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 filosophia
Originally posted by yourmaker
anyone remember that movie where the people on flight 93 'bravely' fought the terrorists to reclaim the plane, only to have it crash?....
so that was bs?? LOL thats hilarious! it fooled so many!
The movie, while fiction (both in being a literal movie while also being based on fiction to begin with and not the true series of events) still gives people the "logic" they need to think in terms of the official narrative. The military was off track (in the movie it was a female officer, visibly shaking, crying a bit, was she to blame sounds pretty sexist to me). And then when they rush through the door at the last minute just as the pilots take a nose dive, all neatly organized with Hollywood magic to make it seem like it is plausible even though it's not based on any facts. (the movie ends at that point, they don't for example show the coroner failing to find bodies or the plane parts scattered six miles away).
edit on 7-9-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Human_Alien
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
If Zacarias Moussaoui is a planted patsy (which many believe) then how can a mock trial and its evidence, prove anything?
Originally posted by WeRpeons
reply to post by getreadyalready
I also don't believe that our nations capital wouldn't have an air defense strategy. Since when are leaders of countries vulnerable to attacks. D.C. always had a no fly zone, it wasn't just created for no apparent reason. Leaving the head of the snake vulnerable to enemies has never been military strategy. Jets can't be scrambled quick enough to defend our nations capital? I doubt our political elite wouldn't cover their a$$e$.
Originally posted by filosophia
It foiled "al Qaeda's" plan, but that's assuming I think it was an al Qaeda plan to begin with, which I don't.
Even if you think it was an al Qaeda plan, don't you find it odd that the only plane that failed to reach its target was the one aimed at the white house? Doesn't this suggest the military has their priorities in order and the American public is not one of them?
But the coincidence of hitting the one side that was being reconstructed at the pentagon just shows the entire al Qaeda "plan" was impossible to begin with,
a 30 year old plan to push America into perpetual war in the middle east with the assistance of Israel and the CIA.edit on 7-9-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)edit on 7-9-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by filosophia
www.foxnews.com...
Former Vice President Dick Cheney on Sunday defended his Sept. 11, 2001, order to shoot down hijacked planes over Washington, saying the call was "necessary."
Seems like he is still suggesting it was necessary. If the plane was never shot down, it was necessary long before he gave the order. But that's assuming the OS is true, which most likely it is not.edit on 7-9-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by filosophia
Oh, but he did.
Originally posted by Human_Alien
Noooooooooooooooooooooooo.
They found books, clothing and even human remains miles from the impact site.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by Human_Alien
Noooooooooooooooooooooooo.
They found books, clothing and even human remains miles from the impact site.
Earlier you said that no human remains were found. Actually you said that about flight 77, but I assume you meant 93.
I don't understand.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
What motive would there be for never admitting such a shoot down actually happened, despite openly saying it had been ordered?