Flight 93 Did Not Crash In Shanksville or Shot Down.

page: 3
29
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


No, you must understand that your average conspiracist wants you to believe that the evil government is good at "false flagging" but most conspiracist are just way too sharp to get anything by them.




posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by triplescorpio
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


Umm there were plenty of eyewitness(let me guess gov. agents) that saw the plane nose down straight at the planet earth and the HUGE fireball that followed.


Then can you list them? I have asked already and only have one name so far and that is Nevin Lambert. The last time I checked, one guy is not plenty of witnesses.

Can you please supply a list?



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
I get my "proof" from original sources fellas. Say what you will, the plane was shot down.

"Well, I discussed it with the president. Are we prepared to order our aircraft to shoot down these airliners that have been hijacked? He said yes... I--it was my advice. It was his decision."(Vice President Dick Cheney, September 11, 2001, source CBS News Archives)


"That's a sobering moment, to order your own combat aircraft to shoot down your own civilian aircraft. But it was an easy decision to make, given the--given the fact that we had learned that a commercial aircraft was being used as a weapon. I say easy decision. It was--I didn't hesitate; let me put it to you that way. I knew what had to be done."(President George W. Bush, September 11, 2001, source CBS News Archives)

Rumsfeld stated in a speech to US troops in Iraq (24 December 2004) that United Airlines Flight 93 was "shot down" on 9/11:

And I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon
(Donald Rumsfeld, speech to US troops in Mosul, Iraq, December 24, 2004. The speech was broadcast by CNN.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


I guess I never looked at it as an out but yes and especially since there are 'truthers' who will point back to that. I guess my distrust of the government comes in here. Which is easier, to switch an FDR which is the only physical thing that can state that there were no issues with the plane, or to take 93 and land it somewhere else at an airport where there are 100's of eyewitnesses and then try to silence 40+ passengers. I had forgotten about it but I always thought is strange Lear said that could not be faked but they used holographic images and unheard of sound technology to pull off the attacks. I believe all of the Pentagon and WTC garbage is disinfo to keep people from looking closer at 93.

The pilot and Jacoby. I believe that is the only testimony that puts the pilot somewhere else. Minetas testimony gives us the stand down. Less than 20-30 people would know the truth. That is how you cover something up.

A conspiracy is a shared idea by a few people and you only include a few people to do something of this nature.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


look up flight manifesto of flight 93 and start calling family members im sure youll be happy you questioned there loved ones death. Or you can take the less painful approach and google news video of that day you can see some of the original footage of the actual day.

so if i get you what has been proven is all false everyone is lieing different governments agencys and privae citizens all to support ?????

The people you think are deceiving you are our freinds family parents brothers sisters and so on not foreign rebels hell bent on your destruction.

We call those people terrorists ya know the people that caused 9-11??

but i should beleive we need more proof way to beat the dead dog with a stick.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by triplescorpio
reply to post by Lillydale
 


look up flight manifesto of flight 93 and start calling family members im sure youll be happy you questioned there loved ones death. Or you can take the less painful approach and google news video of that day you can see some of the original footage of the actual day.


So that would be a no?


so if i get you what has been proven is all false everyone is lieing different governments agencys and privae citizens all to support ?????

The people you think are deceiving you are our freinds family parents brothers sisters and so on not foreign rebels hell bent on your destruction.

We call those people terrorists ya know the people that caused 9-11??

but i should beleive we need more proof way to beat the dead dog with a stick.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]


What I asked was for the list of all these eyewitnesses. What is this nonsense I am not even going to respond to it if you want to play this game. I asked a direct question. Instead of changing the subject, be a man and just say 'no, I do not really have a list because I am just repeating OS crap I have been told.'



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 03:37 PM
link   
post by Lillydale
 


dude im not gonna prove the earth is round to you You can beleive whatever fantasy you like. and if me seeing the twin towers(what that didnt happen either?im off topic blah blah blah)as a first person witness(o wait i imagined it the dust the screaming)isnt proof why would you beleive anybodys testimony?your ignorance is plentiful. i call BS on this whole topic i dnt know what you will ever take as proof if i give you the phone number of the local farm(where this plane crashed) i can already see your response
i mean what you want my name and address dnt think so freind if your savy trace my IP right now im on long island at my shop.

Be a man and stop defyling your country is more like what you should be doin. no i dnt have list of witnesses from 9-11 i have no need to research what is already proven. were you not on planet earth that day how quickly we forget. is the whole world delusional and YOU are different.
?

