Skip to comments.
Was Richard Reid 'Shoe Bomber No. 2'?
WorldNetDaily ^
| 1/17/02
| Debkafile
Posted on 01/17/2002 4:02:31 PM PST by gohabsgo
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-175 last
To: UCANSEE2
Did you pickup on Eleuteria Reid-Hay ? Just seemed coincidental to me. Wonder where she was sitting?
To: RaceBannon
...It wasn't the shoe bomb alone that could have provided the force, but the fuel tank exploding.Aha, I see your point. I'm sorry, I guess I was unable to follow the "logic" of the story. It still makes no sense.
162
posted on
01/18/2002 5:45:01 AM PST
by
wysiwyg
To: wysiwyg
Well, if it was Wilt Chamberlain's shoes....
To: RaceBannon
Shoe Boy Reis is 6 foot 4, isn't he? I imagine he wears quite a large shoe size.
To: aristeides
Why would OUR government be hell bent on keeping this information from us if true? To keep the airline industry from tanking. I agree that the government might decide to hide the possibility that Al Qaida had succeeded in pulling off another fatal airliner highjacking. Happening so soon after the 9-11 attack, it would have been disasterous for the airline industry.
To: RaceBannon
Roger Hedgecock talked quite a bit about this story, but not giving any source, on Rushs' show this afternoon.
To: aristeides
So am I, that's only around 13 for me!
To: RaceBannon
I'm 6 foot 1, but I recently graduated from size 13 to 14, as a result of flat feet! Makes it a pain to find shoes that fit me.
To: csvset
Could it have been a bomb that brought that plane down? Imho, yes.I have never ruled it out, I just have not, to this day, seen any evidence of a bomb. Have you?
To: copycat
Post #8 refers to that picture.
Did you mean "cropped"? ...If so, bad job of it; much of the outwardly-flayed bent metal can be seen.
Now... why would AA587 have such an outsie?
To: copycat
Why slander these unfortunate people? They died in the crash, and at least 2 of 3 are completely innocent of your insinuation.
Not cool.
To: okie01
The first theory floated by the NTSB was uncontained engine failure from fatigue, causing it to BLOW UP. The second was that bird strike had caused uncontained engine failure, causing the engine to BLOW UP. Then we were told that in fact neither of the engines had blown up, rather the plane had simply fallen to pieces.
The NTSB has never, to my knowledge, released any information about testing for explosive residue where explosions were reported. Why?
To: CIApilot
Slander the dead. Good thinking.
To: Melinator
There have been many "theories" floated, by many different sources.
But, to my knowledge, the NTSB hasn't floated any of them.
174
posted on
01/20/2002 5:26:30 PM PST
by
okie01
To: gohabsgo
bttt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-175 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson