It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by gavron
So there is no official report released on this yet, correct?
Originally posted by Boone 870
reply to post by ThroatYogurt
Great find ThroatYogurt!
Debris was found "7 or 8 miles" away. That sounds familiar.
And this '7 or 8 miles away", was in what direction away????
IN the flight path TO crash site, or THROWN past it???
Big diff.
You see, you wish to ignore eyewitnesses that stated the plane was on fire and upside down before crashing to earth. How could that be if official story is accepted?
Explain how Todd & Co "charged the cockpit" while plane was upside down, please.
Or call the two Vietnam vets out hunting liars, the ones that stated they heard and saw the plane. On fire. Upside down. Leaving a debris TRAIL 8 miles long.
Nice try, but no cigar.
Originally posted by gavron
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
Although this crash is not exactly like the crash of flight 93, the explanation of details is eerily similar to that of the crash on 9-11 in Shanksville.
Excellent post, TY. This pretty much is the nail in the coffin for those that think there was no plane in the flight 93 crash site. They whole scene looks identical.
Two thumbs up!
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jfj123
Please repost the information explaining what the document contains in detail.
Thanks.
See my thread "NSA archives: Flight 93 shot down"
As stated i have seen the document and it states that Flight 93 was intercepted.
onlinejournal.com...
On October 29, 2007, WMR reported: “According to U.S. intelligence sources, the archives of the National Security Agency (NSA), available to cleared users via the INTELINK network, contains an archive of Flash precedence and Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) NSA intelligence messages known as ‘CRITICs.’
One such CRITIC from September 11, 2001, which includes a number of follow-on intelligence reports, concerns United Airlines flight 93, downed over Shanksville, Pennsylvania. However, the CRITIC is at odds with the official account of the fate of United 93, which is that passengers and crew attacked the hijackers and forced the plane to crash into the ground.
The NSA CRITIC, according to sources who have seen it, is about five or six sentences, and paraphrasically states:
“Two F-16s scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base at [likely 1336 Zulu]. Civilian airline hijacked. Over state of Pennsylvania civilian airliner was ‘intercepted’ at (Latitude and Longitude of intercept].”
Several follow-up CRITICs are appended to the first United 93-related CRITIC. One follow-up CRITIC mentioned a possible fifth hijacked plane flying south from Canada that was near the Canadian-U.S. border. Another CRITIC states the plane ‘intercepted’ over Pennsylvania was ‘confirmed civilian.’
On April 16, 2008, WMR reported: “WMR has received another confirmation, bringing the total number to three, that United Flight 93, hijacked on the morning of September 11, 2001, was shot down over rural Pennsylvania by U.S. Air Force jets scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland. There are also reports that one F-16 scrambled from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia returned to base minus one air-to-air missile but the National Security Agency CRITIC report specified the interceptors that downed United 93 took off from Andrews.
“The third confirmation, as were the first two, is from a National Security Agency (NSA) source. In fact, a number of personnel who were on watch at the Meade Operations Center (MOC), which is a floor below the NSA’s National Security Operations Center (NSOC), were aware that United 93 was brought down by an Air Force air-to-air missile. Personnel within both the MOC and NSOC have reported the doomed aircraft was shot down.”
[edit on 23-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
As stated i have seen the document and it states that Flight 93 was intercepted.
On October 29, 2007, WMR reported: “According to U.S. intelligence sources, the archives of the National Security Agency (NSA), available to cleared users via the INTELINK network, contains an archive of Flash precedence and Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) NSA intelligence messages known as ‘CRITICs.’
One such CRITIC from September 11, 2001, which includes a number of follow-on intelligence reports,......
The NSA CRITIC, according to sources who have seen it, is about five or six sentences, and paraphrasically states:
.......
......
On April 16, 2008, WMR reported: “WMR has received another confirmation, bringing the total number to three, that United Flight 93, hijacked on the morning of September 11, 2001, was shot down over rural Pennsylvania by U.S. Air Force jets scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland. .........
Originally posted by jfj123
The other sources only state that it was "intercepted" which is different from being shot down.
Also if the government shot down flight 93 this tends to re-enforce that islamic terrorists actually did hijack those flights and it was NOT an inside job.
You understand all this right?
And forget keeping your job at the NSA. We know what happens to whistle blowers under the bush administration.
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
No, you haven't. No such CRITIC report exists and you are not being honest.
Also if the government shot down flight 93 this tends to re-enforce that islamic terrorists actually did hijack those flights and it was NOT an inside job.
I never stated it was an inside job. I am looking for the thruth.
You understand all this right?
And forget keeping your job at the NSA. We know what happens to whistle blowers under the bush administration.
Thanks for showing that you are paranoid of the government, must be the reason you want to live in a save media fed fantasy world instead of thinking for yourself.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
and know it does exist.
What are you going to do when i get a copy of the document and post it?You know you will be proven wrong and cannot back out of your false statements.
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
You said that you are not calling 911 an inside job, but you have clearly stated that you have seen a document that shows the government is covering up the shoot down of flight 93. Correct?
Originally posted by jfj123
If you really get this supposed document, get it into court, into the media, and out to the world, I'll do my best to be the first one to thank you and I'd even consider you a hero.
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
You would rather post the document here.. than....
oh God.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
You said that you are not calling 911 an inside job, but you have clearly stated that you have seen a document that shows the government is covering up the shoot down of flight 93. Correct?
Gee you mean you do not the difference between an inside job and some propaganda?
Originally posted by jfj123
If you really get this supposed document, get it into court, into the media, and out to the world, I'll do my best to be the first one to thank you and I'd even consider you a hero.
Well it will be satisfaction enough to get it on forums like this to at least get believers like you to wake up and start thinking for yourself instead of living in a media fed fantasy world.
[edit on 24-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]
Originally posted by jfj123
You're not going to newspapers? TV? International reporters? etc..????? Why wouldn't you do that?
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
I would like to point out that the link you provide (as noted above) does not say anything about a shoot down. Only an intercept.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jfj123
You're not going to newspapers? TV? International reporters? etc..????? Why wouldn't you do that?
What do you think the media is going to do with it?
They will not publish something that debunks thier own story.
Originally posted by jfj123
There are many media outlets that would of course publish it. Here are a few sources