1 posted on
01/27/2002 11:38:37 AM PST by
Carl/NewsMax
(limbacher@newsmax.com)
To: Carl/NewsMax
Damn, it's starting to look like maybe the "tin foil hat" crowd might not be too far off the mark on this one. Interesting.
3 posted on
01/27/2002 11:45:51 AM PST by
oldvike
To: Carl/NewsMax
LINKCarl:
Can you get Bob Grant or Frank from Queens to interview the police Lt and the NYC fireman mentioned in this article?
To: Carl/NewsMax
Have no doubt of this: Had there been only one plane involved on 9/11, the federal government would have concocted an elaborate account of the pilot's deep depression. Desperate to prevent panic and to protect us from our unenlightened selves, Washington will cover up anything it cannot possibly explain away. I'll settle for the truth, thank you very much...
To: Carl/NewsMax
Still think this might have been a shoe bomber. That was my first thought after that Reid guy tried it. It surely couldn't be the first attempt to do something like that.
7 posted on
01/27/2002 12:02:27 PM PST by
MsLady
To: Carl/NewsMax
The NTSB is nothing but a worthless cover-up agency. I would never work for them.
In the hours and days after the crash of flight 587, the NTSB was floating every crackpot theory it could in an effort to disprove theories of terrorism. Their efforts had quite the opposite effect. It tends to kill an organization's credibility when they scream, "It wasn't terrorism, it wasn't terrorism...!" while the crash site is still burning and no data collection has even been done yet, then float every crackpot theory under the sun to "prove" it. What ever happened to the days of the NTSB not commenting on an on-going investigation? I find their actions highly questionable.
To: Carl/NewsMax
But if it was a "bomber" (shoe or otherwise) wouldn't someone (or some group) have taken credit for it ??
I know that bin Laden rarely took credit for "operations" that he was a part of, but after 9-11 that seemed to change.
I would think there would be some sort of bragging or claim of success ??
12 posted on
01/27/2002 12:08:46 PM PST by
twyn1
To: Carl/NewsMax
what, you going to believe your own lying eyes (that is, if the film is
ever released)?
i won't be convinced until the cia releases their cartoon.
where's the cartoon?
To: *AA Flight 587
bump
To: Carl/NewsMax
Stall spin. PC spinning otherwise.
20 posted on
01/27/2002 1:03:32 PM PST by
Waco
To: Carl/NewsMax
I think it was a shoe bomber. They may never know. I think there is a "shoe bomber brigade" out there.
To: Carl/NewsMax
What I don't understand is why I am supposed to feel more comfortable believing that planes just fall apart in midair.
25 posted on
01/27/2002 2:30:27 PM PST by
Samwise
To: Carl/NewsMax
28 posted on
01/27/2002 4:50:36 PM PST by
gg188
To: Carl/NewsMax
bump
To: Carl/NewsMax
"At the end of the bridge videotape sequence, which has been turned over to the FBI, there appears to be a puff of white smoke in the sky." Right. The puff of smoke is at the END of the sequence -- where one would expect that a plane breaking up in mid air would produce clouds of fuel, etc.
Had the puff of smoke occurred at the BEGINNING of the sequence, then the bomb explanation would at least have some evidence going for it.
So the tinfoilers are wrong again -- batting 0. As usual.
39 posted on
01/27/2002 9:26:54 PM PST by
jlogajan
To: Carl/NewsMax
Is it just me, or did this story just die? I don't recall anything else after this initial announcement of the video's existance.
56 posted on
02/05/2002 11:51:34 AM PST by
gg188
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson