Flight 93 Never Crashed In The Empty Field Outside Shanksville

[Liability]

there are wittiness reports of a fighter plane passing over seconds after the crash it would be safe to assume it was a U.S fighter..

I wonder if there were any witnesses to that?

I don't think id-eotic Troofer claims are all that funny, frankly.

 

[DiveCon]

there are wittiness reports of a fighter plane passing over seconds after the crash ..if correct it would be safe to assume it was a U.S fighter..

and you lie
there were NO reports of a "fighter"
it was a PRIVATE jet that was asked to check for flight 93 by the air traffic controllers

 

[Tom Clancy]

there are wittiness reports of a fighter plane passing over seconds after the crash ..if correct it would be safe to assume it was a U.S fighter..

Then, where is that US Fighter? Where are the Reports and witnesses seeing the Jet leaving the Base?

Where's the Pilot? Wouldn't he have said something.. Why would he shoot down a Plane full of Innocent people?

 

[eots]

there are wittiness reports of a fighter plane passing over seconds after the crash ..if correct it would be safe to assume it was a U.S fighter..

Then, where is that US Fighter? Where are the Reports and witnesses seeing the Jet leaving the Base?

Where's the Pilot? Wouldn't he have said something.. Why would he shoot down a Plane full of Innocent people?

the shoot down order was given that is not in dispute..the reasons for allowing the pilots to remain anonymous seems apparent ..as well as th propaganda effect of going with the more heroic story.. .AKA Jessica lynch

 

[Liability]

there are wittiness reports of a fighter plane passing over seconds after the crash ..if correct it would be safe to assume it was a U.S fighter..

and you lie
there were NO reports of a "fighter"
it was a PRIVATE jet that was asked to check for flight 93 by the air traffic controllers

OMG!

The implications are STAGGERING!

That would mean that id-eots is again proven to be a filthy fucking outright deliberate lying sack of shit.

 

[DiveCon]

there are wittiness reports of a fighter plane passing over seconds after the crash ..if correct it would be safe to assume it was a U.S fighter..

Then, where is that US Fighter? Where are the Reports and witnesses seeing the Jet leaving the Base?

Where's the Pilot? Wouldn't he have said something.. Why would he shoot down a Plane full of Innocent people?

the shoot down order was given that is not in dispute..the reasons for allowing the pilots to remain anonymous seems apparent ..as well as th propaganda effect of going with the more heroic story.. .AKA Jessica lynch

yes, there was a shoot down order, but there wasnt a fighter jet in the area

 

[Tom Clancy]

there are wittiness reports of a fighter plane passing over seconds after the crash ..if correct it would be safe to assume it was a U.S fighter..

Then, where is that US Fighter? Where are the Reports and witnesses seeing the Jet leaving the Base?

Where's the Pilot? Wouldn't he have said something.. Why would he shoot down a Plane full of Innocent people?

the shoot down order was given that is not in dispute..the reasons for allowing the pilots to remain anonymous seems apparent ..as well as th propaganda effect of going with the more heroic story.. .AKA Jessica lynch

Question... Why would the Pilot keep his silence? Wouldn't he be labeled as a Hero to you guys for actually telling the 'So Called truth?'

Who gave the order? When and Where?

there has to be more than 2 witnesses.

You still haven't answered what about the witness seeing the Jet leave?

Any reports about a Fighter Jet flying near the Hijacked plane?

Who are these Witnesses who you said saw the Jet?

 

[Liability]

Then, where is that US Fighter? Where are the Reports and witnesses seeing the Jet leaving the Base?

Where's the Pilot? Wouldn't he have said something.. Why would he shoot down a Plane full of Innocent people?

the shoot down order was given that is not in dispute..the reasons for allowing the pilots to remain anonymous seems apparent ..as well as th propaganda effect of going with the more heroic story.. .AKA Jessica lynch

yes, there was a shoot down order, but there wasnt a fighter jet in the area

NOR, of course, was there any urgent need that would justify shooting down a passenger jet flying (still, at that point) over remote parts of Pennsylvania. So not only was there (A) a passenger jet asked to see what was going on with Flight 93, that passenger jet DID make the effort to comply with the request, so we know it was a passenger jet in the area and; (B) there is no reason to believe that any military fighter was anywhere near Flight 93 at that point.

Id-eots is blowing his usual fare of dishonest shit out of his ass again.

 

[Fizz]

maybe i am getting my flights mixed up here but wasnt the planes sent to intercept flight 93 UNARMED? the plane would have had to basically ram the plane in order to force it down.

not that it mattered because the plane had already crashed well before the fighters would have arrived. the plane that did fly over was a lear jet type aircraft.

personally, i think people would have felt more comforted if they knew the government was able to intercept the plane and shoot it down and possibly save thousands of lives. i dont see any reason to lie about it.

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBUGWOpuRig&feature=related]YouTube - flight 93 crash - was it shot down - witnesses say yes![/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWcdSyyppHI]YouTube - Flight 93 Eyewitness Sees A Second Plane, Says Flight 93 Was Shot Down[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JH4LnIsueWU&feature=related]YouTube - Eyewitness at Shanksville says a small plane flew over moments prior[/ame]

 

[Tom Clancy]

Ahh.. Youtube Videos.

