Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Flight 93 was SHOT DOWN . . .

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
TeeYiYi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:10 PM
Original message
Flight 93 was SHOT DOWN . . .
I've always thought that 'Let's Roll' was a scam. However, before today I didn't know that an actual person had been identified as shooting Flight 93 down. Has anyone on DU ever heard of Major Rick Gibney before today?

"At precisely 0938 hours, an alarm was sounded at Langely Air Force Base, and those whom were on call, drinking coffee, were scrambled. Thus the 119th Fighter Wing was off for an intercept.

They, the Happy Hooligans, a unit of 3 F-16 aircraft, were ordered to head toward Pennsylvania. At 0957 they spotted their target; After confirmation orders were received, A one Major Rick Gibney fired two sidewinder missiles at the aircraft and destroyed it in mid flight at precisely 0958;

He was awarded a medal from the Governor one year later for his heroic actions. As well as Decorated by Congress on 9/13/2001. The Happy Hooligans were previously stationed in North Dakota, and moved to Langley Air Force base some months before 911 occured on a "Temporary assignment."

http://www.letsroll911.org/articles/flight93shotdown.ht...

TYY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. "Let's Roll" Can Still be Real
even if the flight was shot down. I went to a bed and breakfast near Skanksville shortly after Sep 11. The conservative locals were very skeptical about how that plane came down.

If it was shot down, I really don't blame the administration. They did not know that the passengers were taking back the plane. They jsut should have been upfront about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeeYiYi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I've just never heard anyone . . .
. . . admit that it was actually shot down. I'm not casting blame.

TYY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoping4Change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. You's be surprised what people have stated but never got
wide coverage. Check out

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?day_of_...


"At least half a dozen named individuals have reported seeing a second plane flying low and in erratic patterns, not much above treetop level, over the crash site within minutes of the United flight crashing. They describe the plane as a small, white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings.
Lee Purbaugh: I didn't get a good look but it was white and it circled the area about twice and then it flew off over the horizon.
Susan Mcelwain: Less than a minute before the Flight 93 crash rocked the countryside, she sees a small white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings swoop low over her minivan near an intersection and disappear over a hilltop, nearly clipping the tops of trees lining the ridge. She later adds, There's no way I imagined this planeit was so low it was virtually on top of me. It was white with no markings but it was definitely military..."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
23. I Wasn't Trying to be Critical
just pointing out that the two scenarios are not imcompatible.

I don't know if the flight was shot down. Some people have reported eyewitness testimony. If it was, the administration lied about it. They shouldn't do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
27. "Skanksville"?
LMAO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #27
39. Wasn't That Its Name?
Edited on Mon Jun-28-04 09:09 PM by ribofunk
Maybe it was Shanksville. Don't have time to Google at the moment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 06:28 AM
Response to Reply #27
65. ROFL nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DenverDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
50. Perhaps they DID know the passengers had taken the plane
and shot it down to destroy evidence.

Why else would they cover up the shoot down? No one would have questioned the necessity to intercept the plane after what had gone down. The misadministration would have been heroes for stopping the destruction of the Capital.

So, if they shot it down, why did they shoot it down, and why did they then cover it up?
Why are they such sociopathological prevaricators?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #50
85. ?
Destroy the evidence of what, exactly?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DenverDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #85
86. Look up the "home run" technology.
FYI
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #1
54. Lisa Jefferson is real. She is the operator who heard
the phrase "let's roll" and relayed it to the world.

Mark Beamer said it, right?

I've always believed it was shot down, but I've also believed this woman was telling the truth of her conversation with Mark Beamer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ironpost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
73. we're being freeped here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wickerman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. the photo on the site appears to come from here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeeYiYi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. There's also this . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoping4Change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
5. Another F15 pilot , Major Daniel Nash said he was told it
was shot down.

"...F-15 fighter pilot Major Daniel Nash returns to base around this time, after chasing Flight 175 and patrolling the skies over New York City. He says that when he got out of the plane, he was told that a military F-16 had shot down a fourth airliner in Pennsylvania, a report that turned out to be incorrect. "

The most complete accounting of Flight 93 is Pula Thompson timeline at
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?day_of_...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
6. If true (which I doubt) then why did they shoot?
Bush and President Cheney never gave the order.

If Bush wasn't useless, the other three planes might have been shot down and saved thousands.

9/11 happened on Bush's watch. Repeat this often.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
24. I think you may have to rethink your response...
<http://newsmine.org/archive/9-11/questions/af-jets-stan... >

Excerpt:

"09/16/2001 - Updated 11:38 PM ET
Shoot-down order issued on morning of chaos

By Jonathan Weisman, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON With as many as four hijacked airliners believed to be missing, an anguished President Bush authorized U.S. fighter pilots Tuesday morning to shoot down commercial airliners, Vice President Cheney revealed Sunday. Cheney and other administration officials drew a picture of confusion, bordering on pandemonium, that reigned after terrorists plunged their hijacked jets into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The same misinformation that was plaguing the public Tuesday morning was bedeviling the highest officials in the land."
===========================================

<http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1155260/posts >

Excerpt:

"Posted on 06/17/2004 9:34:49 AM PDT by areafiftyone


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House bypassed Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in confusion during the 2001 attack on America and directly ordered U.S. fighter jets to shoot down hijacked airliners used in the strikes, the commission studying the event said on Thursday.

No airliners were shot down, but the independent commission charged in a scathing report that U.S. aviation and military officials responded clumsily to the devastating Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Not only was Rumsfeld bypassed in the normal chain of command for such a shoot-down order, but the command from Vice President Dick Cheney that the airliners be 'taken out' did not reach the fighter planes until after the last ill-fated airliner had crashed in Pennsylvania, the special commission said."
================================

Looks like one of those two people gave the order, doesn't it?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amazona Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
40. cheney did give the order
Ack, they finally acknowledged this, what, a couple weeks ago? I have been traveling a great deal this month but I do remember hearing that it finally came out before the 9-11 commission that Cheney gave the order to shoot down Flight 93.

I think it was probably too painful for the families to release this information earlier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gWbush is Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
7. Cheney gave the order, not Bush>>>Incentive to keep it secret
Edited on Mon Jun-28-04 03:23 PM by Smirky McChimpster
Cheney could be impeached if the plane was shot down on his orders alone.

thus the cover up and the medals to the fighter pilots to keep them quiet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Well, in a NORMAL world he would be
Not THIS world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olddem43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
8. If there is any truth to this, why didn't the media report it?
It would be hard to keep something like this covered up, especially if congress gave him a medal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeeYiYi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. He did get a medal . . .
. . . I don't know if it's a Congressional medal. :shrug:

Within minutes of the attacks on September 11, the 119th Fighter Wing, North Dakota Air National Guard, was flying security over our nations capital. In North Dakota, and worldwide, theyre known as the Happy Hooligans. Earlier this morning, we presented the U.S. Air Force Airmans Medal to four of our Happy Hooligans in recognition of their distinctive service on September 11. Three of them flew surveillance over our nations capital and one flew a special mission to New York on that tragic day. They join us here today and I would like to take just a minute to introduce each one of them to you. First, Major Ricky Gibney, Major Gibney (applause). Major Bradley Derrig, Major Derrig (applause). Major Dean Eckmann, (applause) and Capt. Craig Borgstrom (applause). We honor these men with the Airmans Medal on our nations first Patriot Day. Patriot Day is inspired by the heroic sacrifices of our firefighters, rescue workers, law enforcement personnel, military, and other citizens who rose to the challenge of September 11. Because of their heroism, our nation found unity, focus and strength in one of our nations darkest hours. On September 11, the Happy Hooligans inspired us and gave us a sense of hope. Their courage and skill helped give us the strength to emerge from September 11 as a nation tested and strong. As they honor us today over the skies of North Dakota - as they honored us in the skies over our nations capital - we should all reflect on the meaning of Patriotism, a love of country. It is at this time in our program, that we are scheduled to have a flyover of our F-16, the 119th Fighter Squadron, North Dakota Air National Guard, the Happy Hooligans and then we will have our National Anthem. They should be approaching from the South momentarily. I ask that we would have a moment of silence as they approach then well have the flyover and our National Anthem.

http://www.governor.state.nd.us/media/gallery/2002-911/...

TYY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maine-i-acs Donating Member (989 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. Cute! The "Media"?
Maybe 20 years ago they would have.

But they clamped down on the NeoCon bit when they agreed to be embedded for the WarGasm that was the Iraq invasion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoping4Change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. Read the fastidiously documented 911 Timeline accounting

of Flight 93. For instance it is accepted fact that debris from Flight 93 was spread over quite an area. This debris field is consistent with a missile strike. Had the plane been forced down the engine everything else would have been contained at the crash site.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?day_of_...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BigMcLargehuge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #8
51. the media did report it on September 11th for about two hours
then the cause of 93's downing was described as "unknown".

