Kraken you don't understand how the government works. If the government admitted they shot a plane down - even if it was justifiable as I think it was here - it would have scared many people away from flying. People expect the government to protect them and, also, from a liability standpoint, if the government shot the plane down, you'd be looking a hundreds of millions of dollars in government liability.
-
Comment -
pretty compelling case for it having been shot down in the article above.... sounds like it had been hit by something launched at it; presumably the other mayhem near the cockpit was going down at the time it was blasted out of the sky.....
perfectly plausible....Comment -
Two planes had just taken out the twin towers, one hit the pentagon, and the 4th was probably headed for the Capitol and Americans couldn’t handle that 4th plane getting shot down? The pilots that shot it down would be lauded as heroes
There just isnt any evidence is was shot down, just typical conspiracy theory crap like an “8 mile debris field”
Sure, a tiny piece of paper was found 8 miles away, you got your 8 mile debris field. Plane was clearly shot down and blown to smitherines in the sky, yet all the bodies landed right next to each otherComment -
Lol, Kraken no one is saying its a conspiracy, IMO the government was justified in shooting down the plane. It might have even been negligent to not shoot the plane down at that point. But to say that Rumsfield saying on 3 occassions that the plane was shot down and debris 8 miles from the crash site are not suspicious is nonsense. The JAG officer clearly stated the plane was shot down in their opening statement at Massaui's trial as well.Comment -
There is no way that some of the things that they found at Indian Lake(not 8 miles away) managed to navigate their way through the trees unless they were already flying high above them.
As far as pilots shooting down the planes, it's easier to claim the passengers brought the plane down and hail them as heroes.
Like I said before, this isn't about it being "Blown to smithereens in the sky", it is about it being "Brought down"
If a witness that day claimed that he had seen "Fireballs" coming from the plane while it was in the air, what do you make of that?
IMO, if the Government didn't shoot it down, they would be suspect.Last edited by Kermit; 08-11-18, 01:36 AM.Comment -
It's not about that, it's about citizens coping with the United States shooting down a plane and killing it's own people. Yeah, I know it was the right thing to do, but I am also the same guy who thinks a cop shooting an armed suspect is the right thing to do. Not everyone in America shares my thoughts.Comment -
So there was an 8 mile debris field but the plane wasn’t blown to smitherenes, it was brought down in a controlled manner? Doesnt explain the 8 mile debris field
Also, sorry but eye witnesses are the worst. They have next to zero credibility. Some of its not their fault, they see what they think they’re supposed to see, or the misremember what they saw after they learned what happened. This is all very well documented by video cameras disproving eye witness accounts frequently. Plus, psychologists have proven to us time and time again that we don’t remember things well, like the invisible gorilla
It being shot down just doesnt add up. What does add up based on what we know is the plane was piloted in a nosedive straight towars earth at 600 mphComment -
Was there any plane debris from the World trade center buildings found miles away?
Serious question, as I don't even know the answer. There should be, right?Comment -
locals who witnessed the event suspect it was shot down.....
letters 8 miles away from the plane's mail load it was carrying to cali, and the fbi swearing people to secrecy, etc....
wow.... probably was shot down; covered up for a variety of reasons, some discussed in the articles above....Comment -
Same locals said they saw two missiles. Same locals say they saw two f-16’s flying very, very close.
All records show that by the time the plane had crashed, no fighter jets were even airborne to intercept it. They eventually launched two unarmed f-16’s after the plane crashedComment -
So now maybe it was a missile took the plane down, but the plane wasn’t blown to smithereens, the missile basically just wounded the plane to coax it down but it hit the plane hard enough to knock some debris into the lake
Then the peoples phones were apparently found and the government used them to call family members
Comment -
There were also multiple locals who saw fighter jets and were later told by the FBI to not discuss what they saw publically. Again, I don't see this as an conspiracy, the government does things all the time that cannot be disclosed publically. If the plane was shot down as the evidence indicates it was done because the government thought that was the best way to protect the public.Comment -
There is no credible explanation for why Donald Rumsfield would on 3 separate occassions claim the plane was shot down. The circumstantial evidence, where the debris was, no real evidence a plane even crashed in the field, clearly support the idea the plane was shot down. The story that a bunch of heroes stormed the cockpit with a beverage cockpit sounds like a lame plot in a horrible Hollywood movie.Comment -
I"m not going to dig up the links - but Rumsfield said the plane was shot down in front of congress, on meet the press, and in the speech to the troops.Comment -
i'm interested in the opening statement where the jag officer allegedly said it was shot down, and why this wasn't reported on, or if it was, where the hell is that reporting.....
certainly seems like it would have been newsworthy....
any source?Comment -
The only one I can find was him addressing the troops and its clear he misspoke
”...or the people that did the bombing in Spain, or the people that attacked the
United States and New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon”
So 1/3 its obvious wasn’t saying we shot down the plane over Pennsylvania, would love to hear the other twoComment -
I'm going to bed, lol, here's the link to the Naval officer who clearly said in the opening statement of a trial that the plane was shot down.
Here is the exact quote for the opening statement.
‘If they hadn’t shot down the fourth plane it would’ve hit the dome,’ Stone, a Navy officer, said in his opening remarks.”
Here's the link: http://911truth.org/flight-93-shot-d...-navy-officer/Comment -
There was an attempt to clean up the statement after the fact but I think its pretty clear what the lawyer said - and as an attorney myself I think there's no question the official explanation of this comment does not make sense - its pretty clear the lawyer is saying the government shot the plane down.Comment -
Kraken stop being such a simpleton
You probably believe building 7 collapsed at free fall speed from office furnishings falling on it and burning for a few hours too, right?
Fukkin 17 years later and we still have people reciting the commission report as gospel.Comment -
Morino not only a lawyer now he works for the ATF
Gto
FukkoComment -
The other 2 times Rumsfield talked about the plane being shot down 1) was on Meet the press and the 2) was in front of congress I think testifying for the 9-11 commissionComment
