It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cleveland Airport Mystery

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Using the word "mystery" is inappropriate due to the fact there was no mystery at all. More like a case of confusion with a sprinkling of too many people trying to link the events of 911 to this error made by aircraft controllers.




posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Remember Stapleton Airport?

Here is a perfect example of a conspiracy that has been unfolding throughout avaiation history.

Here is a story most people have never heard.

en.wikipedia.org...

On November 1, 1955, United Airlines Flight 629, a Douglas DC-6B airliner, exploded over nearby Longmont while en route to Portland and Seattle from Stapleton, killing all 44 persons aboard. A man named John "Jack" Gilbert Graham was found to have planted a dynamite bomb in a suitcase that was loaded onto the plane in order to murder his mother in revenge for the way he was treated by her as a child. He was executed two years after Flight 629 exploded.


en.wikipedia.org...

ohn "Jack" Gilbert Graham (January 23, 1932 – January 11, 1957) was a mass murderer who killed 44 people by planting a dynamite bomb in his mother's suitcase that was subsequently loaded aboard United Airlines Flight 629.


This guy was executed because he was supposedly angry at his mother and planted a suitcase bomb in her luggage.

The internet never existed in 1955. But my what an amazing forensics team they must have had.

[edit on 21-12-2009 by 12.21.12]



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
Remember Stapleton Airport?

Here is a perfect example of a conspiracy that has been unfolding throughout avaiation history.

Here is a story most people have never heard.

en.wikipedia.org...

On November 1, 1955, United Airlines Flight 629, a Douglas DC-6B airliner, exploded over nearby Longmont while en route to Portland and Seattle from Stapleton, killing all 44 persons aboard. A man named John "Jack" Gilbert Graham was found to have planted a dynamite bomb in a suitcase that was loaded onto the plane in order to murder his mother in revenge for the way he was treated by her as a child. He was executed two years after Flight 629 exploded.


en.wikipedia.org...

ohn "Jack" Gilbert Graham (January 23, 1932 – January 11, 1957) was a mass murderer who killed 44 people by planting a dynamite bomb in his mother's suitcase that was subsequently loaded aboard United Airlines Flight 629.


This guy was executed because he was supposedly angry at his mother and planted a suitcase bomb in her luggage.

The internet never existed in 1955. But my what an amazing forensics team they must have had.

[edit on 21-12-2009 by 12.21.12]



Outside the city limits of Longmont, a local farmer named Conrad Hopp was in his fields when he heard the loud noise and looked up. "It sounded like a bomb went off," he later told the press, "I ran out and saw a big fire right over the cattle corral. I hollered back to my wife that she'd better call the fire department...then I turned around and it blew up in the air!"


The flight 629 story is an interesting read for sure. Below is a link to the full story about this incident. Personally I don't see any big conspiracy here but to each his own.

Flght 629 full story

[edit on 21-12-2009 by mikelee]



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


Good find.

Well just goes to show how change is usually brought about with disaster.

As 9/11 clearly shows.



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Flight 93 also had 44 passengers.

en.wikipedia.org...

The United Airlines Flight 93 aircraft was a Boeing 757-200, registration number N591UA.[18] The airplane had a capacity of 182 passengers, but the September 11 flight carried only 37 passengers and seven crew members


Wierd eh?



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
Flight 93 also had 44 passengers.

en.wikipedia.org...

The United Airlines Flight 93 aircraft was a Boeing 757-200, registration number N591UA.[18] The airplane had a capacity of 182 passengers, but the September 11 flight carried only 37 passengers and seven crew members


Wierd eh?


Not really. Just because the aircraft wasn't filled to capacity does not automatically mean anything out of the ordinary because many flights each day take off without being completely filled up.



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


It's all a numbers game. I am looking for events that surround that date. So far I have only found one significant thing, but it might not be atrritutable to this story.

Remember, Remember the 5th of November 1955?



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
reply to post by mikelee
 


It's all a numbers game. I am looking for events that surround that date. So far I have only found one significant thing, but it might not be atrritutable to this story.

Remember, Remember the 5th of November 1955?


I hear ya! Good link too, S to you. My opinion is that we'll never know for sure and it'll probably end up being like the JFK assanition...As time passes more facts and evidence will slowly but surely become avalible or be "found" in some building's attic stowed away for safe keeping by accomplices paid to do such things.



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
reply to post by mikelee
 


It's all a numbers game. I am looking for events that surround that date. So far I have only found one significant thing, but it might not be atrritutable to this story.

Remember, Remember the 5th of November 1955?


Maybe this will help you....Cleveland Airport



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


Well maybe if we could figure out why they went to Cleveland, or if they ever went to Cleveland at all?



posted on Dec, 21 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
reply to post by mikelee
 


Well maybe if we could figure out why they went to Cleveland, or if they ever went to Cleveland at all?


I know what ya mean!



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 04:03 AM
link   
reply to post by 22-250
 





Nonetheless, the airport was evacuated, strangeley no one was alloud to drive there cars out of there. All were told to leave by foot.


One of many airports that were evacuated that day. The only mystery remaining about Cleveland is why people still think that United 93 landed there.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
The Cleveland mystery has its base in a report posted by the AP on Sept 11, 2001 stating that United 93 had landed there. It was posted on WCPO-TV's website shortly after. Shortly after that, the AP ran a correction stating they had screwed up. Liz Foreman, at WCPO, removed the link to the story, but did not remove the story. In 2003, after someone had asked her about it still be there, she removed the story. Unfortuately, this false story lives on with the 9/11 "truth" movement.


I think this Liz Forman should be charged with something then along with WCPO.

You don't get it wrong when reporting which plane has landed safely and which plane has not. Especially on 9/11.

If one of my relatives was on flight 93, I'd be suing their asses off for false information on such a critical day.

There should be NO reason why the MSM is reporting which planes are landing. Unless of course they were reporting each and every plane that had landed at Cleveland?

Why did they even report flight 93 landed in Cleveland to begin with?



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter

I think this Liz Forman should be charged with something then



You're absolutely right that she should have taken more care with her sources, but what would you suggest she could be charged with? I don't think she's committed a crime as such.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 05:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Nutter
 


She was the only person updating the station's web page on one of the most chaotic days our country has faced in decades, and you want to crucify her because although she removed the link from the story, it stayed buried in the site where it could be found by a web search? Which it did stay buried...until it was unearthed and publicised by the "Loose Change" crew. I notice you dont mention suing THEM for posting a falsehood and ripping open the wounds of the families of Flight 93.

Your reaction is disgusting in my opinion and one more example of what is wrong with the United States today.

[edit on 22-12-2009 by Swampfox46_1999]



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
You're absolutely right that she should have taken more care with her sources, but what would you suggest she could be charged with? I don't think she's committed a crime as such.


Well, there should be. False reporting is a crime. So, the press should have their facts straight before they report something. Especially things regarding 9/11.

If my wife had been on flight 93 and then I heard that her plane landed in Cleveland (whew...thank God she's safe), only to find out that she actually died in Pennsylvania, I think I would be certainly pissed that a NEWS station would make such a false report.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
I notice you dont mention suing THEM for posting a falsehood and ripping open the wounds of the families of Flight 93.


The difference would be that the LC guys didn't report it. They just uncovered the report. Slight difference.


Your reaction is disgusting in my opinion and one more example of what is wrong with the United States today.


So, you would rather not have journalists accountable for their reports?

THAT is what is wrong with the United States today my friend.


[edit on 22-12-2009 by Nutter]



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Nutter
 





The difference would be that the LC guys didn't report it. They just uncovered the report. Slight difference.


No, they committed the worse offense. They dug up an old, discredited report, did not bother to research it, and plastered it all over the internet for their own gain.

When a journalist lies with malice aforethought, I am all in favor of holding them responsible for their lies. However, what Ms. Foreman did that day wasnt it.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter


Well, there should be. False reporting is a crime.



No it's not, as far as I know. Libel and slander are crimes, certainly in the UK. And I know our laws are stronger regarding the former than in the US



So, the press should have their facts straight before they report something. Especially things regarding 9/11.



Quite so, but it's understandable how mistakes are made in the heat of the moment, esp on a day like 9/11.

Over here a news anchor on a major TV station said that "The whole of the eastern seaboard of the US is ablaze". Obviously she was incorrect, but under the circumstances one can see why she was so het up.


If my wife had been on flight 93 and then I heard that her plane landed in Cleveland (whew...thank God she's safe), only to find out that she actually died in Pennsylvania, I think I would be certainly pissed that a NEWS station would make such a false report.


That would be a nightmare, sure. But it's important that the press remains free, and that means that it is occasionally free to make mistakes and errors.

There is a big debate in the UK about this at the moment because due to the strength of our libel laws foreigners often prosecute here and obtain injunctions, even though the material in question is published all over the world. Furthermore ISPs usually shut down sites at the first sign of a writ because they can't be bothered with the expense of fighting a case for the measly hosting funds.

If journalists faced further risks on erroneous publication that would make investigation into anything - including 9/11 - a lot harder.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 07:19 AM
link   
Also, I'd point out that there's no legal difference between the original journalist and LC, or at least the law doesn't see it differently. Indeed she would appear to have made a complete retraction, whereas they are presumably standing by their claim, and publishing it over the internet. This leaves them even more open to a lawsuit than her, I would imagine.




top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join