Replies

Actually, there's tons of preliminary evidence that it was a bomb and absolutely no preliminary evidence that it was an accident.

Actually, you're letting your shotgun mouth get ahead of your BB gun butt.

The latest is that the pilot was dumping fuel seconds after take-off.

Pilots dump fuel when they believe they can return to an airport.

Not likely that this was terrorism. More likely that it was catastrophic engine failure.

What you say is waayy too moderate and reasoned for this board today. My God, why do people want to believe the worst when there is no evidence to support that at this time!!

The sky is falling! The sky is falling! The government is lying to us! Get a grip, people.

Not likely that this was terrorism. More likely that it was catastrophic engine failure

LOL!

Try telling that to the families of the dead.

New Yorkers can smell a con a mile away.

If your objective is to totally destroy commercial aviation, keep posting preposterous statements like that one!

Whoooooo!

Let's see...what do we know now? Apparently, from multiple eyewitness accounts (and if you have been listening to Hannity today, you've heard some of them) that the plane leveled off at an altitude too low for a routine take-off, we know that the plane made an attempt to return to JFK and it dumped its fuel into Jamaica Bay...you know, the normal things planes do right before bombs go off.

We know that the plane was delayed for one hour before take-off for a mechanical check...obviously, Achmed, on the tarmac with the muffs was placing a bomb in that miraculous place where it could cause an engine separation, but not destroy the engine, not be seen on the body or wings, and not cause the wings to go, either. Nice job.

Then we know that the pilot sent out a transmission that was picked up by at least one other pilot that he had mechanical problems...common by-the-book tactic pilots are supposed to do during terrorist incidents and/or right before bombs go off...are we seeing a pattern here??

> Actually, you're letting your shotgun mouth get ahead of your BB gun butt. The latest is that the pilot was dumping fuel seconds after take-off. Pilots dump fuel when they believe they can return to an airport. Not likely that this was terrorism. More likely that it was catastrophic engine failure.

Sinkspur, WHY NO COMMUNICATION????? NONE? There are usually more than one person in the cockpit. Why, if the pilot could have been dumping fuel, which I've been told is unlikely according to the type of plane it was, wouldn't SOMEONE have radioed the tower? Think about it before you start insulting people who are rightly untrusting of government pronouncements, especially the NTSB, none of whom were on the scene until AFTER the fact and AFTER many eyewitnesses had already been heard from.

The latest is that the pilot was dumping fuel seconds after take-off.

Pilots dump fuel when they believe they can return to an airport.

Pilots dump fuel but DO NOT report mechanical failure to the tower? You sound ridiculous, but thanks for echoing the government spin.

The latest is that the pilot was dumping fuel seconds after take-off. Pilots dump fuel when they believe they can return to an airport. Not likely that this was terrorism

Actually, On another thread it was said that an AA pilot was interviewed and he said that there is no capability on the Airbus300 to dump fuel. Even if you wanted to you couldn't.