AWACS crew member says Flight 93 shot down

reply to post by psyko45


The point is not so much that it might have been shot down.

The point is , if it was, why did the Gov LIE to us about it.

I think they lied about a shoot down, because it would discredit the

whole Military being inept on that day.

[edit on 28-1-2010 by Sean48]

reply to post by Sean48

The point is not so much that it might have been shot down.

The point is , if it was, why did the Gov LIE to us about it.

I agree with what you say but the thread seem to emphasize the shooting down of 93.

I think they lied because a government that was supposed to protect its people ended up taking some out instead.

reply to post by mikelee

Whats it gonna take for you folks to open your damn minds up and see that everything your told, was for other reasons than telling the truth??

Didn't see that coming.


I thought you wanted discussion about this issue.

reply to post by jam321


I dont think anyone will not agree,

The good of the many , out way the needs of the few.

Shoot downs would have been the right move, sad , but true.

Using that analogy , the few for the many.

Is what the Neocon's probably told themselves about 911 in its entirety .

reply to post by Sean48


I think the initial knee jerk reaction was to deny and lie that they had to shoot down 93. After that the web was so tangled they couldn't back out and they just let it evolve into the masses truth.

HBO or one of the networks did a docudrama about the "Official Story of flight 93" in what I thought was record time. Almost as if they implanting the images of the movie, for the viewer to associate with the truth. This has always raised red flags and raised more questions in my mind.

This video does NOT show an AWACS crew member stating that "Flight 93 was shot down." It does not even imply such a thing transpired.

What the crew member said was:

"we would expect that they might scramble fighters to intercept the aircraft; and, if necessary--as we saw from 9/11--possibly shoot down the aircraft."

This statement implies that, in retrospect, we should have scrambled fighters and shot down the planes before they hit their targets.

I'm a 911 truther myself. But this is not definitive evidence that any plane was shot down on 9/11.

Close, but no cigar.

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by psyko45

 

I think they lied about a shoot down, because it would discredit the

whole Military being inept on that day.

[edit on 28-1-2010 by Sean48]

The logic of that statement escapes me, its kind of an ironic logic.
The title is misleading. No such comment was made.



reply to post by linux2216



Thank you. You saved me the time.

Originally posted by Plasma applicator

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by psyko45

 

I think they lied about a shoot down, because it would discredit the

whole Military being inept on that day.

[edit on 28-1-2010 by Sean48]

The logic of that statement escapes me, its kind of an ironic logic.
The title is misleading. No such comment was made.

I'll spell it out for you

According to the OS , the air-force was flying around like keystone-cops

looking for their ass in their hats.

If it was declared a shoot down in Shanksville, the question would arise as

to why no other shoot down, mostly at the Pent.

Better to look inept the whole day.

reply to post by Sean48



I guess I still think one out of four would be better than zero out of four.
I just don’t get what could be gained.
But hey, I am no expert on the matter.

Originally posted by JJay55
The truth is that WMD were used against our country and they will be used again. If you have security clearance you would know the truth. However, since you don't have what it takes to be in that position there things that you will just have to guess about in your lifetime.
Scream all you want, you will never know the truth or find it with a bad attitude of blame and anti-Americanism.
How many freeking threads are you people going to start with conspiracies about 911? Over and over, that's insanity. Try a different approach, maybe that will help you.
Good luck.

This is a ludicrous arguement.

I am a disabled vet, I had a Top Secret (SCI) security clearance. Anyone that has one knows that what you know is EXTREMELY compartmentalized.

History has shown we as a nation have been tricked into political wars over false and misleading information. Just look at the Vietnam war that started over the "Gulf of Tonkin" incident.

There are too many "firsts" about 9/11... where are the black boxes for instance. I am looking at all sides of this issue but there is enough suspicious here that we need another (or a first) REAL investigation.

Might the plane have been shot down because the passengers were retaqking control of the plane? And, had they been able to get in touch with air traffic control and land the plane, then the real truth about what happened on those planes may have been revealed.
I believe the reason that all the planes used on 9-11 were taken out of service 9 months earlier is so that they could be fitted with remote control gear and flown remotely, over-riding the pilots' controls. This would explain why there were no Middle Eastern names on any of the passenger manifests (lists), because the "terrorists" weren't needed to be on the planes, just to be patsies for the crime after the fact.
The hijacked flights on 9-11 were the very first flights the planes had flown after being removed from service nine months earlier. It all makes sense. Plus, the Pentagon Comptroller, Dov Zakheim actually worked for a company that produced the very sort of remote control equipment that it would take to maneuver a commercial jetliner. Go figure.

would make sense to shot it when the passengers got control no way they could let the public no what really happened that day. Same reason why any investigation we have will most likely find nothing, because they will be paid off or black mailed. Secrets cant be buried, and if someone says the truth they are made to look like loons

[edit on 29-1-2010 by Pajjikor]

For those who say "move on" or "so what if it was shot down" and other like comments, saying those type of comments "OKs" the lie, it endorses the will to lie or to cover up. In short its a complacent & dismissive thinking like that in which encourages such behavior in the future. I have always said the flight was shot down. Can I prove it beyond a doubt? No, and I have said as much before. It is never OK to just move on when there are still so many doubts regarding this 911 story especially regarding the after effects & consequences many of which, removed some of our freedoms here in the U.S.