But no reports or any of that sort.

Because Youtube videos are so trustworthy.

 

[eots]

maybe i am getting my flights mixed up here but wasnt the planes sent to intercept flight 93 UNARMED? the plane would have had to basically ram the plane in order to force it down.

not that it mattered because the plane had already crashed well before the fighters would have arrived. the plane that did fly over was a lear jet type aircraft.

personally, i think people would have felt more comforted if they knew the government was able to intercept the plane and shoot it down and possibly save thousands of lives. i dont see any reason to lie about it.

the official story was they were armed and on there way....and who flew this Lear jet ?

 

[DiveCon]

YouTube - flight 93 crash - was it shot down - witnesses say yes!


YouTube - Flight 93 Eyewitness Sees A Second Plane, Says Flight 93 Was Shot Down

YouTube - Eyewitness at Shanksville says a small plane flew over moments prior

the first two videos the people were INSIDE buildings when it crashed
so tey are lying to claim it was shot down
the last one the lady doesnt even know what a 757 looks like and to claim it would have "blown her off the road" proves that

 

[DiveCon]

maybe i am getting my flights mixed up here but wasnt the planes sent to intercept flight 93 UNARMED? the plane would have had to basically ram the plane in order to force it down.

not that it mattered because the plane had already crashed well before the fighters would have arrived. the plane that did fly over was a lear jet type aircraft.

personally, i think people would have felt more comforted if they knew the government was able to intercept the plane and shoot it down and possibly save thousands of lives. i dont see any reason to lie about it.

the official story was they were armed and on there way....and who flew this Lear jet ?

they had the pilot on one of the many debunking you assholes shows

 

[eots]

Ahh.. Youtube Videos.

But no reports or any of that sort.

Because Youtube videos are so trustworthy.

well yes in fact when it comes to interviews such as this they are verifiable and under much scrutiny by dedwunkers and reported in multipile sources and official records....so you are simply going into denial over well documented conflicting wittinesses testimony

 

[Tom Clancy]

Ahh.. Youtube Videos.

But no reports or any of that sort.

Because Youtube videos are so trustworthy.

well yes in fact when it comes to interviews such as this they are verifiable and under much scrutiny by dedwunkers and reported in multipile sources and official records....so you are simply going into denial over well documented conflicting wittinesses testimony

While Interviews could be source of reliable information most of the time it's people who didn't even see it with their own eyes.. Yes that means seeing a Fight Jet actually Firing off Missiles or Gatling Gun to shoot down Flight 93.


I can show you Youtube Videos proving how the Towers fell without Explosives. but that's just idiotic right? since it doesn't go with your story.

 

[Fizz]

maybe i am getting my flights mixed up here but wasnt the planes sent to intercept flight 93 UNARMED? the plane would have had to basically ram the plane in order to force it down.

not that it mattered because the plane had already crashed well before the fighters would have arrived. the plane that did fly over was a lear jet type aircraft.

personally, i think people would have felt more comforted if they knew the government was able to intercept the plane and shoot it down and possibly save thousands of lives. i dont see any reason to lie about it.

the official story was they were armed and on there way....and who flew this Lear jet ?

the pilot flew the business jet, i would imagine. you have evidence otherwise or something? it wasnt a lear jet but it was that type. i cant remember the name of the company that makes it. i think its a european company.

 

[eots]

Ahh.. Youtube Videos.

But no reports or any of that sort.

Because Youtube videos are so trustworthy.

well yes in fact when it comes to interviews such as this they are verifiable and under much scrutiny by dedwunkers and reported in multipile sources and official records....so you are simply going into denial over well documented conflicting wittinesses testimony

While Interviews could be source of reliable information most of the time it's people who didn't even see it with their own eyes.. Yes that means seeing a Fight Jet actually Firing off Missiles or Gatling Gun to shoot down Flight 93.


I can show you Youtube Videos proving how the Towers fell without Explosives. but that's just idiotic right? since it doesn't go with your story.

no it is Idiotic because the lead investigator for the first 7 years of the investigation quit and said this

Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way,”

Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations” at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”
“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.



NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.


Dr. Quintiere said he originally “had high hopes” that NIST would do a good job with the investigation. “They’re the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job. But what I also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire. And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information. What prevented all of this? I think it’s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST. And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything.”

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

 

[Fizz]

Ahh.. Youtube Videos.

But no reports or any of that sort.

Because Youtube videos are so trustworthy.

well yes in fact when it comes to interviews such as this they are verifiable and under much scrutiny by dedwunkers and reported in multipile sources and official records....so you are simply going into denial over well documented conflicting wittinesses testimony

anyone see the plane get shot at? a missile? any evidence of it being shot down at all?

i didnt think so.

so some people saw a plane in the sky? how odd.

 

[DiveCon]

Ahh.. Youtube Videos.

But no reports or any of that sort.

Because Youtube videos are so trustworthy.

well yes in fact when it comes to interviews such as this they are verifiable and under much scrutiny by dedwunkers and reported in multipile sources and official records....so you are simply going into denial over well documented conflicting wittinesses testimony

anyone see the plane get shot at? a missile? any evidence of it being shot down at all?

i didnt think so.

so some people saw a plane in the sky? how odd.

White plane -Debunk 9/11 Myths