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.

 

VIDEO: Gunshots Fired In Immediate Aftermath Of Polish Plane Crash

page: 7
71
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by wordtothewise
 


But what if, what if.

You were a cop.

And you saw a plane crash. You grab your phone and call for help, but it will take them 10 + minutes to arrive...

And you went over there right away, and got to the scene within 5minutes.

And you saw these random people coming up into your huge crash site.

What you gonna do? Let them tamper with stuff? Cause trouble?

Or you gonna grab your AK74, point it into the sky. Star screaming at them, and fire a shot or two.

Just to let them know, to get away.

Look if you don't keep this crash site clean, its YOUR rear bud. If your a cop your the authority here.

Protocols gotta be follow. Gotta do this by the book.

You fire warning shots.

Secure a perimeter 101.

To suggest this was executions well, show me some skulls with bullet holes. Then we can talk conspiracy.

Then again if there are skulls with bullet holes in them. We are in some deep deep crap.


[edit on 15-4-2010 by muzzleflash]




posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   
One other note. Seed bank is near Iceland. Private army offered to lease
Iceland empty military base. Remember the story. The worlds crops storedin case of disaster and a private army with a 15 billion plus bankroll.

Do you not see the connected dots.

Ok class tie the rest together yourselves with the last post.
May we also remind you. Noahs puported Ark and Turkey. The earth makes dramatic changes at times. It will soon again and it's started already. From low to simmer then simmer to........



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:37 PM
link   
I didnt watch the video but it seems obvious... there is fire and im sure the president had at least one armed guard on that plane. Maybe some bullets were in the fire?



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by wordtothewise
 


But what if, what if.

You were a cop.

And you saw a plane crash. You grab your phone and call for help, but it will take them 10 + minutes to arrive...

And you went over there right away, and got to the scene within 5minutes.

And you saw these random people coming up into your huge crash site.

What you gonna do? Let them tamper with stuff? Cause trouble?

Or you gonna grab your AK74, point it into the sky. Star screaming at them, and fire a shot or two.

Just to let them know, to get away.

Look if you don't keep this crash site clean, its YOUR rear bud. If your a cop your the authority here.

Protocols gotta be follow. Gotta do this by the book.

You fire warning shots.

Secure a perimeter 101.

To suggest this was executions well, show me some skulls with bullet holes. Then we can talk conspiracy.

Then again if there are skulls with bullet holes in them. We are in some deep deep crap.


[edit on 15-4-2010 by muzzleflash]

I would probably walk over to them and tell them to leave the area, not recklessly fire a gun into the air.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:15 PM
link   
Its execution shots to be exact. Close range, most likely point blank to the head or heart. 4 shots... More than likely 4 survivors originally, now none remain to tell their truthful story...

I wonder if anyone was really on that plane...


Shots roughly at 0:58, 1:07, 1:13, 1:16.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Britguy
 


That's exactly what I was considering. There is no doubt in my mind that those were in fact gunshots, but whether or not someone fired the weapon or if the bullets went off due to the heat of the fire in the plane; nobody knows.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   
"I will go on Sibir" .. looked that word up.

Sibir is a Russian type Youtube
www.markosweb.com...

So he was like "I gotta get this on the web asap!"



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   
During the Clinton administration, his Secretary of Commerce, Ron Brown, got into a lot of trouble. I won't go into detail about this except that he was in financial and political trouble with some very powerful groups.

A trip to Croatia ended in disaster when the plane carrying him and other important American officials crashed into a hillside, off course, from a landing approach to Dubrovnik airport. His body was later recovered from the wreckage. It had a bullet hole in the head. There are web pages that discuss this and the intrigues that led up to it in detail.

How the plane crashed is very interesting. It might be relevant to the incident being discussed in this thread. When I heard about the shots fired at the crash site, I thought of the Ron Brown incident.

(Apologies for the somewhat long quote, but it seemed to be the briefest statement that covered the facts of the matter.)

www.aim.org...