So what plane crashed then? who didnt die? to what end can you actually prove anything. Other then catch phrase spoofs like NWO and zionists regime and Blah BLAH BLAH .i need not provide this evidence its already right there you to obsorb did you forget how to type or are you afraid of websites that use real science and witness testimony you can also go to this place called a library or is all info corupt except yours ?

crappy debate im not impressed .


bye


[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]

[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]

[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]

[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Your comments lend themselves to being accepted by those who will always agree with BS theorys thers plenty of narrow minds you go with yo badself and maybe oneday you too will be right


do you need a picture of the sun to know its there what if its not???


[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by triplescorpio

proof dude proof

reply to post by Lillydale
 


dude im not gonna prove the earth is round to you You can beleive whatever fantasy you like.


You crack me right the hell up. I never asked you to prove the world was round. I simply asked you to back up a statement YOU made! I thought that was simple. You said there were lots of witnesses. I asked who they were. You sidestepped it. I asked again. I am asking for the names or for you to admit you are just parroting crap you heard somewhere. It is either or. It is very easy. Can you do it?


and if me seeing the twin towers(what that didnt happen either?im off topic blah blah blah)as a first person witness(o wait i imagined it the dust the screaming)isnt proof why would you beleive anybodys testimony?your ignorance is plentiful. i call BS on this whole topic i dnt know what you will ever take as proof if i give you the phone number of the local farm(where this plane crashed) i can already see your response
i mean what you want my name and address dnt think so freind if your savy trace my IP right now im on long island at my shop.


Apparently not.

I am having trouble navigating the typos and spelling errors and grammar. Is English your first language?

It is really simple. You claimed lots of people SAW the plane crash. Who were they? This is three times I am asking after you sidestepped it twice already. You made the claim, not me.


Be a man and stop defyling your country is more like what you should be doin.


I have tried but my vagina keeps getting in the way. Pesky thing that it is. I am not sure what "defyling" is so I do not know how to stop doing it.


no i dnt have list of witnesses from 9-11 i have no need to research what is already proven. were you not on planet earth that day how quickly we forget. is the whole world delusional and YOU are different.
?


Proven by whom? When? You said people watched AU93 go down. Who watched it? Where was it proven? How can you even spout such garbage when you know you cannot back it up? Why would you blindly believe things you think were proven with no proof? Are you so dedicated to your government that you will just believe anything they say without looking into it yourself?


So what plane crashed then? who didnt die? to what end can you actually prove anything. Other then catch phrase spoofs like NWO and zionists regime and Blah BLAH BLAH .


I have never once mentioned any of those things. Classic misdirection.


i need not provide this evidence its already right there you to obsorb


Then tell me where it is for me to "obsorb." That is all. You came here for a reason. Was it to learn, educate, or just fight? I know you will not actually answer my questions so I guess I can ask anything I want at this point. I thought people came here for thoughtful discussion and sharing of ideas and knowledge. You are just parroting crap and telling me I need to just believe it. Why? Why do you believe it? I am asking you real, honest, direct questions. Can you answer them or are you just trolling here?


did you forget how to type


HOLY *! Did you really just type that? Did I forget hot to type? There is a problem with your spelling, punctuation, and grammar ON EVERY LINE. Watch out for those stones in the pretty glass house.


or are you afraid of websites that use real science and witness testimony you can also go to this place called a library or is all info corupt except yours ?


Have a website to recommend or is this more nonsense from your behind?


crappy debate im not impressed .


bye


[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]


LOL. Debate? Who was debating? I asked you one question and you weaseled out of it twice. That is not a debate. That is sidestepping a direct question because you cannot answer it. If that is your idea of debate, best put me on ignore now. I do have a pesky habit of asking people to back up the things they say. When they cowardly weasel out of it, I ask again. You call it whatever you like, sweaty.

P.S. Since I already told you to be a man, it just sounds silly when you use back on me. Especially when my name is Lilly.



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by triplescorpio

do you need a picture of the sun to know its there what if its not???


[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]


Nope. I just need you to back up WHAT YOU CLAIMED.

That is all. Can you do it? This is request 4.

I got the sun and the round earth thing all settled. All I want is you to back up your BS. That is all. That is it. Nothing else. How can I make it more simple?



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 

Your kidding you dont think... wow??? Its not a statement in need of proof but when i get home tonite i get you a nice list and what will this do you are beyond proof if the plane hit you you still wouldnt beleive it now i truly am leaving . we are not going to ever be on the same page i appreciate you looking for answers but i assure you the plane crashed the buildings fell the world suffered its not a conspiracy i know there are types that will suggest and try to prove these IDEAS

i wouldnt want to be in a locked room with them


Be well no hard feelings sorry if i got heated or was rude there is no place for that here. bad on me..




posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
I get my "proof" from original sources fellas. Say what you will, the plane was shot down.

