posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 08:45 AM
reply to post by 007Polytoks
What are you talking about? How do you know what "story" I support?
Given that in my post above I write that I consider it a possibility that the plane was shot down I'm not sure where you're getting your information
What I do object to is the kind of lazy reasoning that allows people to swear blind that there's no way there could have been any crash, and then
claim that the discovery of a crash - albeit by shoot down - is in some way a victory for their version of events. If your "story" is so easily
altered perhaps you should be less insistent about the strength of your evidence.
edit on 1-2-2011 by TrickoftheShade because: (no reason