THA
im a fucking .....well not now
+609|6199|AUS, Canberra
thats a major fuck up. if it got shot down or not, its a huge fuck up either way. but it was said along time ago so im sure shit would have hit the fan by now.
Ryker
Member
+13|5933
I heard about this to. I can believe that the US would shoot down their own plane if it was going to save lives. Its pointless if they were going to let it crash into The Pentagon (i think thats where it was going) and kill more people if it could be shot down and save people's lives.

I also can believe that passengers would decide to die fighting and not just dying helplessly. I rekon Donald Rumsfeld accidentally said the truth, I more believe it was shot down than passengers attacked the terrorists.
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6130|New York
If that plane was SHOT DOWN, There would have been more Pieces than what was found. That plane hit the ground fully fuel'd doing over 700mph, it decintigrated on impact. IF it were shot down there would be Many more parts strewn around the field and woods. It hit so hard and fast that the Ignited fuel destroyed everything. If shot down, there would have been Many pieces of it, there were so many witnesses around the crash site, the govt couldnt possibly cover it up.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6080|USA

Spearhead wrote:

Don't really mind that if they shot it down, but if they did, why cover it up?  There's no real reason for covering up a shoot down, especially one which was part of the 9/11 plot
I agree with you, Spearhead.
Coolbeano
Level 13.5 BF2S Ninja Penguin Sensei
+378|6192

puckmercury wrote:

Last2Stand wrote:

Well, if they did shoot it down, I wouldnt be surprised. Bothered, yes. Surprised, no.
I'm not sure I'd be bothered.  It would be unfortunatel, but when weighed against the likely alternative, I would do the same.  I'm not saying it DID happen, but if it did I would certainly support it.  The choice was 150 dead or thousands dead.  What call would you make?  "Let God sort it out?"  "Not our place to play God?"  He helps those who help themselves.
Nah, they'd send a planefull of Delta Force to zipline through into Flight 93 and take out the terrorists onboard, with the help of a veteran passenger and an unlucky flight stewardess.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|5958|Global Command
The engine was found 1.5 iles from the crash. No brains required to ascertain that it came off in the air, probably with rocket fire.
So what?
I expect our government to shoot down a plane being used as a weapon, even if I was on board it.
[email protected]
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|5978|Southeastern USA
hmmm.....didn't know that, but then the plane did a barrel roll before impact too didn't it? 757's are not known for their aerobatic skills, maybe it came off due to structural stresses, just conjecture, haven't read up too much on 93.
Marconius
One-eyed Wonder Mod
+368|6123|San Francisco
Well, they already made a movie out of it...
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6111|Canada

[email protected] wrote:

Chuck Norris was alarmed over the first 3 plane strikes, so he flew to PA, pointed his finger at the plane, and yelled "BANG", and it was destroyed.
first he tasted the dirt to see where the plane was going, walker texas ranger style
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6111|Canada

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

If that plane was SHOT DOWN, There would have been more Pieces than what was found. That plane hit the ground fully fuel'd doing over 700mph, it decintigrated on impact. IF it were shot down there would be Many more parts strewn around the field and woods. It hit so hard and fast that the Ignited fuel destroyed everything. If shot down, there would have been Many pieces of it, there were so many witnesses around the crash site, the govt couldnt possibly cover it up.
and that would be the first time that ever happened.  Boeing has done plenty of tests showing that is more than impossible.  BTW engine parts always survive because they are made of alloys hot enough to BURN JET FUEL inside them.  Also.  If the plane was shot down it would have been at around 20000 feet which was the alleged altitude of flight 93.  I thought it was pertinent that only RECENTLY, did American Airlines ANNOUNCE that they JUST put in technology on their planes to handle cellphone calls at altitude.  This was not possible at the time of 9/11.  The calls could not have come from flight 93, unless via satellite phones, which there were none.

The lockerby bombing claimed 2 747s loaded with passengers.  There was a fireball, and plenty of evidence.  When somethnig hits the ground at 500+ mph, bits don't go everywhere in the woods.  They go underground.  Nothing was found under 5 feet of soil at flight 93, soil which had been undisturbed by jet fuels.  Explain that?

the identification tag for the flight 93 plane is still in use, still in flight, and is also of the same type.  Somehow AA forgot to retire that ID in respect to what happened?  Either that or it's the same plane, and it was never shot down, but landed in Cleveland, where hundreds of witnesses watched a plane land well after the no fly orders were given?  How many planes were airborne at the time?  Which other plane could it have been?

BTW when you shoot down a plane at 20000 feet, all you get at ground level is VERY WIDELY dispersed wreck, and very little impact zone.  If it was shot down, then the crash site was made by hand.

