Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

A 9/11 smoking gun

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 01:06 PM
link   
The tail number of Flight UA 93, which was supposed to have crashed in Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001, is 591UA. (as reference, see the beginning of the second paragraph under the header "Background" at:

en.wikipedia.org...

Frequent United Airlines user Mr Friedman kept a log of all the flights he flew on during 2003, including details about their crews and the tail number (N-number) of the planes. He recorded that on April 10, 2003, he flew on a United Airline Boeing 757 with tail/N-number N591UA. See his flight log at:

friedmanfamily.org...

and look under the date column 04/10/03 for the row named "Tail" (the tail number).

Moreover, he correctly lists as a Boeing 757 the type of plane he flew on that day with the same tail number as Flight 93 . Given that, according to his log, he flew on nine different types of planes between 01/02/03 and 04/10/03, the chance of him flying on a Boeing 757 on April 10 is about 10%.
If the story told by the American Government is true, how could a traveller record flying on a plane with the same tail number as that which crashed 17 months earlier? The FAA does not assign the tail numbers of crashed planes to other planes. Either:
1. Friedman's log is a subtle joke to fool 9/11 conspiracy investigators for whom he has no time. If that is the case, 'subtle' is the word, for there would be few such investigators, let alone other people, who would recognise the tail number of Flight UA93 if they read it, whilst the log is a single, obscure webpage and not part of a personal website, so he is not exactly trying very hard to advertise his hoax!;
2. he accidently made a false entry that coincided with BOTH the type of plane that was supposed to have crashed on 9/11 AND with its 3-figure tail number. But what are the chances of that?!;
3. Flight 93 did not crash into a field in Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001 and United Airlines was still using this plane in April, 2003.

You decide.




posted on Nov, 21 2004 @ 09:59 PM
link   
If this is one big conspiracy then this would be the equivalent of a murderer leaving his business card at the scene of the crime. Why would those who have perpetrated one of the biggest crimes in history slip up on something so obvious? This sounds like one of those fabricated stories that have popped up, sadly so many times, since 9-11. Then, again, if the conspiracy is true then this could be a monumental mistake by those involved. In my opinion there would be to many parties involved with the caretaking of these planes for the conspirators to take such a risk. I believe that these planes would have been destroyed or extremly altered, if not on 9-11 then at some time soon after.



posted on Nov, 22 2004 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by skychief
If this is one big conspiracy then this would be the equivalent of a murderer leaving his business card at the scene of the crime. Why would those who have perpetrated one of the biggest crimes in history slip up on something so obvious?


This happens everytime, I read a post, form a response and someone already beat me to it. Well I have to agree with skychief. This is a government conspiracy, not a candy store robbery. It seems like if you are going to pull off the biggest crime in history, you wouldnt leave a trace. And what you mention is huge hole in the 'official' story.





 
0

log in

join