Slip up or something more....

[pokerbobo]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a possibility...

Plane crashes into trade center
Plane crashes into trade center
Plane crashes into pentagon
another plane is hijacked.
US military analyzes situation, decides to shoot down plane rather than allow it to crash into populated area

[/ QUOTE ]

So the widows of Flight 93 are lying about the convos they had with thier husbands about "taking back" the plane?

[salesbeast]

I never said "conspiracy" just that he def said shot down when no one else in senior gov has said similar statement. I gave the vid evidence so you can decide yourself if it was a gaff or a legit comment.

[One Outer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a possibility...

Plane crashes into trade center
Plane crashes into trade center
Plane crashes into pentagon
another plane is hijacked.
US military analyzes situation, decides to shoot down plane rather than allow it to crash into populated area

[/ QUOTE ]

So the widows of Flight 93 are lying about the convos they had with thier husbands about "taking back" the plane?

[/ QUOTE ]

The passengers having a plan to take back the plane does not prove that the government didn't shoot it down. I'm just sayin.

This is still a stupid thread.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
So the widows of Flight 93 are lying about the convos they had with thier husbands about "taking back" the plane?

[/ QUOTE ]

at least one person was lying. who are the other people? it may all come from this one person. (who is high in gov and hence probably a scum)

http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd319.htm
[ QUOTE ]
"However, the evidence from the Moussaoui trial ruled out this possibility. In its report on AA 77, it listed one attempted call from Barbara Olson, which was "unconnected" and hence lasted "0 seconds." This was an astounding discovery. The FBI is part of the Department of Justice. And yet it had undercut the testimony of the DOJ's former solicitor general, saying in effect that the two calls that he reported had never happened. The implication is that unless Ted Olson had, like Deena Burnett, been duped, he had lied. Although this should have produced front-page headlines, it has thus far not been reported by any mainstream publication. The Revised and Updated Edition of "Debunking 9/11 Debunking" provides the documentation for these reports from American Airlines and the FBI, which pretty thoroughly undermine the idea that any of the reported calls were genuine: If the cell phone calls were faked, why should we believe that the reported calls from onboard phones were genuine?"

[/ QUOTE ]

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is a possibility...

Plane crashes into trade center
Plane crashes into trade center
Plane crashes into pentagon
another plane is hijacked.
US military analyzes situation, decides to shoot down plane rather than allow it to crash into populated area

[/ QUOTE ]

So the widows of Flight 93 are lying about the convos they had with thier husbands about "taking back" the plane?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necessarily. Not that I believe any of the conspiracy theories about 9/11, but it is entirely possibleble that the conversations actually took place, and the military shot down the plane while the passengers were trying to take it back, or after they failed to take it back. IMO, it is somewhat more plausible that the government covered up a justifiable shooting down of the plane than that they were responsible for the whole thing. OTOH, I really don't think there was any reason to lie about it if they did shoot down the plane. Better to lose just the passengers than the passengers + however many people on the ground would have died if the hijackers had been allowed to complete their mission. I wouldn't want to be the person that made the decision to shoot it down or the pilot that did the shooting, though.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
Not necessarily. Not that I believe any of the conspiracy theories about 9/11, but it is entirely possibleble that the conversations actually took place, and the military shot down the plane while the passengers were trying to take it back, or after they failed to take it back. IMO, it is somewhat more plausible that the government covered up a justifiable shooting down of the plane than that they were responsible for the whole thing. OTOH, I really don't think there was any reason to lie about it if they did shoot down the plane. Better to lose just the passengers than the passengers + however many people on the ground would have died if the hijackers had been allowed to complete their mission. I wouldn't want to be the person that made the decision to shoot it down or the pilot that did the shooting, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

the best explanation I can think of is that the high ups (secdef, wh, ) said no shoot, the commanding general overruled them and shot it down, and it's covered up because of polital reasons. (how to explain politically that you said not to shoot, how to explain you got a general who didn't follow orders, etc.)

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
OTOH, I really don't think there was any reason to lie about it if they did shoot down the plane.

[/ QUOTE ]

The same reason they felt compelled to lie about Jessica Lynch. These stories need heroes. Who stirs up more pride, a fighter pilot coolly following orders, or a rag-tag group of ordinary Am'rican citizens banding together in their last moments to heroically save thousands of lives from the fiery devastation of an international terror plot?