...an amateur video shot five days before the plane's demise. The video captured an image, concedes the FBI, "consistent with the exhaust plume from a MANPAD...
So, 5 days before the airliner goes down, someone sees something that sorta looks like a SAM. So a SAM must've brought down the plane nearly a week later? Where is the logic in this reasoning? I'm sure in the week preceding the crash someone thinks they saw Elvis too. So does that mean it was obviously Elvis that shot it down?
“...someone thinks they saw Elvis too. So does that mean...Elvis that shot it down?”
If something that stupid is all you can contribute, why not just sit there quietly and learn?
posted on 09/20/2007 11:01:21 PM PDT
("One should never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.")
I was always under the impression that the plane was well out of range for any known MANPAD system. A small launcher would be required to fire a missile with enough engine time to get to the altitude. Has this ever been proven wrong?
posted on 09/21/2007 5:14:33 AM PDT
(in the halls of Valhalla...)
I wondered about that as well. Are they saying that someone tried to shoot it down five days earlier?
posted on 09/21/2007 5:59:16 AM PDT
(Crom! Non-Sequitur = Pee Wee Herman.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson