Flight 93 - What really happened?

Im begging you people - Read the 9/11 Report before you jump to conclusions brought on by bad flash videos
 
Matt said:
Where are the passengers now? The island on Lost?

You're asking questions that only the true conspirators would have the answers to... :o
 
TheSumOfGod said:
The "official" explanation completely disregards any and all evidence that contradicts it, and it contains many physical impossibilities. You just don't like MY explanation because it puts the blame on your oh-so-wonderful Bush administration/military-industrial complex. :rolleyes:

And your explanation completely disregards any and all evidence that supports the official story. You don't like the official story because you NEED these conspiracy theories. I'm not sure if you believe them or simply WANT them to be true.
 
He does want them to be true.
He's ****ing insane.
 
Matt said:
Just out of curiousity Lazur...if it wasn't shot down, doesn't it concern you quite a bit that President Bush knowingly allowed flight 93 to fly under the control of terrorists for 50 minutes with no interception?

He was busy finishing that book he was "reading" (and by "reading", I mean looking at the pretty pictures).
 
Carter said:
He does want them to be true.
He's ****ing insane.

That's it. You're nothing more than a bloody insulting annoyance. Ignore...
 
I thought I was already on ignore.
But you'll read everything I say anyway


Everybody wave to TSOG!!
 
Carter said:
I thought I was already on ignore.
But you'll read everything I say anyway


Everybody wave to TSOG!!

You know Carter, TSOG did not disrespect you in anyway. I have no problem at all calling him out when he is acting like an ass...but right now, he isn't...but you sure as hell are.
 
Matt said:
And your explanation completely disregards any and all evidence that supports the official story. You don't like the official story because you NEED these conspiracy theories. I'm not sure if you believe them or simply WANT them to be true.

That's not true, merely false assumptions on your part. If my own personal research would have lead me to believe that the "official" explanation of the story was the truth, then I would simply have accepted it as being so. But no, there is an overwhelming amount of contradicting evidence, that clearly points in the direction of many conspiracy theories being more credible than that absolute bulls**t the American government has tried to make us swallow...
 
I'm sick of his insanity and holier than thou attitude

Edit
And constant "you're just afraid of the truth" comments

Just shut the hell up and actually educate yourself with real facts
 
Matt said:
You know Carter, TSOG did not disrespect you in anyway. I have no problem at all calling him out when he is acting like an ass...but right now, he isn't...but you sure as hell are.

Good to know that you can still defend me even though we are in complete disagreement on this and several other issues... :up:
 
Carter said:
I'm sick of his insanity and holier than thou attitude

To be perfectly fair TSOG has been trying to be more considerate of other people's opinion. Furthermore, you cannot preach about a holier than thou attitude with the way you are treating him.
 
TheSumOfGod said:
That's not true, merely false assumptions on your part. If my own personal research would have lead me to believe that the "official" explanation of the story was the truth, then I would simply have accepted it as being so. But no, there is an overwhelming amount of contradicting evidence, that clearly points in the direction of many conspiracy theories being more credible than that absolute bulls**t the American government has tried to make us swallow...


Not really. The arguements I've heard for the consperacy theories, while good, aren't completely compelling. The best one I've heard is the fact that jet fuel wouldn't burn hot enough to melt metal. This is true. But, it would burn hot enough to weaken the metal. And the jest fuel plus the fact that an 80 ton jet smashed into the building would probably have weakened the structre enough for it to colapse.
 
I can preach whatever I want.
The facts are there, but this assclown completely disregards them and acts like he knows more than everybody else
 
Matt said:
To be perfectly fair TSOG has been trying to be more considerate of other people's opinion. Furthermore, you cannot preach about a holier than thou attitude with the way you are treating him.

Very true. And if you want to see a perfect example of a "holier-than-thou" attitude, just check out ShadowBoxing, or mister "My opinion is more important than all of your opinions combined because I went to COLLEGE!", as I like to think of him. :rolleyes: :D
 
At least SB knows how to pick up an actual book
 
The Question said:
Not really. The arguements I've heard for the consperacy theories, while good, aren't completely compelling. The best one I've heard is the fact that jet fuel wouldn't burn hot enough to melt metal. This is true. But, it would burn hot enough to weaken the metal. And the jest fuel plus the fact that an 80 ton jet smashed into the building would probably have weakened the structre enough for it to colapse.

