Rumsfeld said Flight 93 shot down

[Jazzz]

You want to endlessly talk about this shit

Not with you. I've done quite enough of that. It's been fun

 

[mikeinworthing]

Not with you. I've done quite enough of that. It's been fun

Does that mean you are going to shut the fuck-up with your fruitcake ideas

Oh God, please

 

[Bob_the_lost]

the wind speed was 9 knots.

You can read about the debris here

Interesting also that the main debris site contained no large pieces of plane. Can you see a plane here? Pretty unusual plane crash, that's for sure...

You mean the reclaimed ground that it hit? If memory serves that area was swamp within living memory, offical theory being that it hit and kept on moving.

 

[laptop]

If Rumsfeld has now taken to appearing in public while sozzled, that's probably more important.

Aye.

So long as he doesn't order any invasions while sozzled.




Evens on Chiefs of Staff mutinying and Iran kicking their arse if he does...

 

[longdog]

investigators later said the debris was all very light material, such as paper and thin nylon the wind would easily blow. The wind was blowing towards Indian Lake and New Baltimore at 9 knots. "According to the NTSB, it is not only possible that the debris is from the crash, it is probable," Crowley said.

Your move I believe.

I'm still waiting.

 

[editor]

Not when you have a central point of reference; in this case, the main debris field. The statement means, succintly, that all debris was up to eight miles of the main crash site. If you start talking about diameters it could get confusing.

Great. You're getting scientific.

So what was the exact distribution and nature of the debris?

 

[Teepee]

Jazzz: http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change

 

[longdog]

Great. You're getting scientific.

So what was the exact distribution and nature of the debris?

I refer m'learned friend to posts 88 and 95.

Unfortunately for jazzz they are taken from his own link and piss all over his bonfire.

 

[Jazzz]

I refer m'learned friend to posts 88 and 95.

Unfortunately for jazzz they are taken from his own link and piss all over his bonfire.

It's hardly possible that a light breeze would take debris from the crash site and deposit it within in a specific spot eight miles away. If wind was blowing the debris, it would spray it all over the place. It would however be possible that the distinct debris fields were created by the plane breaking up before crashing if it was shot.

 

[longdog]

It's hardly possible that a light breeze would take debris from the crash site and deposit it within in a specific spot eight miles away. If wind was blowing the debris, it would spray it all over the place. It would however be possible that the distinct debris fields were created by the plane breaking up before crashing if it was shot.

What makes you think we should take the word of a 'seeker of truth' like you with no specialist knowledge over that of an investigator from the NTSB?

No, let me guess, they are part of the conspiracy. Would that be the case?

 

[Lock&Light]

It's hardly possible that a light breeze would take debris from the crash site and deposit it within in a specific spot eight miles away. If wind was blowing the debris, it would spray it all over the place. It would however be possible that the distinct debris fields were created by the plane breaking up before crashing if it was shot.

As William has already said, you seem to be arguing that there were indeed hijackers active on 9/11.

He feared that you would counter with some piece of nonsense. I confidently predict that you will say that the USAF shot down the plane in order to disguise the US Government's complicity.

Go on! Prove me right or wrong.

 

[Loki]

Where's the link to that online South Park episode?

 

[pyrovitae]

That's nice dear, you heard the one about the magic dragon who lives by the sea? It's got about as much factual information as the "thermite explosion" theory...

If you ever mention it again then i will make excessive use of these smilies =

i prefer the term 'emoticons' to 'smilies' because those ones look really upset. are you having a bad day?

i never said i accepted the theory as definitive truth, i just said it seems pretty plausible (for a complete lay person such as myself.) but hey - entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, i always say. i'm equally willing to accept it was a hijacked plane that did the damage.

is this pick on the n00b day?

 

[Jazzz]

What makes you think we should take the word of a 'seeker of truth' like you with no specialist knowledge over that of an investigator from the NTSB?

No, let me guess, they are part of the conspiracy. Would that be the case?

Your guy from the NTSB has simply identified the wreckage at Baltimore as probably from flight 93. I'm not disagreeing with him.

I'm not asking you to take my word for anything, either.

 

[longdog]

is this pick on the n00b day?

Every day is pick on the n00b day

 

[Lock&Light]

is this pick on the n00b day?

For a 'noob' you've sure been here a while.

 

[longdog]

Your guy from the NTSB has simply identified the wreckage at Baltimore as probably from flight 93. I'm not disagreeing with him.

I'm not asking you to take my word for anything, either.

So where is your evidence that debris consistant with the plane being shot down was scattered over an 8 mile radius?

 

[pyrovitae]

^

someone was kind enough to point out today that my post count is low compared to date registered, rendering my opinions virtually worthless.

 

[snouty warthog]

How, one fearfully wonders**, does that square with the apprarant widespread conviction... that the Twin Towers were not hit by a plane at all
[/SIZE]

I am not sure if it's a widespread conviction- I have looked into the theories quite a bit, and the only person I've heard advance this idea is David Shayler... is he working to an MI5 brief? I don't know, and I don't much care either...

about the original post- Rumsfeld's slip-up- that is the trouble with doublespeak- sooner or later you slip up; usually when u are tired an' emotional...

I always thought that they shot down flight 93. I don't even know why they bothered lying about it. it would seem a horrible, but necessary and rational response to a terrorist threat of that nature.

 

[Loki]

is this pick on the n00b day?

Issues surrounding 9/11 have been discussed to death here at least 200 times (and I don't exagerrate!) some are weary of the resident conspiraloons bringing up the same old shite again, and sick of new posters asking the same questions all over again.

 

[pyrovitae]

Where's the link to that online South Park episode?

i'm trying to be helpful, i assume you mean the south park 911 conspiracy?

http://allabout-sp.net/season10/1009.php

(personally, i think season 9 & 10 are hilarious - it's gotten funnier)

 

[longdog]

((((pyrovitae))))

 

[Jazzz]

Issues surrounding 9/11 have been discussed to death here at least 200 times (and I don't exagerrate!) some are weary of the resident conspiraloons bringing up the same old shite again, and sick of new posters asking the same questions all over again.

Those posters could, of course, simply ignore the threads. Rather pyrovitae should realise that quite a few posters, led by editor himself, indulge in 'conspiracy theory bashing'. It's been a kind a of culture around here, and an unfortunate one because CT discussions are often entertaining when they rise above those levels.

 

[snouty warthog]

Issues surrounding 9/11 have been discussed to death here at least 200 times (and I don't exagerrate!) some are weary of the resident conspiraloons bringing up the same old shite again, and sick of new posters asking the same questions all over again.

so? no-one is forcing you to read those threads. I rarely do now. discussing 9/11 is teh bore.

however, if you think it is yr job to pour scorn on anyone who questions some of the very large holes in the official conspiracy theory (it woz bin laden and his mates wot did it) then I can understand why you might feel sick and weary. do you consider it your job?

 

[snouty warthog]

me an' jazzz's posts- snap!!!

 

[pyrovitae]

thanks, longdog

and hey loki, i can appreciate that. certain topics are done to death and are rehashed over and over again. but that doesn't mean some of you have to be so mean

this one's for you, god of mischief:

 

[Lock&Light]

someone was kind enough to point out today that my post count is low compared to date registered, rendering my opinions virtually worthless.

Actually I find the opinions of the old-timers more suspect. They have usually had the chance, and have taken it, to prove their inconsistency.

 

[Badger Kitten]

Aye.

So long as he doesn't order any invasions while sozzled.




Evens on Chiefs of Staff mutinying and Iran kicking their arse if he does...

My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes

So hubristic power-crazed twattish officials make daft statements, so what.

 

[editor]

So, if there's no credible new evidence being discussed here, the bin awaits.

 

[Loki]

Those posters could, of course, simply ignore the threads. Rather pyrovitae should realise that quite a few posters, led by editor himself, indulge in 'conspiracy theory bashing'. It's been a kind a of culture around here, and an unfortunate one because CT discussions are often entertaining when they rise above those levels.

Yes, they could just ignore the threads and let conspiraloons post up bollocks (some of it offensive bollocks) unchallenged, again and again and again and.... or if they feel up to it, they can take issue with the bollocks.

And there's fuck all wrong with 'conspiracy theory bashing'. If a theory of any description is bollocks, it deserves a good kicking!

I don't personally want to see my favourite bulletin board overrun with nutters posting up any old shite passed off as fact (eg "9/11 flights did not exist!" / "Huntley is innocent!" etc. etc. ad nauseum)