"Well, I discussed it with the president. Are we prepared to order our aircraft to shoot down these airliners that have been hijacked? He said yes... I--it was my advice. It was his decision."(Vice President Dick Cheney, September 11, 2001, source CBS News Archives)


You''re not quoting "original sources", you're quoting some damned fool conspiracy web site cutting and pasting people's quotes deliberately out of context in order to get everyone all paranoid over shadows.

Everyone, from the Bush administration to NORAD to the air force all openly admitted to the 9/11 commission they were actively hunting flight 93, and they definitely would have shot it down if they had found it. This is the part you're quoting. What you're not quoting is the part where they said they didn't know where it was. The claim that they wanted to shoot it down and would have shot it down if they found it...and then turned around and pretended they didn't shoot it down...is just adding unwanted and unneeded layers of artificial complexity here.


And I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon
(Donald Rumsfeld, speech to US troops in Mosul, Iraq, December 24, 2004. The speech was broadcast by CNN.


Well if you're going to insist on robotic literal interpretations, he'd be admitting that the TERRORISTS were the ones who shot down flight 93, here. Granted, the terrorists could have theoretically smuggled in a stinger missile to shoot down a flight their fellow terrorists already hijacked, but I think your "we framed Afghanistan as a false flag operation...to invade Iraq" and "we made a fake crash site in Shanksville...and turned around and covered up the fake crash site we made in Shanksville" conspiracy stories are convoluted sounding enough as it is without needing to add any more embellishment, don't you think?



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


i take back my be well you are asking for proof i spell fine was not aware i was being graded on spelling.
i will be glad to get you the list or are you afriad you could do it yourself i just typed into google eyewitness report of 9-11 give it a try the search box is the litlle window on top.
you like to call names the first sign of an ignorant mind i call BS until you can provide your supposed info from a real source.

since you simply askesd a question (arent you politically correct he wouldnt answer me boo hoo )do you even look outside theres a whole world hiding from you. We call it reality. DID you not watch the news during the weeks after 9-11 if im not proof as a witness then who would be? a stranger ? i dnt know ? a second hand witness? did you even watch the television that day or was the three days of non stop news agencys reporting all an illusion produced in hollywood. cnn fox news all have real footage but you dnt wana see that good luck with the supposed one question you asked. there are plenty of answers to it but i have to get you the info why would you beleive me over what you could see for yourself first hand. O i know its boring asking yourself inane questions
what proof have you provided you got into it with me by piggy backing on me addressing another post reply i ve noticed you do that a lot.????



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 





You''re not quoting "original sources", you're quoting some damned fool conspiracy web site cutting and pasting people's quotes deliberately out of context in order to get everyone all paranoid over shadows.


Source: CBS News archives...Conspiracy website?

I also add the source to each of my threads, so your statement about cutting & pasting only certain parts is invalid. Otherwise the source (where people can go and see it for theirselves) wouldn't have been included if that were my goal to mislead ot otherwise.

I have started to link back to the source or include a link in each of my posts so that OS'ers can go there. I have noticed that a lot of you are having a difficult time with that because it plainly disputes any claims to the contrary by OSer's.




Well if you're going to insist on robotic literal interpretations, he'd be admitting that the TERRORISTS were the ones who shot down flight 93, here.


But my point here is, that your OS states it wasn't shot down at all. But Mr. Rumsfeld states that it was. Regardless of who actually shot it down, 'they" lied about it being shot down at all.

Have a good night Dave.

[edit on 20-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


i stated the truth you just dont wana hear it and you have no proof to say otherwise. Poor you. just asking a question boo hoo you need proof of the sun look up you need proof for 9-11 look in the news reports court statements i dont need to be convinced and could careless if you are i just cant beleive how ignorant you are? god all ya hada do was turn on the tv for like the first three weeks and you could have seen the intial wreckage before it was cleaned up and photographed. Do you live under a rock??

[edit on 20-1-2010 by triplescorpio]



posted on Jan, 20 2010 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
I have started to link back to the source or include a link in each of my posts so that OS'ers can go there. I have noticed that a lot of you are having a difficult time with that because it plainly disputes any claims to the contrary by OSer's.


...to which I would respond, if you're going to attempt to "prove" the 9/11 Commission report is false then it behooves you to know what the heck the 9/11 commission report actually says to begin with. The gov't is openly admitting there was a shoot down order for flight 93 and the gov't is openly admitting they would have shot it down, if they had the chance. This was directly in the commission report, so the only one who seems to think it's a stop-the-presses revelation that gov't officials are talkign about a shoot-down order is you.

Either you got the idea that noone ever ordered a shoot-down order from those damned fool conspiracy web sites and you accepted it at face value, or, you're openly dishonest and you're making up crap off the top of your head. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're not openly dishonest, and aren't making up crap off the top of your head.