The reality of the matter is, every piece of evidence can be contradicted by another piece of evidence, every eyewitness testimony can be contradicted by another eyewitness testimony, every expert opinion can be contradicted by another expert opinion, and every report can be contradicted by another report, so it all comes down to what YOU, personally, consider to be more probable. I, for one, consider any information coming from the American government and the mainstream media to be most probably unreliable, for various reasons.
 
Carter said:
I can preach whatever I want.
The facts are there, but this assclown completely disregards them and acts like he knows more than everybody else

Quit being an insulting, condesending prick or I'm reporting you to Daisy. Argue all you want, calling him an assclown and idiot isn't necessary. Whatever TSOG believes and however much I may disagree with it, he is clearly an intelligent man.
 
Matt said:
However, he was speaking in context of an attack. It could entirely be possible to make that slip up. He never said the terrorists shot it down either...he simply said shot down when he clearly meant to say crashed. Whether it did crash or not, that is obviously what he intended to say.

Just out of curiousity Lazur...if it wasn't shot down, doesn't it concern you quite a bit that President Bush knowingly allowed flight 93 to fly under the control of terrorists for 50 minutes with no interception?

I don't think Bush or anyone else knew for certain what was going on with that flight until it was too late. The only people who knew for certain were those who received the 911 calls and the families of passengers who called them. It wasn't in the air for that long.

I do, however, think a viable option would have been to shoot it down if it presented a threat. I just don't think the situation had escalated to that level at that point in time.
 
Matt said:
Quit being an insulting, condesending prick or I'm reporting you to Daisy. Argue all you want, calling him an assclown and idiot isn't necessary. Whatever TSOG believes and however much I may disagree with it, he is clearly an intelligent man.

I... am... speechless... :eek:
 
I said Neither because I'm not entirely sure what the hell happened that day. Of the other two choices, I would say shot down. It's the only way to explain why there was nothing left to the plane, no sign of it even.

Because of such organizations like the 911 Truth Movement (http://www.911truth.org/) I've come to look at that day much differently than I once did. The questions that people are now asking are very vaild and because of all the secrecy, I truly am starting to believe a conspiracy theory as wild as this day being an inside job. A wound on themselves to perpetrate a war. It's not the first time in history that a government has done this, if this is what truly happened.

Either way, I, just don't know...
 
Regardless of my personal beliefs, these two facts remain irrefutable:

The idea that the military was running Atlantic war games and had no planes in the air that could intercept in time with an executive order is ridiculous. That the President and Vice President were not available to NORAD is ridiculous beyond words.
 
Matt said:
Quit being an insulting, condesending prick or I'm reporting you to Daisy. Argue all you want, calling him an assclown and idiot isn't necessary. Whatever TSOG believes and however much I may disagree with it, he is clearly an intelligent man.

Yeah, real intelligent guy
Holographic airplanes:rolleyes:

Righht.

Anyway report me if you must, I think I made my final point about TSOG anyway.
I think he's obviously wacked out of his mind.

But as Mark Twain said:
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience."
 
FlameHead said:
I said Neither because I'm not entirely sure what the hell happened that day. Of the other two choices, I would say shot down. It's the only way to explain why there was nothing left to the plane, no sign of it even.

Because of such organizations like the 911 Truth Movement (http://www.911truth.org/) I've come to look at that day much differently than I once did. The questions that people are now asking are very vaild and because of all the secrecy, I truly am starting to believe a conspiracy theory as wild as this day being an inside job. A wound on themselves to perpetrate a war. It's not the first time in history that a government has done this, if this is what truly happened.

Either way, I, just don't know...

It's the burning of the Reichstag all over again, my friend, the burning of the Reichstag...
 
lazur said:
I don't think Bush or anyone else knew for certain what was going on with that flight until it was too late. The only people who knew for certain were those who received the 911 calls and the families of passengers who called them. It wasn't in the air for that long.

I do, however, think a viable option would have been to shoot it down if it presented a threat. I just don't think the situation had escalated to that level at that point in time.

The first crash into the trade center occured at 8:46 am.

President Bush was aware that we were under attack by 9:00.

By 9:20, they were aware flight 93 was highjacked due to flight control overhearing the pilots talking about a bomb on board.

At 10:10 the flight crashed in PA.

That gives Bush 50 minutes to respond. I find it less likely that they were aware for 50 minutes and did not shoot it down.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"