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-07-08 12:23:06)

Zephyr8965
Member
+1|5932
I got it!  The terrorists covered it up!  They made it look like we shot it down to crumble our society!!  Those clever little bastards!  We must smite them!  Who's with me!?  Oh yeah, we already smited them with war......

Woot for soldiers with big guns!!
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6111|Canada
wow neg karma is gone...  Sweet
Havazn
Member
+39|6122|van.ca

Spumantiii wrote:

wow neg karma is gone...  Sweet
Well look at that, I went from 9 to 28.

Spumantiii, i didn't know about those details regarding 93. Any links you could post for me to read up on?
T0rr3nt
Member
+54|6006|Michigan

tvmissleman wrote:

hmmmm an American plane shot down over Americian soil?........ yeah right
it was you, with your tv missles!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,998|6200|USA

oug wrote:

Forget the videos on loosechange and the like, those might have been tampered with by anyone. (Not my opinion but anyhow...)

The real question is why the US Government refuses to go public with the information they have. For example, there are videos of that plane crashing into the Pentagon which they refuse - for NO good reason - to show. Same goes for that passenger plane that was shot down. No videos, no pictures, nothing! Its not like any important information about the "terrorists" (or whatever) is gonna be revealed by showing us pictures of debris from the plane crash...
Especially that plane on the Pentagon... Is it possible there is no footage of it crashing?? Its the Pentagon we're talking about remember??

go ahead and give me -karma but state your name and opinion you  ("asshat" I know who you are u ignorant pussy)
I thought the Pentagon already released those videos.
Marconius
One-eyed Wonder Mod
+368|6123|San Francisco
The Pentagon only released a few more frames of the video, each of which showed no more than the original few frames.  I even got them all together and made a nice graphic detailing it all in the thread about the Pentagon coverup (when the video was actually released...just go back a few pages and you'll see it).


They still have not made the confiscated videos from the Hotel or Gas Station public, which probably show a hell of a lot more than the "lens flare covered" video...

I think with the amount of info that both the Pop-Sci write-up and the Loose Change documentary bring to the table for both sides, Rummy's slip up here just makes him look worse.
.:ronin:.|Patton
Respekct dad i love u always
+946|6238|Marathon, Florida Keys

spastic bullet wrote:

Chuck Norris does not get "alarmed".  He can wipe out galaxies without even going to DEFCON 4.
have we ever been in DEFCON 4?
https://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g117/patton1337/stats.jpg
MorbidFetus
Member
+76|5980|Ohio

Spearhead wrote:

SGT_Squirtle wrote:

the only reason to cover it up would be if it was shot down by US planes
But that makes no sense.  Bush was criticized for NOT shooting down the other planes.  Therefore, they would probably not cover it up.  That's why I think it's a slip of the tongue
Like MacNamara said, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't, and he'd rather not.

It's best to play it safe and concoct a story that will elevate some of the victims to hero status and get the partiotic bandwagon going.

*Imagine if he did say they shot it down. I bet you'd see more than an anthrax mail scare directed at the govt.

.:ronin:.|Patton wrote:

spastic bullet wrote:

Chuck Norris does not get "alarmed".  He can wipe out galaxies without even going to DEFCON 4.
have we ever been in DEFCON 4?
Throughout most of the Cold War. BTW, DEFCON 1 is the "oh shit" level. 5 is peacetime.

Last edited by MorbidFetus (2006-07-08 17:07:14)

splixx
ChupaCABRA
+53|6168|Omaha, Nebraska
You are all very sleepy....sleepy...go back to sleep.
MorbidFetus
Member
+76|5980|Ohio

splixx wrote:

You are all very sleepy....sleepy...go back to sleep.
*zzz...free ipod...zzz*
Ziggy_79x
Member
+4|6114
This is another example of how you can only lie for so long before you screw up and the truth slips out. Just like how Bush said he watched the first plane hit the WTC while he was outside the classroom on 9/11, when the video of the first plane hitting didn't come out until the next day AND the asshole was in his presidential limo on the way to the school when it hit. I'll acknowledge the fact that these people talk to a lot of people everyday and the possibility of a slip up is considerable, but I don't think this is the case here.

Lying bastard!
spastic bullet
would like to know if you are on crack
+77|5969|vancouver

MorbidFetus wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

SGT_Squirtle wrote:

the only reason to cover it up would be if it was shot down by US planes
But that makes no sense.  Bush was criticized for NOT shooting down the other planes.  Therefore, they would probably not cover it up.  That's why I think it's a slip of the tongue
Like MacNamara said, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't, and he'd rather not.