When the Air Force plane carrying Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown crashed in Croatia in April 1996, rumors immediately circulated that the beacon that was supposed to guide the plane to the airport had been set to guide the plane into the mountain nearby. This was allegedly done by an employee at the airport who was found shot to death three days later. His death was declared a suicide. When it became known that the beacon at the airport had a fixed setting that could not be changed, the story changed. It was said that a portable beacon had been set up on the mountain to lure the plane off course. At the time, we were skeptical of this story, which was widely circulated by a publication called Wall Street Underground. It seemed to us to be a concoction based on imagination, not on factual evidence. However, thanks to the persistent efforts of Hugh Sprunt, a Texas tax expert and part-time investigator of political crimes, we now have evidence supporting the rumor that the plane carrying Ron Brown was deliberately guided to crash into the mountain. Hugh Sprunt, who has studied all the investigative reports of the Brown plane crash, has discovered in an official Air Force report on the crash detailed data showing the plane’s course based on AWACS airborne radar. The radar shows that when the plane was within four minutes of touching down at Dubrovnik, it suddenly changed course radically. It turned to the left almost 90 degrees. A few seconds later, it made a U turn back to the right. It then fixed on a course with a heading of 110 degrees, which it followed for over a minute, ending with the plane crashing into the mountain, nearly two miles off course. The Air Force jet, carrying the Secretary of Commerce and 14 business executives who were accompanying Brown on a trade mission, crashed into a mountain, killing all aboard. The pilots, who were making an instrument landing through a low cloud cover and a light rain, obviously thought they were being guided to a safe landing by a beacon at the Dubrovnik airport. But that beacon would have put them on a course with a heading of 119 degrees, 9 degrees farther to the right than the course they followed. Maj. General Charles Coolidge, who headed the Air Force investigation of the accident, won’t explain why his report failed to mention the radical course correction by the plane that sent it into the mountain. He told Hugh Sprunt that his technical advisers said this was an anomaly of no significance, but he has not answered Sprunt’s request for an explanation of that judgment. Maj. General Coolidge knows that when pilots are landing they don’t make radical changes in their course without a very good reason. It appears clear that when Brown’s plane tuned in to the beacon at Dubrovnik, the instruments told them they were off course and would have to make a quick correction. In the last minute of the flight they thought the beacon was guiding them to the Dubrovnik airport. They didn’t know that it was guiding them to their deaths.


[edit on 15-4-2010 by ipsedixit]



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   
They are not bullets going off in the flame. If that was the case you would hear bullets in rapid succession, like firecrackers, one after the other.

Unless you think that everyone only had one bullet in the clip? You throw a full clip into the fire, they are all going to go off.

At the same time, they are not warning caps on the tracks. Warning caps are meant to be WARNINGS before the train goes by.

What good is it warning people with caps after the train has already gone? Come on, use some common sense.

[edit on 15-4-2010 by Rukas]



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by yzzyUK
Is that LAUGHTER at 1:20 after the 'gun' shot?



My guess is that something popped in the plane from the fire and it scared the guys that were close to the crash. They both probably jumped then laughed at eachother.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 10:59 PM
link   
I know Russian, and can I just say anyone who says that anyone on that video is crying for their life is a complete idiot.

What is actually said in that phrase around 1:00, after the other guy says get out of here, is "Veeberitesc Atsuda!", which means again "lets get out of here" or simply "get out of here".

There is no "nas" (i.e us) ANYWHERE around 1:00, I also cannot hear the word "kill" ANYWHERE. You are all full of !@#$.

They are basically yelling go away and get back continuously, the only thing I can't make out is the thing said at the very end, it's not said very clearly or something. Sounds a bit like "move away from those", but I'm not the slightest bit sure.

There were clearly several civilian witnesses there, and clearly none of them were very scared (ie. being shot at). The guy with the camera probably moved away because whatever authorities were there were telling everyone to do so.

The bangs could be anything, including warning shots to scare people away. The last thing you want is civilians contaminating a presidential plane crash.


I also fail to see the point of shooting any survivors of the plane. It would be impossible to explain the bullet wounds, and I...just don't see why. Everything that went on in the plane is known through the black boxes.



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 11:31 PM
link   
You can clearly see a person in a trench coat point his hand at something.

After all, I heard that the medical examination has to be carried out first hand in Russia before the bodies are flown back. Therefore, this would give the culprits enough time to chop the body parts, like, limbs, arms, legs, etc, in order to conceal any penetration marks from the bullet wounds.

[edit on 4/15/2010 by krystalice]



posted on Apr, 15 2010 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Manincloak
I also fail to see the point of shooting any survivors of the plane. It would be impossible to explain the bullet wounds, and I...just don't see why. Everything that went on in the plane is known through the black boxes.


In the normal course of things in a world where due process is a rule without exceptions, you are right. We don't live in that world though.

What do you think would happen if the Polish President's body was discovered with a bullet hole right between his eyes? I think there well could be a press scandal, or it might be hushed up. Either one is quite within the realm of reason. The only thing I would definitely rule out is an international incident over it.

I think it is entirely possible that someone in Polish politics, colluding with the Russians, could have arranged for this plane crash.

My understanding is that this plane was directed to divert to Minsk and persisted in trying to land at Smolensk. Does that make sense? It certainly does have the superficial effect of making the Russians look innocent but it doesn't make much sense otherwise.

Maybe I just haven't seen enough information about this incident, but I wouldn't rule out skullduggery just yet. Presidential plane crashes are highly unusual for very good reasons.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by krystalice
After all, I heard that the medical examination has to be carried out first hand in Russia before the bodies are flown back. Therefore, this would give the culprits enough time to chop the body parts, like, limbs, arms, legs, etc, in order to conceal any penetration marks from the bullet wounds.