First Rumsfeld said it was shot down. Then everyone said "oh it was a slip". Then we have this video which does infer that an airline was shot down on 911. Now some say "it don't say that". Next we have the Canadian official stating that NORAD sent fighter jets to shot it down. Then people say his words were "twisted". It sounds like there are many people in denial of what happened and they have a hard time putting 2 & 2 together. Some will claim"circumstantial or indirect evidence" here but few know the definition of either:

Circumstantial evidence is a fact that can be used to infer another fact. Indirect evidence that implies something occurred but doesn't directly prove it; proof of one or more facts from which one can find another fact; proof of a chain of facts and circumstances indicating that the person is either guilty or not guilty.

I know this but some others do not and they need to understand where I'm coming from and stop making claims of "no evidence" only because they either do not know or misunderstand what they claiming about citing evidential statements, videos, documents etc regarding flight 93 and what I believe was a shooting down of that aircraft.

To say there is no room for my opinion or beliefs because it does not fit into what other people or groups claim is to me, not an issue at all. I do not base what I believe on what others are saying, claiming or the trend at the moment. I have always and will always believe this aircraft was shot out of the sky in haste or via some miscommunication. That does not excuse any cover up or flat out lying about it. For any reason. Period.

One last statement, there are more references & statements from officials and other people who were acting in an official capacity on 911 who have made statements as to shooting down flight 93. If anyone cannot understand what happened to this aircraft then that's their own oversight as far as I'm concerned. Their opinion is of course respected by me nevertheless.

Its not a matter of just saying what everyone else agrees with or what is popular. It isn't about going along with your buddy s beliefs. Its about the truth and that must remain at the top of everyone's list.

[edit on 29-1-2010 by mikelee]

Mike, I notice from another thread that you were appreciative of the work done by Shadowherder attempting to discredit the existence of a plane at the Shanksville crash site.

How can you simultaneously believe it was shot down but also entertain the idea that it might not be there at all? To me it looks suspiciously like you're just wandering up the aisle in the supermarket marked "Conspiracy Theories" and selecting stuff at random from the shelves.

reply to post by mikelee

Originally posted by mikelee
AWACS crew member says Flight 93 shot down

No he didn't.

What he did say was this:

"We would expect they might scramble fighters to intercept the aircraft and if necessary, as we saw from 911, possibly shoot down the aircraft.

I understand the urge to want to interpret this statement as the the 'evidence' you suggest, but the linguist in me just can't agree.

It is hardly clear.

I think the actual meaning of the soldier's statement was that 911 demonstrates the necessity to consider shooting down a potential threat.

My $0.02.

If lies like the one told to the world about this incident are commonplace, then the whole premise for what we do as a nation is flawed. All our patriotism is based on lies. All our sacrifice and service is a waste of time. We have made fools of our heroes and spat in the face of our forefathers. If our mistakes are never made public, we will be doomed to repeat them. Imagine if the passengers were communicating with a tower, telling them how they had regained control of the plane, just as a sidewinder kills them all.

reply to post by loam


With all of the pragmatics & semantics aside including any implicature of language context here speculating about what he ment or intended to say, we are still left with that nagging suggestive speak about flight 93 being shot down.

Thats the point here. Not what a linguist "thinks" or speculates about.

Originally posted by linux2216

What the crew member said was:

"we would expect that they might scramble fighters to intercept the aircraft; and, if necessary--as we saw from 9/11--possibly shoot down the aircraft."

Exactly right.

This statement REALLY debunks the whole shootdown fantasy, IMHO.

The military guys were open about their desire to shoot down 93 on 9/11. They testified as such before the 9/11 Commission. They make no bones about it, no hidig their desire to do so.

The AWACS guy confirms that this is now a policy, and will happen if the need arises again.

reply to post by mikelee


mike, oh mike oh mike!!!!

Reaching much???

Everyone, PLEASE, PLEASE watch the video again, and try NOT to interpret it with the same color glasses that (apparently) the OP used...

I saw it from about 1:20 to 1:35

I hear something VERY different than the OP....

Originally posted by linux2216
This video does NOT show an AWACS crew member stating that "Flight 93 was shot down." It does not even imply such a thing transpired.

Wait...a Truther misrepresenting a video to further their skewed perspective of events? Say it ain't SO!

I'm crushed. You'd think the Truther club doesn't have any real evidence of things so they have to make up stuff and misrepresent existing videos or something. Why would they do that? Perhaps they don't have the power of their own convictions? Perhaps they don't really believe their own BS and as such have to make up stuff or misrepresent existing videos or information?

Heh.