To: Alberta's Child
Regarding flight 587, this means the Bush administration is continuing the policy of concealment to the public. I have great problems with this.
25 posted on
03/24/2004 5:03:56 PM PST by
spyone
To: spyone
Yes - no way Flight 587 was caused by wind shear or whatever BS they came up with.
28 posted on
03/24/2004 5:08:37 PM PST by
petercooper
(I actually did vote for the $87 Billion, before I voted against it.)
To: spyone
The tail fell of flight 587, and I've never read ANY credible analyses that indicate terrorism there.
29 posted on
03/24/2004 5:11:32 PM PST by
walden
To: spyone
Regarding flight 587, this means the Bush administration is continuing the policy of concealment to the public. I have great problems with this. I don't. If Richard Reid had been successful in his attempt to blow a plane out of the sky with explosives in his shoes, I have no doubt that there would have been a "mechanical problem" identified as a cause of the incident.
"Put not your trust in princes."
32 posted on
03/24/2004 5:14:19 PM PST by
Alberta's Child
(Alberta -- the TRUE north strong and free.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson