Posted on 01/31/2002 12:01:36 AM PST by JohnHuang2
Since this type of argument applies to just about any observation, what exactly is the point of bringing this all up? Even the FBI and NTSB don't doubt the witness claims -- they just came with a different interpretation of what was seen based on a supposed post-explosion "climb" of the aircraft.
Believe what you want - I will rely on the facts....
The eyewitness accounts are fundamental "facts".
All the 401k's I've had or seen have a choice of investments, generally stock, bond and money market funds. Yes, the matching part is in company stock -- but hey, that's okay, after all it is a bonus.
And if your friend wanted to protect his own profits in a 401k after a takover he had only to quit the company and rollover or rollout the 401k funds, company stock included. Given the value of some 401k's -- quitting can be the least risk option.
Let's get back to the point I made. Any pensions that aren't carriable -- able to be taken with you -- act as traps when you have to make a moral or ethical decision to leave an outfit.
No, you have your facts wrong. It was two airliners that took down the Twin Towers.
Rely on these facts...
Approximately 100 people saw exactly the same thing at the same time... A yellow streak going up to the plane and then a giant explosion...
In the literally millions of hours of flight time that 747's around the world have accrued, not one time has a fuel tank ever exploded... Not once...
Once again, your government is lying to you...
When and from what state was this?
You call this a "fact" but it is simply not true. In fact, most eyewitnesses said the streak was red. Only 7 said it was yellow. One even said it was green. Only 40 of the 96 said the streak originated from the water. 10 said it came from the land and the remainder didn't say. Assuming a "fact" is 100% true, then what you have designated as "fact" is not. Your second "fact" concerning fuel tanks exploding on 747's is also untrue. Since 1959 there have been 26 documented fuel tank explosions/fires on transport aircraft including an Iran Air 747 in 1976.
I'm not going to accuse you of lying, but I would say your "facts" do not prove the government lied in this case.
GSA(P)
But they don't. Some accounts have the missile coming from land, others from the sea. Some describe a red flame, others describe a yellow flame, still others a white flame. Some witnesses say it rose heading east, some say west, some say it headed north. You have a dozen different accounts of what happened.
(The bad guys already know who he is, or have narrowed it down so far that they effectively know.)
A couple of questions. Why wait 8 years for revenge? How did the sub 'track' the airplane and know that it was a U.S. airplane instead of, say, Egyptair or SwissAir or something like that? What kind of missile did it use that could reach the 747 at that altitude? How did the sub get from Iran to Long Island without attracting attention when it stopped and refueled, which it would have had to do 5 or 6 times?
Red streak, yellow streak, blue streak... I would submit what difference does it make what exact color the streak was...
If the center wing tank did explode, there would be NO witnesses to ANY streak rising up from the surface...
No witnesses... Because the streak didn't happen...
But the streak did happen. Many people saw it...
That right there should be enough to discount the gov't story...
And as far as fuel tank explosions, only 747 evidence is relevent. Not DC-9 data, MD-80 data, or 757 data... Only 747 data...
And if the Iran Air 747 was actually downed by a center wing tank explosion, (I'm not saying it wasn't), if that's the only incident attributed to 747's blowing up because of the fuel tank, I still submit the odds of that being the cause of flight 800 to be astronomical. Especially when you consider all the corellating evidence which points to foul play...
Since I can't state how old you are, when was the last time that the United States Federal Government admitted that it screwed up and killed any number of it's citizens?.
Hasn't happened in my lifetime.
The Feds cover their respective butts in all aspects and do not eat their own. Those who fail to play along with the Feds consistently commit suicide.
---max
But they don't.
But they do.
Some accounts have the missile coming from land, others from the sea. Some describe a red flame, others describe a yellow flame, still others a white flame. Some witnesses say it rose heading east, some say west, some say it headed north. You have a dozen different accounts of what happened.
Not really. If they are observing the same event from totally different locations there will be differences between descriptions. However, they are *all* essentially describing something similar. A real difference would be if they saw a light coming down from the air and hit the ground. The essential description is a missile, or light, going up and the plane exploding. If there are variances some of this would be due to the type of witness. The evidence needs to be weighted, such as in terms of common descriptions, how many people saw a particular object, and the reliability of certain witnesses. If a preponderance of witnesses agree on a certain description, then it most likely is the correct description of what really occured. From what I have read the observed missile, or light, tends to triangulate to the area where the plane went down.
I am sick of the public credence given this excuse. These people earn their retirement by being willing to die for their country. If they can't take that kind of risk, they do not deserve a paycheck for the honor of serving this country and its Constitution.
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.