It's best to play it safe and concoct a story that will elevate some of the victims to hero status and get the partiotic bandwagon going.

*Imagine if he did say they shot it down. I bet you'd see more than an anthrax mail scare directed at the govt.
QFmf'ingE.

If you are reading this, you owe it to yourself to watch The Fog of War.  Whatever your views; whether you find yourself shaking your head at my posts more often than not; rent, buy or steal this movie.  You can thank me later.

MorbidFetus wrote:

.:ronin:.|Patton wrote:

spastic bullet wrote:

Chuck Norris does not get "alarmed".  He can wipe out galaxies without even going to DEFCON 4.
have we ever been in DEFCON 4?
Throughout most of the Cold War. BTW, DEFCON 1 is the "oh shit" level. 5 is peacetime.
Yeah, I coulda been clearer, I guess.  I just meant to convey the awesome destructive power Chuck can unleash with a mere furrowing of his brow, while still exuding a zen-like calm of DEFCON 5itude.
[email protected]
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|5978|Southeastern USA

Spumantiii wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

If that plane was SHOT DOWN, There would have been more Pieces than what was found. That plane hit the ground fully fuel'd doing over 700mph, it decintigrated on impact. IF it were shot down there would be Many more parts strewn around the field and woods. It hit so hard and fast that the Ignited fuel destroyed everything. If shot down, there would have been Many pieces of it, there were so many witnesses around the crash site, the govt couldnt possibly cover it up.
and that would be the first time that ever happened.  Boeing has done plenty of tests showing that is more than impossible.  BTW engine parts always survive because they are made of alloys hot enough to BURN JET FUEL inside them.  Also.  If the plane was shot down it would have been at around 20000 feet which was the alleged altitude of flight 93.  I thought it was pertinent that only RECENTLY, did American Airlines ANNOUNCE that they JUST put in technology on their planes to handle cellphone calls at altitude.  This was not possible at the time of 9/11.  The calls could not have come from flight 93, unless via satellite phones, which there were none.

The lockerby bombing claimed 2 747s loaded with passengers.  There was a fireball, and plenty of evidence.  When somethnig hits the ground at 500+ mph, bits don't go everywhere in the woods.  They go underground.  Nothing was found under 5 feet of soil at flight 93, soil which had been undisturbed by jet fuels.  Explain that?

the identification tag for the flight 93 plane is still in use, still in flight, and is also of the same type.  Somehow AA forgot to retire that ID in respect to what happened?  Either that or it's the same plane, and it was never shot down, but landed in Cleveland, where hundreds of witnesses watched a plane land well after the no fly orders were given?  How many planes were airborne at the time?  Which other plane could it have been?

BTW when you shoot down a plane at 20000 feet, all you get at ground level is VERY WIDELY dispersed wreck, and very little impact zone.  If it was shot down, then the crash site was made by hand.
if the plane was in a covered area, cell phones can work, EM transmissions go in every direction, many planes have onboard phone systems, I remember seeing them in the 90's, and you don't know what angle the plane struck the ground at, the base I work at saw a B-52 with a belly full of nukes land with no gear, and the state of georgia is still on the map, and tell me, how many planes were in the air once the no fly order was issued? How long do you think it takes to re-route the destinations of an entire coast's worth of flights, especially considering that the world's busiest airport is on the east coast?
MorbidFetus
Member
+76|5980|Ohio

[email protected] wrote:

and you don't know what angle the plane struck the ground at, the base I work at saw a B-52 with a belly full of nukes land with no gear, and the state of georgia is still on the map
Apparantly it hit at a 45 degree angle and around 580mph. That B-52 most likely came in horizontally at less than 200mph in a semi-controlled landing. Nukes have failsafes which prevent them from accidentally going off. Here's some links I was just browding through...

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.htm
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/k/ … 091305.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/910643/posts
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight93.html
PuckMercury
6 x 9 = 42
+298|5956|Portland, OR USA
agreed, nukes aren't impact detonated but have a rather complex fuse and ignition system.  Even when they are properly deployed, they don't go off at zero altitude, but some hundreds of feet in the air.  It creates more destruction that way, otherwise much of the explosive force goes into the ground and is wasted.

As for parts being strewn about if it were shot down, engine aside, that really depends on how the missle impacted the aircraft, the size of the missle, and blah blah blah.  It's quite possible that it just hit the engine (heat seeking) and knocked it clean off which would leave the rest of the plane largely intact.  This is all assuming that it WAS in fact shot down, which I frankly believe it was.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2022 Jeff Minard