the Prairie” when the plane went down about 1,500 yards from her home along Lambertsville Road at Little Prairie Lane.

“I looked out the window and saw the plane nose-dive right into the ground,” she said, barefoot and shaken just 45 minutes after the crash.

The explosion buckled her garage doors and blasted open a latched window on her home, she said.

“It was just a streak of silver. Then a fireball shot up as high as the clouds. There was no way anybody could have survived. I called 911 right away.

“There was no way anything was left,” Pluta added. “There was just charred pieces of metal and a big hole. The plane didn’t slide into the crash. It went straight into the ground. Wings out. Nose down.” Source

Unfortunately, it's a fake hole,

So you think the people who responded to the crash, and worked the crash site for days afterwards were

A) Too stupid to spot it was a fake. (because you could figure that out from photos)

or

Complicit in a conspiracy to cover up the cause of death for nearly a hundred people.

So which do you think the people are who worked the crash site? Stupid or Criminals?

People like....

On 9/11 alone, these included: • 8 Police Departments • 7 EMS Services • 8 Fire Departments • 10 Emergency Management Agencies • NTSB • ATF • FBI • CISM • Red Cross • United Airlines

Some of the first people at the crash site were;

Shanksville Volunteer Fire Company, Stoystown Volunteer Fire Company, Central City Fire Department, Berlin Fire Department, Friedens Volunteer Fire Department, Listie Volunteer Fire Company, Somerset Volunteer Fire Department, Somerset Ambulance Association, Hooversville Volunteer Fire Department, and the Hooversville Rescue Squad.

So which is it jumpjack are the volunteer members of these fire deparments so stupid that they can't spot a fake plan crash, or are they part of the conspiracy?

just like the fake mushroom cloud (promptly withdrawn from internet).

Val MaClatchy's photo?

Green grass on a plane crash site?!? (with the plane being filled with fuel). A dozen of burnt trees?!?



Please!! Are we dumb?!?

When was that photo taken?

I also studied flight recorder data, clearly absurd in last 3 minutes of the flight (of course, as the plane had been hit and it was fallin apart in pieces).

The flight data recorder is supported by the cockpit voice recorder, eye witnesses, phone conversations between passengers and loved ones.

weisses

I would admit as a government (true or false)admit that the plane was shot down ...sends out a message that says ....Yes we shoot down a hijacked plane when it suits us so don't bother trying


They got away with less plausible explanations that day :rolleyes:

jumpjack

Di0genes wrote: »

So which do you think the people are who worked the crash site? Stupid or Criminals?

I don't think it was very hard to ask the local marshal to get his people placing 50 kg TNT, detonate them, fill the hole with some wreckage and burn a dozen of trees.

Others came after and just viewed the scene.

Probably remainings of plane passengers are all spread out in the trees... Or more probably wild animals "cleaned up" all in a few days.

Very sad.

Kenny Logins

jimbo00 wrote: »

a friend of mine works for the US airforce. A colleague of his loaded missles onto 2 fighter jets and when the jets came back to base the missles were gone. make of that what you will!

Wow. I'm convinced.

Hogzy

If it was shot down then the debris field would be a hell of a lot larger than just a corner of a field. It would be spread over miles and miles of countryside.

Monty Burnz

jumpjack wrote: »

I don't think it was very hard to ask the local marshal to get his people placing 50 kg TNT, detonate them, fill the hole with some wreckage and burn a dozen of trees.

Others came after and just viewed the scene.

Probably remainings of plane passengers are all spread out in the trees... Or more probably wild animals "cleaned up" all in a few days.

Very sad.

And all the people who saw the plane fly right over them? And how many people had to be in on this conspiracy, none of whom have told anybody about it in a decade? And local marshals aren't in the habit of carrying around 50 kilos of TNT - or any at all in fact, and would not be expected to know the first thing about explosives.

Your idea works only if we ignore a mountain of evidence and common sense too.

Di0genes

jumpjack wrote: »

I don't think it was very hard to ask the local marshal to get his people placing 50 kg TNT, detonate them, fill the hole with some wreckage and burn a dozen of trees.

And you think all those volunteer firemen and state police would be happy to take part in vast criminal conspiracy theory?

Others came after and just viewed the scene.

They didn't just "view" the scene they searched for survivors, then combed the wreckage for days and weeks finding and identifying each piece of remains.....

Probably remainings of plane passengers are all spread out in the trees... Or more probably wild animals "cleaned up" all in a few days.

Very sad.

Thats just classy you've clearly not read anything about the work of volunteers the red cross, crash investigators, who spent months toiling over the crash site, looking for evidence, personal effects and DNA...

Myrddin

Personally I believe it was shot down, which, if it was, was the right thing to do sadly.

I do also think that if the US Government had successfully shot down all four planes, we'd still be blistered with conspiracy theories...albeit wilder ones. No matter what happens, people will see conspiracies everywhere.

Imagine a situation where all four planes were shot down & the trade centers were still standing.

"There were high level diplomats on board, about to initiate Disclosure"
"There were people on board infected with a new biological super germ"
"Someone on board had stolen state secrets"

You could go on forever.

snafuk35

Personally I believe it was shot down, which, if it was, was the right thing to do sadly.

The CVR clearly shows that passengers stormed the cockpit before the plane crashed into the ground. Witnesses on the ground saw the plane go down and nothing they saw indicated whatsoever that the plane was shot down. Investigators combed the crash site and recovered the wreckage which showed no evidence whatsoever of a missile strike or air to air cannon fire. There was not a trace of explosive found at the scene.
The evidence clearly indicates therefore there was not shoot down.

If Flight 93 was shot down there would be no way the US government could have covered it up.

And by the way is that same government that failed to cover up the Pat Tillman scandal, the Abu Graib scandal, the Scooter Libby scandal etc etc etc.

Do you really believe that a government this incompetent could have pulled it off?

Hogzy

snafuk35 wrote: »

Do you really believe that a government this incompetent could have pulled it off?

This should be the first questions all conspiracy theorists should be asking themselves about 9/11

Myrddin

snafuk35 wrote: »

Do you really believe that a government this incompetent could have pulled it off?

A plane on it's way to the front door to the White House isn't going to get there...conspiracy or no conspiracy. I strongly agree with you, & I also doubt the US goverment has the intelligence/organisational integrity to stage 9/11 as an excuse to begin the War On Terror.

I do believe though, that they have the cowardice to lie to protect their own internal political interests. Ie, would they have the balls & open mindedness to come out and say:

"Regretfully, Flight 93 was lost in the interests of national security. We deepply regret having to take the necessary action, but the lives lost should be remembered, as they have potentially saved a lot more today."

Of course they wouldn't, as it would be political suicide. If the above action was taken, would I expect them to lie about it? Most definitely yes. The plane came down in a remote location, witnesses wouldn't be a problem. The black box recordings we all heard are the bits we were allowed to hear & so forth. I don't want to come across as a foil hat lover as I'm not, but I think the above has merit.

Di0genes

EnterNow wrote: »

Personally I believe it was shot down, which, if it was, was the right thing to do sadly.

Please read this link

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page1

It details the overwhelming evidence that the plane crashed due to passenger intervention.

Dozens of passengers and flight attendents attacked their hijackers and paid for it with their lives.

By spreading this untruth you are dishonouring the memory of their sacrifice.

snafuk35

A plane on it's way to the front door to the White House isn't going to get there...conspiracy or no conspiracy.

A plane was crashed into the front of the White House during the Clinton Presidency.

I do believe though, that they have the cowardice to lie to protect their own internal political interests. Ie, would they have the balls & open mindedness to come out and say:

"Regretfully, Flight 93 was lost in the interests of national security. We deepply regret having to take the necessary action, but the lives lost should be remembered, as they have potentially saved a lot more today."

There is no way they would have been able to cover up the shooting down of Flight 93. There would have been too many people involved and too many links in the chain of command to keep people involved onside and to keep them from going to the press.

witnesses wouldn't be a problem.

Why wouldn't they be a problem?

The black box recordings we all heard are the bits we were allowed to hear & so forth.

The full details of the black boxes are on public record.

Di0genes

In addition full transciprts and the actual recordings from NORAD and FAA staff on 911 can be listened to here.

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608

davoxx

EnterNow wrote: »

"There were high level diplomats on board, about to initiate Disclosure"
"There were people on board infected with a new biological super germ"
"Someone on board had stolen state secrets"

You could go on forever.

you sure can .. but does not mean they were false.

similarly they could have said that godzilla took down the buildings, you'd have crazy N-CTs saying:
"of course it happened, even though i never saw godzilla other than in movies"
"you hate america because you don't believe in godzilla .... no i never actually saw him"


i think people need to stop lumping all CTs together. just like all NCTs are not religious fanatics that believe in god/s

davoxx

Hogzy wrote: »

This should be the first questions all conspiracy theorists should be asking themselves about 9/11

maybe that is what they want you to think ... maybe all NCTs should be asking themselves that?

snafuk35

davoxx wrote: »

maybe that is what they want you to think ... maybe all NCTs should be asking themselves that?

So you want us to believe Dubya was pretending to be stupid?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rToKEnySb7s

davoxx

snafuk35 wrote: »

So you want us to believe Dubya was pretending to be stupid?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

i'm not sure what those clips are meant to say.

are you saying you believe bush to be slightly dim?

davoxx

Di0genes wrote: »

By spreading this untruth you are dishonouring the memory of their sacrifice.

nice touch there.
ever think that by not questioning it we are dishonouring the memory of the sacrifice of the people who died on 911 and in the wars there after in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as all those who lost loved ones from 911 and the wars?

snafuk35

davoxx wrote: »

i'm not sure what those clips are meant to say.

are you saying you believe bush to be slightly dim?

Obama too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzugbGTj_k4

And you expect us to believe these guys are masterminds of a vast conspiracy?

davoxx

snafuk35 wrote: »

Obama too.

okay i'll deal with
1) that bush and obama are idiots
2) that being idiots they can not be the master mind of a vast conspiracy.

weisses

davoxx wrote: »

okay i'll deal with
1) that bush and obama are idiots
2) that being idiots they can not be the master mind of a vast conspiracy.

since when do presidents know what their intelligence agency's are doing ?

I know Kennedy didn't

davoxx

davoxx wrote: »

okay i'll deal with
1) that bush and obama are idiots
bush -> http://www.insidepolitics.org/heard/heard32300.html
obama -> NONE FOUND (though this might explain his intelligence http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_were_Barack_Obama%27s_grades_in_college)

2) that being idiots they can not be the master mind of a vast conspiracy.

since point 1 cannot be substantiated, point 2 is null and void.

agreed snafuk35?

Di0genes

davoxx wrote: »

nice touch there.
ever think that by not questioning it we are dishonouring the memory of the sacrifice of the people who died on 911 and in the wars there after in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as all those who lost loved ones from 911 and the wars?

What a wonderfully loaded question.

The evidence that the passengers attacked the hijackers is overwhelming.

When I made my post I backed it up with links that supported my assertion, something you never bother doing.

davoxx

Di0genes wrote: »

What a wonderfully loaded question.

loaded how?

Di0genes wrote: »

By spreading this untruth you are dishonouring the memory of their sacrifice.

i just did what you did, unless ... wait for it ... wait for it ... you loaded yours first?

Di0genes

davoxx wrote: »

loaded how?


i just did what you did, unless ... wait for it ... wait for it ... you loaded yours first?

Do you have a substantive point about United 93, or do you want another discussion about semantics?

davoxx

Di0genes wrote: »

Do you have a substantive point about United 93, or do you want another discussion about semantics?

do you have a point or do you want another discussion about semantics?

snafuk35

If Flight 93 was shot down, then who shot the plane down? Who is the pilot? Where was he based? Who is his commanding officer? Who ordered him to shoot the plane down? Why hasn't the pilot or commanding officer and another number of other people who would have to have known about gone to press and blown the story?

Daithi 1

Di0genes wrote: »

By spreading this untruth you are dishonouring the memory of their sacrifice.

Sacrifice :

Sacrifice is the offering of food, objects or the lives of animals or people to the gods as an act of propitiation or worship.

Oh.. you must be talking about the hijackers. :rolleyes:

humanji

2.Give up (something important or valued) for the sake of other considerations