Conceal bullet wounds? Are you serious?

First of all, that is not possible. Second of all, Polish investigators were granted full access, therefore they will be present at all elements of this investigation. The implication is that it's not possible to do anything without them.


Originally posted by ipsedixit
My understanding is that this plane was directed to divert to Minsk and persisted in trying to land at Smolensk. Does that make sense? It certainly does have the superficial effect of making the Russians look innocent but it doesn't make much sense otherwise.


No - it makes perfect bloody sense.

The President (and everyone else there) were on their way to the commemoration of the 70th anniversary of the Katyn massacre. This was a very very very significant event, because for the first time ever Russia acknowledged the historical event, and invited the Polish leadership for a joint commemoration.

If the plane did not land, the President, and all the other political and military leaders on the plane would miss it - and the Polish President did not want to allow this to happen, due to the once in a lifetime chance to attend this event.

The Polish President is known for his attitude to air safety being second to politics. Back during the Russian-Georgian war, this very same president ordered his pilot to fly into the warzone and land the plane in Tiblisi.
The pilot refused and made the president *very* angry. It made the news because it was an unprecedented refusal of direct order (pilot was air force officer, president is armed forces' commander in chief).

The same thing happened this time, the President wanted to land right there, and pilot didn't want to repeat the situation (or was carefully chosen among pilots who wouldn't repeat the situation).


This is very very simple, and I cannot understand what you find so nonsensical about all this.

[edit on 16-4-2010 by Manincloak]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Simple maths, 1+1=2

If we want to know whether these people were executed, then one thing we need varified are the things being said in the background. Because if things like "don't kill us" and "give me a gun" were said before we hear suspecious sounds, we can concluded that :

cries for mercy + sounds similar to gunshots = execution

And we can debate all day about whether they were gunshots or not, but we can't debate the things that were being said. Although we do need a genuine translator and not a nutjob that just wants to sound clever. After we find the real deal, case closed.

Only thing I find strange, is that there are groups saying they heard them saying "give me a gun" and "please don't kill us" and groups saying this was not being said. Because if it's not true... why would you say that these things are being said???



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Goethe
Its execution shots to be exact. Close range, most likely point blank to the head or heart. 4 shots... More than likely 4 survivors originally, now none remain to tell their truthful story...

I wonder if anyone was really on that plane...


Shots roughly at 0:58, 1:07, 1:13, 1:16.





Which way is your ball bouncing ? First it's execution shots to kill the 4 remaining people who 'know' the truth, and then it's wondering if the plane had any people on it at all.

Any angle for a conspiracy !!




posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:40 AM
link   
OK - I have watched the vid now - and as i my polish / russian translation ability is near zero - it took me 2 attempts to order a dammed sandwitch in kiev
, i will pass on the voices - but the conflicting translations offered make me LOL

as for the alleged gunshots - i cannot ascertain what preciecley it is - thoufg i must admit the do sound like gun fire

but - if [B] IT WAS ME [/B] ordered to kill all survivors - i most certainly would not take a firearm

in no paricular order -

aditional lacerations in the area of major blood vessels - using peices of debris closest to each victim

using a syringe and hyperdermic needle to introduce an air embolism into a blood vessel - in the area of a existing wound

a single blow to the head with the nearest peice of luggage

there its that simple

shooting the victims ` excecution style ` is simply retarded



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 03:50 AM
link   
Hello, I uploaded the video in this thread.
www.youtube.com...

This is an excellent breakdown of the footage. I just linked to this thread in my description. Also, I will change the translation in the video if it can be verified. Any help with the translation is much appreciated. I am apprehensive about putting such serious and incriminating dialogue on the vid if I'm not 100% certain it's correct.

I am on page 3 of this thread so I haven't read the whole thing.

I will check back tomorrow, thanks for the great discussion.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 04:24 AM
link   
Recently became aware of this... when I first heard about the plane going down I too had strange thought go through my mind, but that's just the way I am.. anyway, a couple things on this:

1) Why was somebody out running around in the woods filming the plane crash right after it happened, instead of running up to the plane trying to help people?

2) Why is there another guy standing in front of the person filming the accident, just walking around acting like he's doing nothing?

3) Why is there a "train whistle / alarm" going off right after the accident

4) Why were so many Polish Government Officials aboard the same exact flight?

5) And of course, why were there gunshots - best argument I scanned thru about this one was the guy talking about how people on the plane probably had ammunition on them to protect the President, but I ask this.. wouldn't they be able to pick up weapons and ammo upon landing the plane?

Personally, too many questions going on for me, but then again I don't know what to think.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by highlyoriginal
 


Definitly hear gun shots in the clip. It would be interesting knowing how long after the actual plane crash the videographer appeared. Was this video shot just prior to the emergency vehicles appearing enmasse as in the utube video with people being led away from the scene? The train going by is key in setting a timeline when the shots were heard.



new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join