Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 05/17/2008 3:49:17 PM PDT by Daniel T. Zanoza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Daniel T. Zanoza
Quite a few hypotheticals in that piece, which was very short on fact.
2 posted on 05/17/2008 3:56:36 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza
...the key to finding the truth about any event is to watch the media. I'm not saying the mainstream press always reports the truth. I simply know, if the media is shying away from something, there is a good chance there is a reason why.

I almost stopped reading at this point, but out of sheer morbid curiosity kept going. I mean, really... Does he buy into this all-controlling cabal that can order the media around? The MSM, inept and deluded and liberal as it is, is pretty good at digging for facts, or even near-facts. That's actually one of my complaints against them - they too often (IMHO) go with "facts" of questionable nature. They are too eager to dig for what they think they know, and go with that. If someone said "Hey, don't dig into..." that would be a huge red flag. Someone would go after the story no matter what. The exclusivity of it would merely make it all the more attractive.

...there is another scenario which could have taken place on November 12th of 2001. Is it possible...

Well of course, there is always another scenario which could have taken place... Aliens may have beamed Elvis back into the cockpit of the aircraft. I'm pretty sure the King wasn't multi-engine turbine certified so that could've caused it... ;-/

...soon became common knowledge a U.S. missile cruiser was in the area of the Flight 800 tragedy. Was it possible an errant launch of an American missile took down Flight 800...

In a word, no. Simply no, it is not possible. If they had bothered to check the distance between the cruiser and the flight, they'd see it was well outside even the extreme engagement envelope for the SAMs on board the ship.

Why would the government cover-up these possible acts of terror? The answer is simple. Economics. If Airbus Flight 587 were in fact another victim of a terrorist attack, Americans' trust in the aviation industry would have been totally destroyed.

Of course, these are the same tinfoil-hat types that swear up and down President Bush was looking for excuses to invade Iraq and finish daddy's work. So of course his administration would cover-up a ready-made excuse to hit back sooner and harder... ;-/

6 posted on 05/17/2008 4:36:56 PM PDT by CodeMasterPhilzar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza
Regarding TWA flight 800. Couple of thoughts.

1. How many times in the past has the FBI taken over the investigation of an airplane crash from the FAA and NTB? I can't think of one.
2. Once the FBI determined there was no crime involved how come they stayed with the investigation until the end? Why did they not just drop out and let the FAA/NTB finish the investigation like what is normally done?
3. I had one more good point but it has been two long since the crash and my memory is not what it used to be.

8 posted on 05/17/2008 5:28:53 PM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Daniel T. Zanoza

Actually, FDR and his military advisers thought the Japanese focus would be on the American forces and assets in the Phillipines (which was an American territory), and that the assets farther east (Midway and Pearl) would not be struck because of logistics. Well, When Japan hit Pearl it also hit the Phillipines. Thus, FDR was half right and half wrong.


10 posted on 05/17/2008 5:52:44 PM PDT by ought-six ( Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson