Gitmo Prosecutor: Flight 93 Was Shot Down On 9/11!, page 5
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 30 times


reply posted on 27-7-2008 @ 06:05 PM by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by MrWendal

Flight 93 WAS shot down. One of the passengers reported to a loved one on the ground by cell phone that there was an wxplosion on the wing. One of my collegues at work who lives near the Pittsburgh International Airport said that F-16 fighter jets were scrambled from that airport and flew over his farm in persuit of Flight 93.



reply posted on 28-7-2008 @ 06:27 PM by Anonymous ATS
Ok, IF the plane was shot down, then doesn't that disprove the "inside job" theory? Think about it.
If the government was behind 9/11, and used airplanes to attack NYC and DC, why should they shoot down Flight 93 if they were controlling it? And then, why would they say it was not shot down, but crashed after passengers fought off the attackers? It really does not make sense.

So IF the aircraft were all remote controlled, then that would mean Flight 93 was also remote controlled. The official story is they were hijacked by terrorists. Ok, so if that is the case, and the first three hit their targets, why did they bother shooting down Flt93? Did they lose control over it? If they did, why didnt they just let it fly uncontrolled and let it crash where ever? Why send out fighter planes to shoot it down, then say there was no shoot down? Wouldnt it seem a more plausible claim to have a plane that was hijacked (ie they lost their control), have it crash wherever, and say they terrorists were attacked and the plan crashed by itself?

If they did in fact shoot down the REAL flt 93, how would it look after having 4 buildings destroyed or heavily damaged by terrorists crashing airplanes, and then admitting they had to shoot down another plane? After all that is happening, they come on and say, "In addition to the attacks in NYC and DC, we had to shoot down another hijacked flight?" How do you think the public would react if the govt admitted they had just shot down their own airplane, after all the bloodshed earlier?


reply posted on 29-7-2008 @ 10:57 AM by rightwingnut
We are all nice people and would probably like to believe that we would die fighting but even the movies seem to convey that the calls which were received spoke of nothing, of recapturing control of the plane. We were not on the plane and there for cannot speak in fact to what happened. Prior pictures of the area have brought in question whether the event has happened at all. That's a staunch contrast, maybe we should seek some one who lost a relative.

The facts to this being a hoax command some strict comformance with reality. All who made a trip on said flight would have to live in secrecy. If prior pictures show the same area with a ditch, then, now the ditch has a plane in it, are the events of history.

The fact that the plane was not shot down is in the picture of the wreck. The plane is belly down and practically in a few peices. I saw other pictures that showed no plane or that it had disintergrated upon crashing, leaving only debris. Neither picture produced other accounts from the ground of a wide debris field consistant with the mid-air destruction of a jetliner. There is a place where it crashed so it cannot be a shoot down.

"Evidence Timing" this is the time when the evidence is produced. This doesn't seem like a spontaneous plot. The buildings in N.Y. start the plot but now we must believe that the media or government kills more people in penn or at the pentagon. The WTTS are gone, this whole thing, is not a hoax.

However it's most likely a George Bush fantasy.

[edit on 29-7-2008 by rightwingnut]

[edit on 29-7-2008 by rightwingnut]
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^




Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 16 hours ago, 69 replies
Official Maine Caucus Results Thread!!
  2012 US Elections, Posted 6 hours ago, 58 replies