I listened to the whole day on ABC radio.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Town Jake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #8
52. That's why...
...I don't buy it. But then, tinfoil has never fit very comfortably on my head, all the way back to the grassy knoll speculations. The simplest explanation in such matters is almost always the correct one, and, in this case, that would be: this simpleton-led administration was caught flat-footed, and thrashed around in confusion for a long time before command & control was re-established at the highest levels of the United States government. That explanation is damning enough, and doesn't require any elaborate conspiracy theories to back it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juajen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
9. I read about this before, but can't remember where
Of course, this plane should have been shot down. The lies, however, are intolerable. The fact that it had to be taken down in no way takes away the bravery of the passengers who were doing their patriotic duty also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leyton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
12. Documentation?
There are no sources listed. Why should I believe this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hoping4Change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Lots of documentation available if you check out
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
15. ...Except if it was "destroyed in midflight at precisely 0958"...
...then it took 8 minutes to strike the ground. Which seems a little long.

Which isn't of course to say I don't think it was brought down, because everyone here knows I do. But I think no one has details like this; if they say they do, they're making it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #15
80. Unless the "crash" of flight 93 was really no more than a very
explosive missile fired at the biggest piece of already grounded debris.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Delano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
17. Good.
If the military shot it down, they did the right thing.

If they covered such a thing up, that would be a shame, since I think most Americans would have unerstood the need to do so.

PS - that's why I don't believe in this theory.

Why doesn't he come forth and tell the media? It would be a huge sensation.

Why would the government cover up such a prudent action?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gWbush is Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Why > see post #7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gWbush is Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. dupe
Edited on Mon Jun-28-04 03:32 PM by Smirky McChimpster
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
21. I've figured that was what happened all along
and it was the right thing to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
22. I don't buy it.
I listened to the timelines put together by the 911 staffers, and I don't think this shoot down was possible. With all the stupidity happening that day, I just don't think they could have gotten to their target in time to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. Then why was there an eight-mile trail of debris leading to the....
...eventual crash site of Flight 93?

Take a look at this site:

<http://www.flight93crash.com />

<http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_secondary_debris_... >

Excerpt:

"The secondary (and tertiary) debris fields:

The Pennsylvania state police said debris from the crash has shown up about 8 miles away in a residential area where local media quoted some residents as seeing flaming debris from the sky.

But investigators were unwilling to say whether the presence of debris in two separate places evinced an explosion.

Finding the flight data recorder had been the focus of investigators as they widened their search area today following the discoveries of more debris, including what appeared to be human remains, miles from the point of impact at a reclaimed coal mine.

Residents and workers at businesses outside Shanksville, Somerset County, reported discovering clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human remains. Some residents said they collected bags-full of items to be turned over to investigators. Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly six miles from the immediate crash scene."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #28
33. There is another credible explanation
If indeed there was a fight for control of the aircraft and the resulting struggle made the plane go into manuevers beyond its wing loading capabilities (very fast up and down or sideways control inputs), the airframe could have broken up and scattered debris away from the crash site.

This has happened in the past when a plane enters a thunderstorm and breaks up from excess wing loading.

I don't know if it was shot down or not. It would not surprise me if it had been shot down.

But, there IS another explanation for the debris field.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #28
34. I analyzed every report of debris last year
...Or was it the year before? :)

This is one of the misunderstandings I've seen online over and over again. For example, while most of Indian Lake itself is beneath the flight path and quite far away, the actual verifiable reports of debris came from the marina, which is located at nearly the southernmost end of the lake, and far closer than six miles to the impact point.

Nothing was found very far from the site that wasn't lightweight, and all the lightweight debris was found where it should have been -- in other words, perpendicular to or ahead of the crash line. Lightweight debris found at the greatet distance from the impact point (if I recall correctly, it was inflight magazine pages in a churchyard) mapped out with other debris reports as a straight line, following the prevailing wind...again, right where it all should have been.

There are many problems with the official story of Flight 93, but unfortunately for investigators the debris field isn't one of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeeYiYi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #34
38. An article containing extensive evidence . . .
. . . and numerous eyewitness accounts from September 12, 2002:


India Lake also contributes to the view there was an explosion on board before the Newark-San Francisco flight came down. Debris rained down on the lake - a curious feat if, as the US government insists, there was no mid-air explosion and the plane was intact until it hit the ground.

