Flight 93 Shootdown - Once kooky theory - now confirmed (again and again), page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times
Topic started on 16-4-2008 @ 10:25 AM by Maxmars
April 16, 2008 -- Flight 93 shot down by Air Force jets

[Poster's comment: The WMR reference if from WAYNE MADSEN REPORT, a website which I have come to learn is 'subscription-based'; as a result I have apparently propagated information from a URL that requires a paid membership to access. Also, I'm sure those inclined to argue for the sanctity of profit over truth might be correct in stating that this information is 'owned' and therefore subject to the usual restrictions of 'fair use'. I APOLOGIZE and attest that I in no way wish to complicate the lives of the kind folks at ATS who have no complicity in my posting it here. - If it must be 'removed' so be it - I will certainly take no offense]


"WMR has received another confirmation, bringing the total number to three, that United Flight 93, hijacked on the morning of September 11, 2001, was shot down over rural Pennsylvania by U.S. Air Force jets scrambled from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia.

The third confirmation, as were the first two, is from a National Security Agency (NSA) source. In fact, a number of personnel who were on watch at the Meade Operations Center (MOC), which is a floor below the NSA's National Security Operations Center (NSOC), were aware that United 93 was brought down by an Air Force air-to-air missile. Personnel within both the MOC and NSOC have reported the doomed aircraft was shot down.

The 9/11 Commission, which is now known to have been influenced by Bush adviser Karl Rove and its Executive Director Phil Zelikow, never interviewed the on-duty signals intelligence personnel who were aware that United 93 was brought down by Air Force jets. The cover-story is that passengers on board the plane struggled with hijackers and flew the plane directly into the ground near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Investigators have stressed that the 8-mile debris field left by the doomed aircraft proves the government's story is a hoax. "

This is my first thread. Please forgive me if any technical issues are apparent.

Maybe this is old news. Maybe this is 'well-known'. On the other hand after three (countem' - three) confirmation from my old alma mater NSA - the story of the flight 93 shoot down is no longer 'debatable.

My interest in starting this thread is towards a discussion of five things:

1) How fervently those who argued 'against' the theory seem to be utterly mute on the matter now. Their provided 'proof' and of course their undying loyalty to the 'official position'.

2) How the government 'cooperated' with the media to produce and promote the heartrending "Flight 93" docudrama that served to cement public opinion against the truth and truth-seekers as lunatics with possible 'unpatriotic' motivations.

3) How the 'independent' media exemplified its 'journalistic integrity' while generating tens of millions (around the world no less) in revenue while propagating information that even untrained eyes recognized as patently false.

4) Why the American people are intended to 'let it go' despite the disrespect it shows to those who died. And the 'circumstantial' evidence it lends to the 'looney' theory that we have been, and continue to be misdirected and blatantly lied to by the government.

5) Which public officials stepped forward to propagate and strengthen this pack of lies. Which actually 'created the lies' and which just surrendered to them.



[edit on 16-4-2008 by Maxmars]

[edit on 16-4-2008 by Maxmars]

[edit on 16-4-2008 by Maxmars]


reply posted on 16-4-2008 @ 11:52 AM by Griff
reply to post by percievedreality



Here it is:

www.youtube.com...

Actually watch the two people behind him. There was a reaction. Just not from the MSM. Wonder why?

Edit: I think Dr. Love answered my question above.

[edit on 4/16/2008 by Griff]


reply posted on 16-4-2008 @ 01:02 PM by percievedreality
reply to post by Dr Love



FYI, at least one of the "Fruedian slips" happened not in front of a room full of reporters (ie @ a press conference) but in an Elks Lodge gathering of local people that were there to see Rumsfield speak. I was thinking more along the lines of a civilian standing up to question that statement, not a press-corps person fearful of retribution! Total different scenario..............


reply posted on 16-4-2008 @ 01:16 PM by Dr Love
reply to post by percievedreality



In that case you'd end up like that kid at the John Kerry speech saying "don't taze me bro'!".

Peace


reply posted on 16-4-2008 @ 01:47 PM by IvanZana
reply to post by beachnut



The shootdown theory is used to cover up the fact that No BOEING 757 Crashed in Shanksville on 911.

It is a classic straw man theory started by the perps to confuse, obsefucate, derail, mislead, and all and all make the conspiracies unbelievable in hopes that new users will get frustrated with the so many CT's out there that they will give up seeking the truth.

[edit on 16-4-2008 by IvanZana]


reply posted on 16-4-2008 @ 01:55 PM by Dr Love
reply to post by IvanZana



I tend to agree with Ivan about flight 93. When I saw pictures of the alleged crash site from a distance I saw nothing. After that of course I'm presented with close-up pictures of plane parts that could have been taken back in '78 in El Salvador for all I know.

Peace



reply posted on 16-4-2008 @ 02:00 PM by Maxmars
reply to post by beachnut



Let's see ...

scramble jets during hijaack scenario - 3 maybe 4 people (controller, pilot(s), flight-line officer - if at all)

Confirm shoot down order - 4 people - commander, comms officer, pilots, air traffic controller.

----

But wait! the jets had already been scrambled during a 'similar scenario' exercise coincidentally taking place a the same time - in the same air space.. subtract 2 people from each.

NO, it is not 'a lot of people' COMSEC and security channels ensure that only a very few people are tactically involved in any such operation. This isn't a football game - it's real life . You don't get 50 people on the sidelines mulling around like in Hollywood - tactical operations must be as close to instantaneous real-time as possible - more people means more opportunity for delay and or failure.

This is not to say that there shouldn't have been quite a number of detached lookers on - ego's must be fed and many officers want to be able to claim "I was in the 'war room' and "I was there" etc. That doesn't mean they did squat other than stand around drinking coffee. (I've been there - I've seen that)

Now while I definitely differ with you on how command and control is carried out in a tactical situation, your other points merit review. Perhaps you are right. Maybe there was no shoot down and all of this is just someones idea of a funny joke.

I can only tell you that after over a decade with NSA I am inclined to believe them. The reason you hear so little from them is because of the structure of the organization and the nature of its 'product' - they would rather say nothing than propagate 'bad' info - bedsides, that's what the FBI and CIA are for.


reply posted on 16-4-2008 @ 04:38 PM by Boone 870
reply to post by Maxmars


1) How fervently those who argued 'against' the theory seem to be utterly mute on the matter now. Their provided 'proof' and of course their undying loyalty to the 'official position'.
Maybe the reason that those who have undying loyalty to the official position remain mute, is because the truth movement never brings anything viable to the argument. It's always the same old anonymous so and so from such and such organization making sensational claims with nothing to back it up. Like you have just done.

2) How the government 'cooperated' with the media to produce and promote the heartrending "Flight 93" docudrama that served to cement public opinion against the truth and truth-seekers as lunatics with possible 'unpatriotic' motivations.
Oh great, more of the government controls the media nonsense. What about the family members who helped on the Flight 93 docudrama? Are they controlled by the government also?

3) How the 'independent' media exemplified its 'journalistic integrity' while generating tens of millions (around the world no less) in revenue while propagating information that even untrained eyes recognized as patently false.
How can an untrained eye recognize something that is false when they are untrained to recognize what is true?

4) Why the American people are intended to 'let it go' despite the disrespect it shows to those who died. And the 'circumstantial' evidence it lends to the 'looney' theory that we have been, and continue to be misdirected and blatantly lied to by the government.
The FDR and CVR found at the crash site are as about as rocksolid as you can get.

5) Which public officials stepped forward to propagate and strengthen this pack of lies. Which actually 'created the lies' and which just surrendered to them.
What about the family members? Are they propagating and strengthening lies? Or were they controlled by the government also?


reply posted on 16-4-2008 @ 05:14 PM by Coach Knight
I personally have been saying since the day it happened that it was shot down. I remember watching the news reports with my wife who also remembers the same thing, and one of the reports that was given said that part of the tail section was found in a lake several miles away from the main site. I'm sorry but I can't buy that it would happen if a plane just crashed into the ground. We never heard that report again or anything like it on any channel after that.

I have not followed all the arguments to the conspiracy theories about 9/11 and have no real opinion at this point one way or the other. However I do believe this plane was shot down. Too many things, like Rumsfield's slip point to it. It is possible that we shot it down just to prevent it from achieving it's final mission, and that's what I'd like to think.

Also to the poster who mentioned are the families in on any cover-up, I don't think the families are aware of the truth...but certainly we'd all like to remember our loved ones as heroes instead of victims. If that is the story they are hearing it probably gives them more comfort than to hear that some jets shot them down and they were helpless to stop it.

I think most anyone knows the media is censored to some degree at all times, and to a great degree when it deals with National Security issues. To believe everything we get fed by the newspapers, TV and radio journalists is 100% accurate is very gullible, indeed.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 13 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 7 days ago with 13 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 18 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 14 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 15 hours ago, 24 flags
Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 17 hours ago, 24 flags
My Brain = about to explode
  Member Art, Posted 7 hours ago, 22 flags
ATS's Gutter-rats and the 90+ intro thread
  Rant, Posted 15 hours ago, 20 flags
Amazing French Indigo Girl in Africa (Tippi)
  Survival, Posted 6 hours ago, 14 flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 17 hours ago, 127 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 15 hours ago, 101 replies
Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 11 hours ago, 65 replies