But my point here is, that your OS states it wasn't shot down at all. But Mr. Rumsfeld states that it was. Regardless of who actually shot it down, 'they" lied about it being shot down at all.


It makes no logical sense for the gov''t to admit they wanted to destroy the plane only to turn around and deny they destroyed the plane, It likewise makes no logical sense whatsoever for terrorists to shoot down a plane that was under the control of their fellow terrorists. The only thing that does make sense is that Rumsfeld was exhausted, and mispoke "shot down" with "deliberately crashed" becuase he wasn't expecting anyone to be grading him on his grammar.

There WAS a shoot down order from the president so there is ZERO reason for the gov't to deny it if it had been shot down. If you can't get past that, then the rest of your conspiracy claims can't even get out of the gate.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by triplescorpio
reply to post by Lillydale
 


i stated the truth you just dont wana hear it and you have no proof to say otherwise. Poor you.


Bye. I will not entertain your desperate need for my attention. If you cannot answer a simple question in 4 tries, you are worthless to me. Funny how you can ask me to prove you wrong when you refuse to PROVE YOURSELF RIGHT. LOL

SEEEYA!



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave







The only thing that does make sense is that Rumsfeld was exhausted, and mispoke "shot down" with "deliberately crashed" becuase he wasn't expecting anyone to be grading him on his grammar.

There WAS a shoot down order from the president so there is ZERO reason for the gov't to deny it if it had been shot down. If you can't get past that, then the rest of your conspiracy claims can't even get out of the gate.




Two things...First Gooddave, thanks, you gave me a good laugh there. Just the thought of you attributing his comment to exhaustion is unbelievably funny, and telling.

To actually see how the thought process of a so called Debunker works is amazing(not that this isn't a two way street ,b/c believe me I know that it is). But to discount something like that, I mean no aircraft were shot down that day, so to say that he confused that with "deliberately crashed" is a gigantic leap.

Also, he wasn't expecting anyone to grade him on his grammar(grammar? maybe truthfulness)..Please, as Stossel would say "gimme a break".

He was ONLY speaking about 9/11, he WAS the secretary of defense. He was in a room full of people(military if I remember correctly) who were all as shocked to hear it as any other normal sane person would be. Only do the Debunkers write it off as "the poor old man was just exhausted".

Secondly, and more importantly, I think that saying there is ZERO reason for the government to deny a shoot down is just typical Debunker logic.

There is one very big reason to deny a shoot down(IMHO), and that reason would be in light of the known events that came to light immediately following the crash.

That is, that basically everyone on the jet was in contact with people off the planes. And the fact that the passengers were in the process of taking back control of the aircraft.

Can you imagine(especially back at that time) our government coming out and saying "Well yes as soon as the passengers took the plane back, we shot it down having no idea that they had just took back control from the hijackers"

I think that is a good reason to deny a shoot down.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


You''re not quoting "original sources", you're quoting some damned fool conspiracy web site cutting and pasting people's quotes deliberately out of context in order to get everyone all paranoid over shadows.


Stop attacking the messenger beliefs and stick to the topic.


"Well, I discussed it with the president. Are we prepared to order our aircraft to shoot down these airliners that have been hijacked? He said yes... I--it was my advice. It was his decision."(Vice President Dick Cheney, September 11, 2001, source CBS News Archives)


Bring on the source? I can make up anything you want.

Where is this source? Oh, I get it, we are to take your word for it.


Everyone, from the Bush administration to NORAD to the air force all openly admitted to the 9/11 commission they were actively hunting flight 93, and they definitely would have shot it down if they had found it.


Really, I read the 911 commission report and it was not there. What I do know, is that everyone in the bush administration stonewalled and lied, to the 911 commissioners.
NORAD lied so much that the 911 commission requested the Justices department to do a “criminal investigation,” do I stand correct?

If everyone in the Bush administration and the Pentagon said we shot down the plane in Shanksville PA. Then, why was it not in the 911 report?


but I think your "we framed Afghanistan as a false flag operation...to invade Iraq" and "we made a fake crash site in Shanksville...and turned around and covered up the fake crash site we made in Shanksville" conspiracy stories are convoluted sounding enough as it is without needing to add any more embellishment, don't you think?


Wow, talk about angry and spewing venom.

Yet you cannot disprove this theory but only “dismiss it as impossible,” yet you “cannot” provide one pieces of evidences to prove it is not possible.

Look, if you want to disagree then say so! Why is it so hard to “be respectful” to someone else opinions, and theories? Leave out your insults.

Many of us have seen enough “circumstantial evidences” of a false flag that definitely points to the Bush administration and Dick Cheney.



[edit on 21-1-2010 by impressme]





new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join