"It was mainly mail, bits of in-flight magazine and scraps of seat cloth," Tom said. "The authorities say it was blown here by the wind." But there was only a 10mph breeze and you were a mile and a half away? Tom raised his eyebrows, rolled his eyes and said: "Yeah, that's what they reckon."

Light debris was also found eight miles away in New Baltimore. A section of engine weighing a ton was located 2,000 yards - over a mile -from the crash site. Theorists point out a Sidewinder heat-seeking missile attacks the hottest part of aircraft - the engine.

The authorities say the impact bounced it there. But the few pieces of surviving fuselage, local coroner Wallace Miller told us, were "no bigger than a carrier bag".

Nearly all the passengers were reduced to charcoal on impact and the largest piece of human tissue found was a section of spine eight inches long.

More: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=...

TYY
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. Ah reckon so, actually
If you'd like, I can dig up a good white paper NASA did in the 90's on debris splatter... it was done for the sake of risk analysis, in terms of aircraft testing and whether they should assist in insurance efforts for people who had homes near test flight areas. A mile and a half is nothing... I've got AARs with lightweight debris being flung as much as twelve miles.

New Baltimore, that's the churchyard paper debris. It's actually six miles away, and if you draw a straight line from the impact point in the direction of the wind (NOAA recorded 12-15 mph), that line will pass through the marina and hit the churchyard in New Baltimore.

The engine section this one's reporting has never been found. There's a difference between "I heard something" and going to PA to look for it. The author of this article (Wallace) even cites me without knowing it -- the sonic boom business -- nearly a year after I posted a retraction about it. That's at best sloppy.

People I've spoken to who spoke to Richard Wallace say he was absolutely uninterested in facts, only people's speculation.

Again, as I said above, there's plenty fishy about 93. But Wallace is a clown hack, ruining it for those actually interested by ignoring facts and just running with what sounds interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #34
44. Sorry, but that's highly debatable, Robb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #44
45. Wow, I haven't been over there in a good while...!
:)

The only weirdness still is that engine part that was supposedly so heavy, and I haven't been able to verify independently it was even found, much less what it weighed. I don't see anything particularly unusual about the big piece of sheet metal or any of the lightweight debris around the marina. :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. Charred, "bolt sized" pieces of metal were found 2+ miles from the
Edited on Mon Jun-28-04 11:05 PM by stickdog
crash site.

That's ballistically impossible. Guns with aerodynamic lead bullets don't shoot that far.

Find me an example of a single intact-plane-into-ground crash in which ANY debris was found more than 5 miles away or ANY metal debris more than 1 mile away.

I've examined literally hundreds of NTSB crash reports searching for the term "debris field." None had such a wide debris field unless the plane blew up or started falling apart in the air.

And, remember, the wind that day was only 10-12 mph.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #47
72. I really think we've had this discussion before
...you and I. You're on my "have a beer with a DUer" list, BTW. :)

"Bolt-sized" doesn't mean "bolt-shaped" or "bolt-weight". Plenty of metal on an aircraft that's thin enough that, if say a quarter inch by two inches, could travel the distance.

The 10-12 mph wind isn't the big deal, either; remember the tennis ball on top of the basketball thing, drop the two touching and they'll hit the ground, the basketball stops, and the tennis ball goes practically into orbit. Lead bullets don't get ejected with that kind of power, and don't float down later in the breeze.

AARs, mishap reports, whatever, the relevant term is "debris splatter", or just "debris". Military crashes are actually probably a better parallel, I think, just from what we think was going on with the speed and nose-in thing. :shrug:

Besides, look at the map -- all these reports are still in front of the flight path, where you'd expect splatter to go. If this stuff isn't splatter, how could it get there? 93 wasn't flying over these locations, and an in-flight breakup should've put debris outside that (I'm now coining a phrase) "New Baltimore Line". :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #72
76. You don't understand ballistics very well. Heavy, dense things
Edited on Tue Jun-29-04 12:04 PM by stickdog
travel further. Things that can float on the wind are not ballistically scattered more than a few hundred yards. Think baseball vs. golfball. Then realize that your "orbit" description won't get you 400 yards (1/4 mile) from the crash site in a brisk wind.

Anyway, I don't feel like bringing out the ballistic charts again. This is old news AFAIAC. Way old. All I'm taking issue with is your ridiculously overstated contention that Flight 93's debris field is perfectly understandable.

Suffice to say that until you offer some examples of comparably wide debris distribution for other planes that crashed while physically intact, we are talking about -- at the very least -- a "debris outlier" when it comes to the history of aviation disaster.

