To: JohnGalt
It just seems like, even if you're going to proceed on the assumption that Ron Brown's death was an assassination, there are a hell of a lot of ways to do it that make more sense, and are logistically easier to carry out, than shooting him straight down into the top of his head, then crashing the plane. Why not just plant a bomb on the plane? Then you could blame the Serbs or something. I'm sorry, I enjoy a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy, but this one is just too far fetched. It would be interesting to see, by way of comparison, what sorts of injuries people killed in non-suspicious plane crashes suffer.
32 posted on
04/05/2002 10:51:25 AM PST by
Heyworth
To: Heyworth
I'm right there with you. I was just sharing with you an angle that whoever shot Ron Brown did not know the plane was scheduled to be blown up.
33 posted on
04/05/2002 11:01:00 AM PST by
JohnGalt
To: Heyworth
How or what happened is immaterial at this point. There are many scenarios that could explain the evidence. The question is, why wasn't an autopsy done? Why not do one now?
To: Heyworth
Has anyone ever heard of a parachute before? I can't believe how shallow dissenteres can be.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson