 Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
On 9/11 I was signing off on some ABF truck bills with the driver
his cell phone ring.He took the call It was his son.He told his son to get a grip on his self he did what he was to do thats your job and you did the
right thing.After gatting off the phone the drive I know well was trearing up .He said his son and 3 others were scrambled from a base to take out a
airliner they did he thinks it was ome of his missles that took it out.I told him he did the right thing. today I still remember the look on that mans
face after that call.I know this happened and no one could change my mind of what I heard.   So this guys son called his dad on a cell phone and told him about a super top secret mission. And then his dad told you. You are going
to have to come up with a better story then that? What was his sons name? What time did he call? Where are you from? Come on now. The people on
this site are pretty intelligent. I doubt even the people who believe it was shot down would believe a story as rediculous as this. Also if the guys
son shot it down he wouldnt say " I think one of my missles shot it down" Those missles dont miss. It not like all three would have to fire. So
whoever fired would know. Those missle have tracking. THis is one of the biggest BS posts I have ever read on this site. Complete Lie.
|
This entire charade is nothing but the government admitting that they shot down Flight 93 while still trying to make the gullible believe that it's
connected to al-CIAduh.
|
reply to post by MrWendal
Flight 93 WAS shot down. One of the passengers reported to a loved one on the ground by cell phone that there was an wxplosion on the wing. One
of my collegues at work who lives near the Pittsburgh International Airport said that F-16 fighter jets were scrambled from that airport and flew over
his farm in persuit of Flight 93.
|
Ok, IF the plane was shot down, then doesn't that disprove the "inside job" theory? Think about it.
If the government was behind 9/11, and used airplanes to attack NYC and DC, why should they shoot down Flight 93 if they were controlling it? And
then, why would they say it was not shot down, but crashed after passengers fought off the attackers? It really does not make sense.
So IF the aircraft were all remote controlled, then that would mean Flight 93 was also remote controlled. The official story is they were hijacked by
terrorists. Ok, so if that is the case, and the first three hit their targets, why did they bother shooting down Flt93? Did they lose control over it?
If they did, why didnt they just let it fly uncontrolled and let it crash where ever? Why send out fighter planes to shoot it down, then say there was
no shoot down? Wouldnt it seem a more plausible claim to have a plane that was hijacked (ie they lost their control), have it crash wherever, and say
they terrorists were attacked and the plan crashed by itself?
If they did in fact shoot down the REAL flt 93, how would it look after having 4 buildings destroyed or heavily damaged by terrorists crashing
airplanes, and then admitting they had to shoot down another plane? After all that is happening, they come on and say, "In addition to the attacks in
NYC and DC, we had to shoot down another hijacked flight?" How do you think the public would react if the govt admitted they had just shot down their
own airplane, after all the bloodshed earlier?
|
We are all nice people and would probably like to believe that we would die fighting but even the movies seem to convey that the calls which were
received spoke of nothing, of recapturing control of the plane. We were not on the plane and there for cannot speak in fact to what happened. Prior
pictures of the area have brought in question whether the event has happened at all. That's a staunch contrast, maybe we should seek some one who
lost a relative.
The facts to this being a hoax command some strict comformance with reality. All who made a trip on said flight would have to live in secrecy. If
prior pictures show the same area with a ditch, then, now the ditch has a plane in it, are the events of history.
The fact that the plane was not shot down is in the picture of the wreck. The plane is belly down and practically in a few peices. I saw other
pictures that showed no plane or that it had disintergrated upon crashing, leaving only debris. Neither picture produced other accounts from the
ground of a wide debris field consistant with the mid-air destruction of a jetliner. There is a place where it crashed so it cannot be a shoot
down.
"Evidence Timing" this is the time when the evidence is produced. This doesn't seem like a spontaneous plot. The buildings in N.Y. start the plot
but now we must believe that the media or government kills more people in penn or at the pentagon. The WTTS are gone, this whole thing, is not a
hoax.
However it's most likely a George Bush fantasy.
[edit on 29-7-2008 by rightwingnut]
[edit on 29-7-2008 by rightwingnut]
|