And yes, I just searched for the word "debris" in the NTSB reports. It's been over two years, Robb, and my memory was the first thing to go.

And by the way, Robb, that reminds me. It has now been almost three years since Flight 93 crashed. And the 9/11 Commission has already concluded public testimony. So exactly when is Flight 93's Flight Data Recorder information going to be released? Could it be that the reason it's not being released is because who ever was piloting Flight 93 at the time it crashed DID NOT ram it into the ground full speed ahead shouting "Allah Abkar"?

Until the FDR data (and/or the final radar return data is it exists) is released, your "flight path" assumptions are just that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #76
79. You're generalizing
...and I maintain the stuff that's been confirmed could easily cover the distance, between the energy of the crash and whatever explosion after.

>>Could it be that the reason it's not being released is because who ever was piloting Flight 93 at the time it crashed DID NOT ram it into the ground full speed ahead shouting "Allah Abkar"? <<

Seems like a good reason to me. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomNickell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 07:55 AM
Response to Reply #28
71. Misunderstanding....
Air-to-air missiles use minimal explosive necessary to bring down a plane. They don't blow it to bits.

Less weight = Faster turns.

A missile might cause pieces to fall off. So might aerodynamic forces caused by an uncontrolled powered dive or wild movements of the control surfaces.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #71
81. Yes. Nice post, Tom.
We just don't know on this one.

But whoever is suppressing the Flight Data Recorder information does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 02:09 AM
Response to Reply #22
61. USA Today just had a whole section
on the 9-11 report and explained the timeline of how Cheneyed up the response was.

By the time planes were told where to go, the attacks had already happpened.

Nope I don't think it was shot down.

If they would have, it would have been the right thing to do though.

They probably would have waited a bit longer though, especially if they knew there was a struggle on board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #61
69. had they waited a bit longer before THEY SHOT IT DOWN-
flight 93 would have been over more populated areas of Maryland and the DC suburbs- meaning a lot more damage and death potential on the ground. that' why they knocked it out of the sky when/where they did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fryguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
25. sounds fishy to me actually....
If a plane were to explode in mid air, the wreckage would cover a very large area, and not be confined to a relatively small area as in Shanksville. Not to mention there wouldn't be a creator such as the one famously pictured in the field. I'm sure people will say that it would be possible for the bushistas to fake the crash scene, but if the plane were destroyed in the air - regardless of how sparsely populated an area - people would have seen/heard the explosion and material would be all over the place.....I recall that when the Swiss Air flight blew up off the coast of Long Island it was seen by people 100s of miles away - same would have happened here....

I think more disturbing and questionable is whether a plane actually hit the Pentagon....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #25
31. See my post #28, and check out the second link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thecrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
26. I distinctly remember at the time
some Shanksville local station had two or three eyewitnesses that saw a fireball in the air and then the plane come down. This was early in the day.
These accounts were only shown once and then.... disappeared.

The persons in question were farmers out in the field that had no idea of what was going on in NY and DC because they were plowing their fields or some such thing.

I figured they shot it down but weren't ready to tell the public that fact yet... besides, * and F-U Cheney were still in their bunkers.
And no black box found? Highly suspicious.
That only reinforces it.
These black boxes are made to withstand the tremendous forces of an airline crash. They need this information to know what safety measures to check out in the future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressivebydesign Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. I also distinctly remember that.. I have a eerily good memory.
and.. I remember witnesses finding pieces of the plane in a large, large area.. much larger than they might in a normal crash. Why did the plane "crash"? If planes have autopilot, even if the pilots are killed (horrific thought), the plane would not just go down instantly.. it would go for quite a while unattended. Are we to believe that in a struggle, the autopilot was somehow disengaged? And that someone, struggling for the controls, smashed it into the ground? I obviously know little about planes, but I really felt that the whole idea of the plane crashing right after the fellow said (supposedly), Let's Roll, seemed wierd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thecrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #30
74. I remember on the VIDEO news
Edited on Tue Jun-29-04 09:58 AM by thecrow
That they interviewed a farmer and somebody else who said they saw a fireball in the SKY and then found pieces of wreckage that you describe. Then that report suddenly "disappeared".
I hope those witnesses are okay today... that they didn't have any "unfortunate farm accidents".

Also the cell phone call to one passenger's mother reported a white puff of smoke outside the plane and an explosion..

also this link telling of debris 8 MILES away! Over the mountain range on a 10 mph wind?
http://post-gazette.com/headlines/20010913somersetp3.as...

Also read this:

http://post-gazette.com/headlines/20010913somersetp3.as...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kittykitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #26
49. It was the Atoona Noon News. The report was as you described
and it was never shown again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
29. Cheney said "We've already shot a couple down"...confused? Nah.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nolabels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #29
46. So that "couple" would make sense about FLT #77 also
Flight 93 Families Dispute FBI's Theory
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TeeYiYi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
32. kick
TYY :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
35. I'm going to Shanksville next Monday.
To see the scene and the temporary memorial. I'm anxious to know the truth.

I think it's quite possible that it was shot down, and the government really played up the "let's roll" story to distract from that reality. Not to take away from the brave passengers, because I believe they did storm the cockpit and try to re-take the plane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ensemble Donating Member (79 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. A couple things...
Edited on Mon Jun-28-04 08:00 PM by ensemble
An airliner attacked by an interceptor would likely not explode in
mid-air; heat seeking missiles target the engine exhaust and would blow up an engine. The rest of the airplane would come down in one or several pieces.

One other sinister theory: 93 was shot down when it was realized that passengers might gain control of the plane. If there was any gov't complicity in the hijackings, the last thing they would want would be surviving hijackers. Dead men tell no tales....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Well, those are things to consider.
And welcome to DU! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 06:29 AM
Response to Reply #35
66. You mean "Skanksville"?
:P

j/k
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
41. And one of the "shoe bombers" was successful.
That's when I put on my tinfoil hat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
43. Yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nolabels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #43
60. hehe
stickdog, that guy is funny, that "Rex BW" from the link is a hoot, you should of just told him "Bumbles bounce"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 02:30 AM
Response to Reply #60
62. ROFLMAO!
"Bumbles bounce!" ha ha ha! That takes me waay back!

Remember they always had that same Nurelco electric shaver advert on every commercial break?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nolabels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #62
75. They felt relieved that he went over the edge and had to face gravity
Only they got surprised later in the show when he reappeared



http://www.appealingcollectibles.com/bumble-the-abomina...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #75
83. Aww how cute! That's a cute Bumble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-28-04 11:25 PM
Response to Original message
48. Eyewitness Confirms Shootdown of Flight 93 on Stern today


Howard Stern Show | April 21 2004

A caller to the Howard Stern Show related the story of how he saw Flight 93 in flames while it was in the air and two other aircraft circling it.

listen here
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2004/042104fl...

Red_Viking

The pilots are "unavailable"
No joke--all the pilots scrambled on 9/11 were sequestered and no one has spoken to them. Wouldn't they be the best ones to answer these questions?

This came out during the 9/11 Commission questioning of NORAD officials. They said the pilots were unavailable for questioning. I said, "huh?"

Also, foreign news sources did a lot of reporting on the condition of the crash site. Very peculiar. Wreckage was scattered up to 8 miles away. Not consistent with a plane hitting the ground, where wreckage would be fairly linear. This stuff was blown all the heck over the place, kinda like the plane was blown out of the sky.

Makes me say hmmmmmm.

By the way, it is legal for them to do this. I'm not sure why no one will admit the plane was ordered shot down. The plane was hijacked. I suppose it's because the shock would be too much.

Must_B_Free

It was on the Johnstown PA TV news
early that day till it got scrubbed. They aired footage of an interview with a farmer that corroberates this account. He said "I saw the big plane and them other little planes by it"


Bjornsdotter
Hi,

Two days after Flight 93 was shot down, I received a call from a business aquaintance...he told me he saw it shot down. He has since left the country.

Later in the week I spoke with a air traffic controller at O'Hare...he told me "No Comment" when I asked if the plane was shot down.

I do believe it was shot down...for those of you who don't....ask yourself one question; Why has there NEVER been a photo published showing the crash site?

Cheers,
Kim

LisaM
Strange. Interesting.

Edited on Wed Apr-21-04 03:26 PM by LisaM
Just last night, I accidentally listened to KVI (local hate radio station) for several minutes and the played a transcript of the ATC talking to Flight 93 (it was edited so that it played through in four minutes, so either some parts were classified, or they just edited out the dead air.) Anyway, there was a part right near the end where an air traffic controller confirmed from a pilot on another flight that there was smoke on it, and it also appeared that other flights were trying to keep it in their sights.

No2W2004

Right
Brave Americans fighting their captors is much better for propaganda than Air Force shoots down commercial airliner.

I still remember hearing on 9/11 witnesses saying the plane was shot down, then, in the following days, they all stopped talking and the heroic version took root.

