Posted on 06/29/2002 10:42:42 AM PDT by Paul Atreides
If this is actually true, which I don't think it is, I would applaud Bush for making this kind of tough decision. The jet had to come down...one way or another. There was simply no option.
And Bush wouldn't have suffered, in the view of the citizenry, at all if he had given the order for 93 to be downed. Only a complete and truly uncaring idiot would have held that action against him.
What's confusing about it? A 757 or 767 in a full-throttle dive can break the sound barrier. Doing so, however, will put stresses on the airframe well beyond rated limits. Any structural failure on the plane will substantially increase drag in and around the failed area, causing forces that will very effectively tear the plane completely apart.
So why is it 'confusing' that the debris was scattered over an 8 mile area?
Well, if it's written in the Idaho Observer then it has to be the real deal -- I apologize for any skepticism. In the November issue they proved that a freemason standing on a grassy knoll fired a pristine bullet into the cockpit to keep the jet from crashing into Trilateral Commission HQ, where the government is hiding Vince Foster, Ron Brown and Bruce Lee (all alive and well, I assure you).
I'm stunned that some Freepers are toeing the Democrats.com line. Unbelievable.
Having gone to this site, www.Democrats.com and scoped out the referenced (?) article(?), I can report the following:
1.) After each "eyewitness" account, there immediately follows a qualifying statement ("...or so I heard.."; "...I was told by others...").
Conclusion: This easily makes a Nat'l Enquirer, Star or Globe article look like a well-research and footnoted effort.
2.) Every accusation starts out speculatively, with one overriding concluding statement that has obviously ignored any other evidence presented in the accusation.
Conclusion: The author of this scree wanted very much to sound objective, but threw the objectivity out the window in broad daylight so as to make his conclusion the focus of paragraph. Cheap propagandist trick.
If you want to sniff out the truth, send in woofer.
In deed they were. It was almost an established fact here that it was shot down. Bush was probably preparing to explain it to the American people as they uncovered those cell phone calls.
You have heard the flight recorder? Can you link me to a site.(snicker)
I hope you don't overdose on your drugs. The DEA is just following orders and doing what's tactically necessary to save the citizens from being shot on the street for drug money. You, sir, are in the wrong country.
The signals from the tinfoil on their heads are making it hard for them to concentrate?
LOL! It sounds as if they interviewed the customers of a hair salon.
No, not really....some of us just refuse to drink the Bush/Republican Kool-aid.
That was a well rationed post. It all DOES come down to the disarming of the people.
LOL!! Thats funny, some other poster said it was fact that it is run by the DNC. Maybe you two should get your propaganda straight.
I've never been to the web site myself, but all this party-line kool aid gulping is just funny.
The former inquisitive practitioners of this art, have, apparently, decided to nolonger practice it. ;-) See HOLY SEE ADHERES TO CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE ;-)
Bush did not disarm anyone.
Those rules about guns on planes were made by the airlines. Wilber and Orville made that rule.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.