Has anyone ever explained why one engine of flight 93 was found miles away from the crash site?

rhino47

I live in western Pa

I saw that flight that day.I know that it was flight 93.My nephew is an air traffic controller out of youngstown ohio.On 9/11 when I heard that the skies where cleared and I saw that jet I was rather frightened being where as it started towards cleveland and came back around southeast.I did see two planes shortly there after.I called my nephew but the lines where all done.I got the all circuits are busy.I did manage to get a hold of him later on that day about 6 pm .He said that flight had went down near pittsburg.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... ...




Here's an aerial view of the whole strip mine where Flight 93 crashed.

Here's the deal: after following the links below, the real crash
location of Flight 93 is a couple hundred yards away from Skyline Road
near Lambertsville and Shanksville. I had to find it by finding
Lambertsville, PA on the map, then go south. Lambertsville Road in the
photo is on the far left. Then Skyline Road forks down in a southeast
direction in the mine area. Now somewhere in that area, you'd mark an X
to mark the crash site. Keep in mind this photo is 2 levels out: more
detail could be retrieved, BUT bear in mind this photo has to be OLD
because it's in black and white. So it's before the crash happened,
see.

The deal with the mine itself is: a company called Svonavec owns the
area where the mine is, and they LEASE it to both Rollock Inc. and PBS
Coals Inc.

Religious folks are heavily leaning on that LAMBertsville name, meaning
the Lord did it to prove this and that, something or other...

Does that help? Sheesh! Just try to find an overhead satellite photo
of the Flight 93 crash, and it's like pulling TEETH! But now you got
the photo, Kent. I'm done for tonight... Happy Thanksgiving!

http://www.cyberspaceorbit.com/warrant25.htm



Seismographs of the sonic boom, recorded at approximately 9:22 AM local time on 9/11

The presence of this particular sonic boom at 9:22 A.M. refutes the story we have been told of the military's response to 9/11.

The North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, issued a press release one week after the attacks. The timeline told of Air National Guard fighter jets taking off from bases in Massachusetts and Virginia at 8:46 A.M. and 9:30 A.M., respectively. The first jets, two F-15's from Otis Air National Guard Base, responded to an 8:40 A.M. scramble order and screamed towards New York City six minutes later. The second group, F-16's from Langley AFB, responded to a 9:24 A.M. order and again were en route to their target in six minutes, this time pointing towards Washington D.C. and the threatened Pentagon.

The problem with this story is that neither group of fighters could have made the sonic boom recorded in Pennsylvania by 9:22.

The F-16's from Langley hadn't even been told to get into the air yet, so they're out. The F-15's from Otis reached New York at 9:06, 3 minutes too late to stop the second World Trade Center impact, having averaged a speed of around 800 miles per hour to get there. They could have covered the 207 miles from NYC to the seismic station in Pennsylvania in a mere 15 minutes at that speed. But this would have required them to leave New York City undefended at 9:07, merely one minute after arriving.

It would also have required a sixth sense, since the FAA didn't even warn NORAD that Flight 93 was considered a possible threat until 9:16.

While we don't know where the jet that created the sonic boom came from, we can safely assume that any aircraft moving supersonically over the continental U.S. by 9:22 on September 11th was part of our own military. And not knowing the fighter's home base does little to change the fact that it would have been in excellent position to intercept Flight 93 well before it crashed at 10:06.

Major General Paul A. Weaver Jr., Director of the Air National Guard, has told reporters that National Guard aircraft "weren't even close" to the fourth hijacked airliner. Thanks to the seismic record, we can now suggest there was little gold in his remarks.

Tracking aircraft in flight with seismic networks is not a new idea. NASA has looked at ground-recorded sonic boom signatures of aircraft like the F-18 and the SR-71; scientists at the California Institute of Technology have examined data from existing networks for events like the landing of the space shuttle Discovery.

Seismic networks have also been used to determine the time of aircraft crashes; indeed, when the United States Army wanted to know with greater accuracy exactly when Flight 77 struck the Pentagon on 9/11, they turned to seismologists at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University, and the Maryland Geological Survey. Won-Young Kim and Gerald R. Baum were unable to definitively set the impact time of the Pentagon crash, but they were able to determine the time of Flight 93's impact to within 5 seconds (10:06:05 5, EDT).

In the days and weeks following the crash, rumors circulated of a shoot-down, the scenario being that the military brought the airliner down before it could reach a more populated area. It should be said that just because we now know a fighter was close enough to do the grim job, it doesn't necessarily follow that the job was done: there is still no direct proof that the unknown fighter chose to fire upon Flight 93.

The question, however, remains:

Why would NORAD misrepresent where their fighters were if they didn't shoot it down?

http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_seismic_event.htm

Catching the FBI in a Big Fat Lie



The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection released this photo a few days later

The pattern of impact is consistent with an aircraft with significant lateral movement,
a "fan" pattern where debris is blown in the direction the aircraft was headed.
Debris found two and eight miles from the crash was explained by this "splatter" effect, bolstered by
winds reported in the area at the time. The effect of the wind can be seen in the burned trees as well.



The grass in this farmer's field is similar to that replanted in stripmine reclamation projects.
Windspeed at the time of this accident was recorded as 15 knots. As you can see, fire from the
wreckage was spread through the grass by the wind. You can clearly determine the direction
of the wind by the way the fire spread. Just like the FBI and PDEP photos.

Except....



This showed two important things. First, that the impact indeed occured on the border between
flammable grassland and equally flammable forest.

Second, and much more importantly, it showed me which way was north.
Something the other photos oddly enough didn't bother to indicate.

http://www.bartcop.com/flight93.htm

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nolabels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #48
57. Why if they knew why and who would they need to hide like they do?
I never really noticed till just today, but after watching F 9/11 I come to see the ever more obvious liar in him. He is deep with this too, it's only so obvious now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #48
58. There's a lot of mis/disinfo in your post. Robb can clear much of
it up for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 06:24 AM
Response to Reply #58
64. Thanks so much
I appreciate your advice


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmokramer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
53. That website reporting this is a hack who is living in an...
...apartment in Illinois. Read the text of the article below the alleged pilot's picture...sounds like an English as second language author...very choppy. Furthermore, look at the letsroll911 home page--full of unbelievable conspiracy theories (like a military plane made to look like a commercial jet liner crashed in to the WTC).

Come on, the credibility of that website is joke, and so is the content.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Town Jake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #53
55. Agreed. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmokramer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #55
82. Likely...
...a foreign national trying to spread propaganda, similar to the various groups claiming all Jews escaped the WTC because it was a concerted effort between Israel and the US to have an excuse to go to war in the middle east.

Just plain silly source.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #53
56. That website may indeed be a "joke", but the idea that Flight 93 was...
...actually shot down is NOT a joke, IMHO.

The mere fact that the NeoCon Junta has lied about virtually everything since the 2000 election campaign makes me believe that something isn't right about their explanation of the crash of Flight 93.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #53
59. IMHO, it's purposeful disinfo.
But that doesn't meant Flight 93 wasn't shot down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 02:42 AM
Response to Original message
63. Weren't there several minutes missing off the black box tapes
from this flight?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #63
77. Cockpit Voice Recorder missing the last 3 minutes, and played only
for releatives under a gag order.

The Flight Data Recorder information had never been released to anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 06:31 AM
Response to Original message
67. Of course it was shot down.
It crashed 80 minutes after the second plane hit the towers. They damned well SHOULD have shot it down by then, if they didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasSissy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 06:31 AM
Response to Original message
68. The FAA never notified the military of F93, I believe they said..
to the 9/11 Commission staffers. The military said they never rec'd notice of Flight 93. The military said also that the pilots never rec'd the "shoot down" orders from Cheney. Relatives of F93 passengers have said that they told the passengers about the World Trade Center suicide bombings, at which point the passengers knew what was going on, hence the attempt to take back the plane.

A lot of people would have had to have gotten together to concoct some sort of story that wove together in a tight timeline in order to give the 9/11 Commission this picture. And for what reason? I don't believe a large conspiracy on this issue.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasperc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #68
70. cabin rushed at 9:58am, not shoot down
as reported by cooperative research, also if the plane was hit by two sidewinder missles, being a flying bomb it would explode. Instead the plane flew erratically and crashed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #70
78. Wrong. The flight hit the ground at 10:06. So what the fuck happened over
those 8 minutes in your scenario?

And heat seeking missiles would take out the engine vicinity only.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #78
84. Which is right with the fuel tanks
Which were still fully loaded. This was a coast-to-coast flight.

There isn't going to be much left to make a crater like what happened.

That site is junk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-29-04 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #84
87. Most of the plane would be left.
Ever heard of Korean Air Flight 7?

I'm not defending the story, though. I find it more than a tad incredible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 30th 2014, 02:25 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC