News Report 93 Was Shot Down !!!! Missing Piece Of Evidence !

[911thology]

Many people still remember that during September 11 contemporary coverage many news agencies reported that the 4th hijacked passenger flight was shot down - it was reported by at least CNN, BBC, NBC, ABC, FOX. Even a pilot who actually shot down the aircraft was present himself in the CNN news release and said a few words.

However, later it became virtually impossible to find that seditious footage. It seem that the US Government took the greatest effort to quash the public distribution of that dangerous piece of 9/11 news and most probably the US agents simply redeemed all copies of that footage from all people who could possess them and who could publish them on YouTube. Because if not, this news release would exist on YouTube all these years - along with footage of the WTC collapse and other 9/11 evidence. But, as everyone could see, it was not so in reality. No one has ever been able to successfully publish that important news release.

Now, after many years of research, this missing piece of evidence was, at last, discovered and made publicly available! Don't miss the point - it is not an infamous slip of the tongue by Rumsfleld that is known to many. This is an OFFICIAL PUBLIC NEWS REPORT where it is OPENLY STATED that the US Air Force jet fighter SHOT DOWN the 4th passenger aircraft ! This is EVIDENCE admissible in the court-room!

Download links for the footage are here:
http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com/911_flight_93_shot_down.htm

Enjoy, you 911-truthers!

[LightinDarkness]

You have got to be kidding me.

Because world altering events (like the 9/11 attacks) result in only 100% accurate stories form the media in the minutes or even hours after they occur, and they never get anything wrong in the rush to be the first to present new "breaking news."

I remember on 9/11 hearing all sorts of false news reports that were generated in the chaos of that day. Rumors of capitol hill being blown sky high, the white house being hit, etc. That doesn't mean any of it actually occurred.

Ignorance is bliss, I suppose.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Yeah, and one station also reported that WTC7 collapsed before it actually collapsed. A number were even reporting car bombs. :rolleyes:

[excaza]

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc04.pdf

Please show us the parts in the flight data consistent with an aircraft getting shot down. We'll wait.

[911thology]

I am not going to ‘show’ anything and I am not going to prove anything. Because I do not claim anything. I only discovered a genuine 9/11 clip which nobody has ever discovered before me and offered you to download it and to enrich your collection of 9/11 evidence. Nothing more than that. If you want to download - you download. If you don't want to download - do not download. Simple. No debunking of the current 'theory' is accepted, because I did not put forward any 'theory'. I merely revealed the download link to the interesting video clip. End of the story.

[Zep]

I am not going to ‘show’ anything and I am not going to prove anything. Because I do not claim anything. I only discovered a genuine 9/11 clip which nobody has ever discovered before me and offered you to download it and to enrich your collection of 9/11 evidence. Nothing more than that. If you want to download - you download. If you don't want to download - do not download. Simple. No debunking of the current 'theory' is accepted, because I did not put forward any 'theory'. I merely revealed the download link to the interesting video clip. End of the story.Well, see... This is a skeptical forum. And we rather like to see the people making claims produce evidence to support their own claims. Makes for good discussions and stuff. "Just sayin'" and then telling us to go look is the opposite of how it works. So since you aren't going to produce evidence, thanks for playing.

Next!

[excaza]

I am not going to ‘show’ anything and I am not going to prove anything. Because I do not claim anything. I only discovered a genuine 9/11 clip which nobody has ever discovered before me and offered you to download it and to enrich your collection of 9/11 evidence. Nothing more than that. If you want to download - you download. If you don't want to download - do not download. Simple. No debunking of the current 'theory' is accepted, because I did not put forward any 'theory'. I merely revealed the download link to the interesting video clip. End of the story.

You claim that the evidence is "genuine." If the report was genuine, there would be evidence of the airplane being shot down. I provided the flight data for you, show where the aircraft was shot down. Shouldn't be too hard, missile impacts are pretty noticeable.

[Gawdzilla]

"First reports are always wrong." Write that down.

[LashL]

...OFFICIAL...


:rolleyes:

[Inigo Montoya]That word, I do not think it means what you think it means.[/Inigo Montoya]

[dtugg]

lol

[Bell]

Is this Dimitri Khalezov the same nut that claimed nukes brought down the WTC? The one who is afraid to discuss his theory here at JREF? lol indeed!

[911thology]

Is this Dimitri Khalezov the same nut that claimed nukes brought down the WTC? The one who is afraid to discuss his theory here at JREF? lol indeed!

Yes, this is Dimitri Khalezov - I don't give my password to anyone so only I myself can use my account. Note, though, that I am not affraid of anything except only the God. Whey I refused to continue that discussion it was not because I 'was affraid' but merely because I am a man of my word. I set the conditions and I stated that if my condition were not met there would be no discussion. The conditions were not met. End of the discussion. I can't take back my words. Sorry. I am too old-fashioned for that. However, here it is not about the WTC nuclear demolition and not about any other claim of mine. It is merely about a download link. Nothing much to debunk. Got the point?

[T.A.M.]

I remember several news reports stating that the washington monument had been destroyed, and that the capitol building was under attack.

Since these were "official news reports" just like the alleged report in the op, then they MUST be true also....right?

Is it just me or does the truther argument, as a whole, get weaker and weaker as time goes on?

TAM:)

[tuc0]

Got the point?
Yes. I looked at it and your earth shattering EVIDENCE is so underwhelming it's pathetic.

[Bell]

Yes, this is Dimitri Khalezov - I don't give my password to anyone so only I myself can use my account. Note, though, that I am not affraid of anything except only the God. Whey I refused to continue that discussion it was not because I 'was affraid' but merely because I am a man of my word. I set the conditions and I stated that if my condition were not met there would be no discussion. The conditions were not met. End of the discussion. I can't take back my words. Sorry. I am too old-fashioned for that. However, here it is not about the WTC nuclear demolition and not about any other claim of mine. It is merely about a download link. Nothing much to debunk. Got the point?

And here you are again, spamming nonsense on the forum and refusing to discuss it. What's your point? And if you want us to watch your silly video, upload it to YouTube. We are not waiting for some porn/malware/spyware to be downloaded onto our computers when we download your link.

[Bell]

I remember several news reports stating that the washington monument had been destroyed, and that the capitol building was under attack.

Since these were "official news reports" just like the alleged report in the op, then they MUST be true also....right?

Is it just me or does the truther argument, as a whole, get weaker and weaker as time goes on?

TAM:)

They must have then replaced it with a hologram (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=washington+monument&sll=38.889897,-77.033043&sspn=0.031867,0.075188&ie=UTF8&hq=Washington+Monument&hnear=Washington+Monument,+Washington,+District+of +Columbia,+20024&ll=38.88953,-77.034309&spn=0.00395,0.009398&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=38.889416,-77.03288&panoid=Gn5T_wBbkrfaO2CuDPeLeg&cbp=12,271.12,,0,-15.24).

[Oystein]

I remember several news reports stating that the washington monument had been destroyed, and that the capitol building was under attack.
...

"Car bomb exploded in front of State Department". Heard that several times that day, it also made the rounds in the emails my work mates sent around. Read it many times on the pager messages that Wikileaks released some months ago.

[911thology]

And here you are again, spamming nonsense on the forum and refusing to discuss it. What's your point? And if you want us to watch your silly video, upload it to YouTube. We are not waiting for some porn/malware/spyware to be downloaded onto our computers when we download your link.
First of all I do not 'spam'. I post. Secondly, I have never refused to discuss my video. I refused to discuss it with particular persons due to particular circumstances. Thirdly, when I posted my own movie on YouTube as you suggest now, some folks from here refused to watch it anyway. Therefore I don't see any point in uploading this one on YouTube. Fourthly, you could take my word for it that this is merely a zip archive with common video file and text file inside. You have more chance to get virus if you open your email or visit some web site compare to this innocent zip archive to health of which I bear full personal responsibility. And, the last, if you don't want to download it - don't download. Simple. When it comes to the discussion, I agree to discuss my own video, because I am its creator and the man who is behind the very idea. So there is something to discuss (but still I refused to discuss it particularly with you because of your non-observance of general rules of discussion). However, in this particular case it is not my video - it is merely a news report which I recently discovered. I am not a reporter who reported the flight 93 shot down. I am merely a person who packed the video file into the zip archive and uploaded it for others. So, as you can see, nothing to debunk and nothing to discuss.

[911thology]

"Car bomb exploded in front of State Department". Heard that several times that day, it also made the rounds in the emails my work mates sent around. Read it many times on the pager messages that Wikileaks released some months ago.
When it comes to me I even have an HQ genuine video with 9/11 coverage when it is not only 'reported' as such, but even the very loud explosion is heard - you can hear it on that footage and then the news reporter pointed to that sound of the explosion and said that it was perhaps another car-bombing near Washington monument. But later they apologized and said that it was not actually an 'explosion' but a sonic boom from a military jet fighter that was patrolling the area around the Pentagon. After that all news agencies retracted their previous statements about car-bombings at the State Department and Washington monument. However, the initial claim that the flight 93 was shot down has been never officially retracted. Instead, they made the original footage unavailable for public. This makes a huge difference.

[Bell]

When it comes to me I even have an HQ genuine video with 9/11 coverage when it is not only 'reported' as such, but even the very loud explosion is heard - you can hear it on that footage and then the news reporter pointed to that sound of the explosion and said that it was perhaps another car-bombing near Washington monument. But later they apologized and said that it was not actually an 'explosion' but a sonic boom from a military jet fighter that was patrolling the area around the Pentagon. After that all news agencies retracted their previous statements about car-bombings at the State Department and Washington monument. However, the initial claim that the flight 93 was shot down has been never officially retracted. Instead, they made the original footage unavailable for public. This makes a huge difference.

Do you have evidence that it was a sonic boom? If a car bomb was reported then it was a car bomb. Since the report came from Washington the government could force the reporters to change their story really quick.

[Sceptic-PK]

I love the confirmation bias. We're all shills because we swallow everything the mainstream media feeds us, but hang on a minute, this is true because it was an "OFFICIAL PUBLIC NEWS REPORT". Ahhhh truthers, always good for bringing the lulz.

[911thology]

Do you have evidence that it was a sonic boom? If a car bomb was reported then it was a car bomb. Since the report came from Washington the government could force the reporters to change their story really quick.
No I don't have any evidence. I have only a news report. It is up to the people - if the take a news report for 'evidence' or not...

[T.A.M.]

When it comes to me I even have an HQ genuine video with 9/11 coverage when it is not only 'reported' as such, but even the very loud explosion is heard - you can hear it on that footage and then the news reporter pointed to that sound of the explosion and said that it was perhaps another car-bombing near Washington monument. But later they apologized and said that it was not actually an 'explosion' but a sonic boom from a military jet fighter that was patrolling the area around the Pentagon. After that all news agencies retracted their previous statements about car-bombings at the State Department and Washington monument. However, the initial claim that the flight 93 was shot down has been never officially retracted. Instead, they made the original footage unavailable for public. This makes a huge difference.

How do you know the original claim of shooting down flight 93 was not retracted? What do you base this on?

TAM:)

[911thology]

How do you know the original claim of shooting down flight 93 was not retracted? What do you base this on?

TAM:)
I spent all day watching the original 9/11 news on CNN channel. I remember that the statements about car-bombing in State Department and car-bombing at Washington Monument were retracted. But I can't recollect that the statement about '4th passenger' aircraft was retracted. Moreover, it was not possible to retract it, because the pilot who actually shot down the plane was also shown by CNN and he even said something. It would be difficult to retract such a claim I guess. Besides of this, now, 9 years after 9/11, many video clips surfaced and I have quite a big collection of contemporary videos - so I can find where the claim of car-bombing was retracted. But I have never been able to find any video where the claim about flight 93 shot down was retracted. They obviously preferred another way - they made the original report unavailable (perhaps by redeeming the video from all people who attempted to upload it on YouTube) - so they 'calmed down' the matter in that way. At least so it appears to me (I can't claim the truth in the last instance, of course, it is merely my humble personal opinion).

[carlitos]

Here is all of the information you need (http://www.google.com/cse?cx=016182179862191393560%3Ahx2yxincxdu&ie=UTF-8&q=flight+93+shot+down&sa=Search&siteurl=www.google.com%2Fcse%2Fhome%3Fcx%3D0161821 79862191393560%253Ahx2yxincxdu). Next time you see such a video, just enter the main point into this search engine, and you can read about the reality.

[Oystein]

...the initial claim that the flight 93 was shot down has been never officially retracted...

Ut was on the media. That is not "official". Therefore, no "official" retraction needed.

[twinstead]

I'd like to go on record as formally apologizing to any actual, competent investigators from any law enforcement agency or news organization who may have been insulted or embarrassed by any truthers in this thread or on this forum who describe themselves as "investigators".

There. It had to be done.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Many people still remember that during September 11 contemporary coverage many news agencies reported that the 4th hijacked passenger flight was shot down - it was reported by at least CNN, BBC, NBC, ABC, FOX. Even a pilot who actually shot down the aircraft was present himself in the CNN news release and said a few words.

However, later it became virtually impossible to find that seditious footage. It seem that the US Government took the greatest effort to quash the public distribution of that dangerous piece of 9/11 news and most probably the US agents simply redeemed all copies of that footage from all people who could possess them and who could publish them on YouTube. Because if not, this news release would exist on YouTube all these years - along with footage of the WTC collapse and other 9/11 evidence. But, as everyone could see, it was not so in reality. No one has ever been able to successfully publish that important news release.

Now, after many years of research, this missing piece of evidence was, at last, discovered and made publicly available! Don't miss the point - it is not an infamous slip of the tongue by Rumsfleld that is known to many. This is an OFFICIAL PUBLIC NEWS REPORT where it is OPENLY STATED that the US Air Force jet fighter SHOT DOWN the 4th passenger aircraft ! This is EVIDENCE admissible in the court-room!

Download links for the footage are here:
http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com/911_flight_93_shot_down.htm

Enjoy, you 911-truthers!

That's odd, Johnstown Airport doesn't have jet fighters, only Apache Helicopters. Also the jet fighters that were scrambled went East into the Atlantic. Damn, doesn't that just suck to know that this topic is just full of you-know-what.

Another thing is I know Flt. 93 wasn't "shot down" because I live about 20 miles North of Shanksville.

Who are you trying to kid? I think I know, the Truthers. They're suckers for this type of crap.

[Jack by the hedge]

...the pilot who actually shot down the plane was also shown by CNN and he even said something.

What did he say, exactly?

[JimBenArm]

What did he say, exactly?

Something!

He was a pilot, and he said something!

What else do you need to connect the dots?

[Jack by the hedge]

Something!

He was a pilot, and he said something!

What else do you need to connect the dots?

Umm. A crayon? They don't allow me anything sharp.

[phunk]

What did he say, exactly?

I'm curious about when he had time to give an interview on 9/11.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

What did he say, exactly?

He said that Truthers are a bunch of crazy paranoid idiots who have no clue. :D

[Bell]

What did he say, exactly?

"I like gladiator movies."

[excaza]

I'm having a hard time discerning the point of this thread.

[KingMerv00]

Hmm... (http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/dewey_defeats_truman1.jpg)

[twinstead]

I'm having a hard time discerning the point of this thread.

It's hard to discern something that doesn't exist.

[excaza]

Hmm... (http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/dewey_defeats_truman1.jpg)

Guess Dewey dropped the bombs on Japan.

I never saw them redact it, therefore Dewey was actually elected and FDR was a hologram beamed from space.

[Quad4_72]

I am not going to ‘show’ anything and I am not going to prove anything. Because I do not claim anything. I only discovered a genuine 9/11 clip which nobody has ever discovered before me and offered you to download it and to enrich your collection of 9/11 evidence. Nothing more than that. If you want to download - you download. If you don't want to download - do not download. Simple. No debunking of the current 'theory' is accepted, because I did not put forward any 'theory'. I merely revealed the download link to the interesting video clip. End of the story.

This is ridiculous. Stop being a coward. You know you have a claim to make but you won't say it because you know you don't have a shred of evidence except a news report that reported a rumor on a chaotic day (Something that happened numerous times on 9/11). Shameful.

[KingMerv00]

This is EVIDENCE admissible in the court-room!

I can't click on the link right now but there is a good chance your news report is inadmissible hearsay.

[Foolmewunz]

I'm having a hard time discerning the point of this thread.

Come back after a few hours, you'll have just as hard a time. We never figured out his first thread, either. Evidently it was to plug his theory which is on those 26 x 10 minute videos, or plug his book which is probably the same as the 26 x 10 minute videos, and which he self-published at Lulu. Or maybe not. He won't discuss what his thread was all about, his credentials, his sources of knowledge, or, for that matter, anything. Dimitri sets the rules. We are to obey.

Nothing to discuss, like he says.... and I'd sure trust a stranger on the internet who runs a conspiracy site frequented by an adoring anti-zionist and anti-semitic crowd. Yep. I'll just go and download that stuff right now. Oh, wait, this is the night I have to wax the backyard. Dang! Maybe another night, then?

[JimBenArm]

"I like gladiator movies."

"Ever see a grown man naked?"

[KingMerv00]

I never saw them redact it, therefore Dewey was actually elected and FDR was a hologram beamed from space.

I edited my post. The "Dewey Defeats Truman" headline was printed in 1948. Three years after Truman dropped the atomic bombs. :boxedin:

[ScottyMate]

Many people still remember that during September 11 contemporary coverage many news agencies reported that the 4th hijacked passenger flight was shot down - it was reported by at least CNN, BBC, NBC, ABC, FOX. Even a pilot who actually shot down the aircraft was present himself in the CNN news release and said a few words.


I downloaded the zip file for this one thing. I watched all the clips but didn't see it. What clip is this supposed to have happened?

Oh btw I had a few PM's with you back and forth on Youtube. Hi! :)

[Jack by the hedge]

Yeah. Who was this pilot, what did he say and when did he say it? It's not like nobody was watching the news - millions must have seen him.

[njslim]

"Ever see a grown man naked?"

Well Billy do you like Turkish prison movies?

[T.A.M.]

I spent all day watching the original 9/11 news on CNN channel. I remember that the statements about car-bombing in State Department and car-bombing at Washington Monument were retracted. But I can't recollect that the statement about '4th passenger' aircraft was retracted. Moreover, it was not possible to retract it, because the pilot who actually shot down the plane was also shown by CNN and he even said something. It would be difficult to retract such a claim I guess. Besides of this, now, 9 years after 9/11, many video clips surfaced and I have quite a big collection of contemporary videos - so I can find where the claim of car-bombing was retracted. But I have never been able to find any video where the claim about flight 93 shot down was retracted. They obviously preferred another way - they made the original report unavailable (perhaps by redeeming the video from all people who attempted to upload it on YouTube) - so they 'calmed down' the matter in that way. At least so it appears to me (I can't claim the truth in the last instance, of course, it is merely my humble personal opinion).

Funny i watched cnn all day as well, yet i Do not recall the report that it was shot down, nor do i recall the pilot interview.

So there you have it...one anecdote for each side.

Why dont you write cnn and ask them why they havent retracted it...lol that should be good.

TAM:)

[KingMerv00]

In other news, Bill Cosby is dead again.

[alienentity]

Norman Mineta confirmed this! OMG!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qkhgtdu0ds#t=2m

[alienentity]

Many people still remember that during September 11 contemporary coverage many news agencies reported that the 4th hijacked passenger flight was shot down -..

Dude, you are soooo out of touch... Flight 93 probably never even existed. There is no evidence that a plane actually crashed at Shanksville - no serial numbers have been reported for the 'wreckage' and no bodies were found. (/jammonius)

[Cl1mh4224rd]

You claim that the evidence is "genuine." If the report was genuine, there would be evidence of the airplane being shot down.


To be fair, the report may be genuine, just incorrect.

[TexasJack]

So we have more incorrect reporting on a chaotic and hectic day. I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.

[T.A.M.]

To be fair, the report may be genuine, just incorrect.

Yah right, and so the capitol report, the washington monument destroyed, all those reports i suppose were incprrect too....

Come on man, that is too many false reports...it was an inside job man.

TAM:)

[Loss Leader]

This is EVIDENCE admissible in the court-room!



I don't think you should use words unless you know what they mean.

[alienentity]

Yah right, and so the capitol report, the washington monument destroyed, all those reports i suppose were incprrect too....

Come on man, that is too many false reports...it was an inside job man.

TAM:)

Why did NIST not test for thermite or explosive residue at the Washington Monument?
This is a huge coverup - the demolition failed, but reporters already had their 'scripts', just as they did with WTC 7. But the monument wasn't destroyed - something went wrong with the demolition.

Without tests, you cannot disprove that there were explosives there as well.
This just gets bigger and bigger...:eek:

[excaza]

Well it's evidence that some news agency ran the story without fact checking, that's about it.

[alienentity]

I don't think you should use words unless you know what they mean.

It must've been a typo: he meant 'coat room':D

[excaza]

Why did NIST not test for thermite or explosive residue at the Washington Monument?
This is a huge coverup - the demolition failed, but reporters already had their 'scripts', just as they did with WTC 7. But the monument wasn't destroyed - something went wrong with the demolition.

Without tests, you cannot disprove that there were explosives there as well.
This just gets bigger and bigger...:eek:

http://www.magnetmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/smilingbob350.jpg

[alienentity]

Well it's evidence that some news agency ran the story without fact checking, that's about it.

Question is, why did the NWO order all these phony news stories? This is bigger than JFK - it's really deep.

[Dog Town]

In other news, Bill Cosby is dead again.

Yet, Elvis was seen at Dairy Queen!

[TexasJack]

Wait, I was at the Washington Monument the other day and it looked fake. It's a fake!

[W.D.Clinger]

I am not going to ‘show’ anything and I am not going to prove anything.
Nice summary, thanks.

[alienentity]

CBS story on the shootdown order.

OB8JE-54Xqc

[upgrayedd]

True story on the veracity of news reports. I was a sophmore in high school when the first school shooting ever in my school district occured. I was in astronomy class with a bunch of seniors, the next day, two of them bring up a tape of them on the newscast.

They were explaining to the reporter how they witnessed the shooting, and what it was about and who was involved. Meanwhile, as we're watching, our 2 new "eyewitness" stars in class, they both then proceed to tell us how they were on the other side of the school and didn't know anything had happened. but when the news truck showed up they were the 1st ones to give their "eyewitness" account.

Ever since, i've sorta been skeptical about "eyewitness reports".;) especially minutes after the story has broke

[CORed]

I edited my post. The "Dewey Defeats Truman" headline was printed in 1948. Three years after Truman dropped the atomic bombs. :boxedin:

Well then it must have been Dewey that sent the troops to Korea.

[sheeplesnshills]

[QUOTE=911thology;6207193]Many people still remember that during September 11 contemporary coverage many news agencies reported that the 4th hijacked passenger flight was shot down - it was reported by at least CNN, BBC, NBC, ABC, FOX. Even a pilot who actually shot down the aircraft was present himself in the CNN news release and said a few words.


Curious....why would they cover up shooting one of the planes down?....after the second plane hit that exactly what the USAF should have been doing if they were in the right place at the right time.

Also curious.....why would the Gov. shoot down a plane thats part of a giant conspiracy they are supposedly involved in? Its not as if they were short of targets for a fourth plane! Capitol, White House, Fleet at Norfolk, Empire State, Sears Tower, Statue of Liberty............endless possibilities.

[beachnut]

I am not going to ‘show’ anything and I am not going to prove anything. Because I do not claim anything. I only discovered a genuine 9/11 clip which nobody has ever discovered before me and offered you to download it and to enrich your collection of 9/11 evidence. Nothing more than that. If you want to download - you download. If you don't want to download - do not download. Simple. No debunking of the current 'theory' is accepted, because I did not put forward any 'theory'. I merely revealed the download link to the interesting video clip. End of the story. You can't show anything when you post moronic lies.

This is not evidence, it is delusional fantasy. You might want to look up what evidence is.

You post lies.

However, later it became virtually impossible to find that seditious footage. It seem that the US Government took the greatest effort to quash the public distribution of that dangerous piece of 9/11 news and most probably the US agents simply redeemed all copies of that footage from all people who could! ... A lie, you posted. Did you make up this delusional tripe?



This is an OFFICIAL PUBLIC NEWS REPORT where it is OPENLY STATED that the US Air Force jet fighter SHOT DOWN the 4th passenger aircraft ! This is EVIDENCE admissible in the court-room!

Download links for the footage are here:
http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com/911_flight_93_shot_down.htm (http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com/911_flight_93_shot_down.htm)

Enjoy, you 911-truthers!
This is a lie. This is not evidence, it is proof of 8 years of failure. Why do you post lies?

[TruthersLie]

Why did NIST not test for thermite or explosive residue at the Washington Monument?
This is a huge coverup - the demolition failed, but reporters already had their 'scripts', just as they did with WTC 7. But the monument wasn't destroyed - something went wrong with the demolition.

Without tests, you cannot disprove that there were explosives there as well.
This just gets bigger and bigger...:eek:


because they were part of the anti mothra coverup. duh.

How many times do I have to tell you it was the giant MOTH flying around NYC on 9/11?????

[Skeptic]

I am not going to ‘show’ anything and I am not going to prove anything.

Yeah, we noticed.

[Captain_Swoop]

Another thing is I know Flt. 93 wasn't "shot down" because I live about 20 miles North of Shanksville.

How does that work?

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

How does that work?

By driving to the location! LOL! :D

[Foolmewunz]

I guess Dimitri got such a fine reception his last visit that he decided to break this news here, first. It's on no other blogs or conspiradroid sites (well, as of about seven hours ago before I went to bed) yet.

I guess he reckons he can get street cred by starting out here? If it's anything like his last escapade, he'll be out plugging it at ATS and other sites toot sweet.

[patchbunny]

You have got to be kidding me.

Because world altering events (like the 9/11 attacks) result in only 100% accurate stories form the media in the minutes or even hours after they occur, and they never get anything wrong in the rush to be the first to present new "breaking news."

I remember on 9/11 hearing all sorts of false news reports that were generated in the chaos of that day. Rumors of capitol hill being blown sky high, the white house being hit, etc. That doesn't mean any of it actually occurred.

Ignorance is bliss, I suppose.

In my office that morning we were getting news off the radio and the internet as we didn't have TVs, so we were getting a lot of the other reporting since they can't exactly point a microphone at the WTC and do an interview.

A Chinese immigrant in my office was browsing the Chinese language news sites on the internet, and they reported an airliner had landed with terrorists on board, and were holding everyone hostage with the plane parked on the taxiway. I also recall reports of car bombs detonating at the Capitol Mall.

Yeah... first news reports are renowned for their accuracy.

[Loss Leader]

I also recall reports of car bombs detonating at the Capitol Mall.


Car bomb at the State Department. I remember that one got repeated for something like an hour before they were able to put it to rest. And morning DJs in New York got the call about dancing Arabs in New Jersey which, even though it's been completely debunked, they still to this day insist was true.

[Furcifer]

What did he say, exactly?

WHeGxL1u6sE

The usual piloty kinda stuff.

[Furcifer]

"Ever see a grown man naked?"

bastard.

(note to self: read entire thread before posting)

[Furcifer]

NM, wrong file.

edit: ok saw it, was that second plane debunked a while ago? I thought it was a private jet.

[Zep]

I don't think you should use words unless you know what they mean.That will just leave him speechless.



Oh I see. Good point.

[MG1962]

Do you have evidence that it was a sonic boom? If a car bomb was reported then it was a car bomb. Since the report came from Washington the government could force the reporters to change their story really quick.

Actually I do remember that specific incident. CNN (Maybe) Where doing a live cross in a park - possibly across the road from the White House. The first reports were comming through of an 'accident' at the Pentagon. There is this massive bang and the reporters all flinched while trying to scan the sky. Then you hear a jet blast overhead

A few minutes later reports came through of a truck bomb at the Capitol Building.

[alienentity]

I was just reminded of the report that a 'small Cessna' was the first plane to hit the WTC.
It must've been on the news because a number of people have mentioned it, and I think even Barry Jennings reported being told the same thing.

There were apparently (according to Robert Fisk) reports that a helicopter had crashed into the Pentagon. he was told this while enroute to the USA from Britain.

[MG1962]

I was just reminded of the report that a 'small Cessna' was the first plane to hit the WTC.
It must've been on the news because a number of people have mentioned it, and I think even Barry Jennings reported being told the same thing.

There were apparently (according to Robert Fisk) reports that a helicopter had crashed into the Pentagon. he was told this while enroute to the USA from Britain.

Yes thats correct. The intital reports were a chopper had crashed taking off or landing depending which news source, then a few reported the chopper had hit a LP Gas tank near the landing pad

It has to be remembered these reporters were as scared and rattled as everyone else. They just had to act otherwise

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I was just reminded of the report that a 'small Cessna' was the first plane to hit the WTC.
It must've been on the news because a number of people have mentioned it, and I think even Barry Jennings reported being told the same thing.


My mother woke me up that morning telling me that a "small plane" had hit the WTC. I didn't think much of it at first and rolled over to go back to sleep. (I was working afternoon shift at the time, so 9/11 started in the middle of my "night")

But... something made me turn on my TV anyway. I immediately saw the hole in the first tower and thought that it was awfully large to have been caused by a small plane. That's when the second jet swooped in and crashed into the second tower... :(

There were apparently (according to Robert Fisk) reports that a helicopter had crashed into the Pentagon. he was told this while enroute to the USA from Britain.


I vaguely remember hearing that, too.

I also ended up in a chat room that I visited semi-frequently at the time and remember someone saying that there were 11 hijacked planes in the air. Another person said that there was at least one incoming from over the Atlantic.

I don't know what their sources were, but obviously none of it was correct.

[Foolmewunz]

I'm probably the guy who started the "small plane like a Cessna" disinformation. Well, me or someone just like me, e.g. someone who witnessed the moment or two after it happened. When I heard the sound of the explosion and looked up to see flames shooting out the side of Number 1, I first thought (gas leak, fire, bomb, whatever...), but within moments we all started speculating and it became, "Must've been a small plane off course or out of control."

Not because we had any knowledge, but because it was just unfathomable to most non-intelligence people that someone would be directing passenger aircraft as guided missiles into buildings. The ability had always been there. The will to do so and ability to coordinate the doing had not. Any number of us who could still get phone lines that morning were telling friends and relatives that we thought a small plane had crashed into the WTC.

So,... that's it. I did it. :D

[double_o]

However, the initial claim that the flight 93 was shot down has been never officially retracted. Instead, they made the original footage unavailable for public.

That's not true, for example an official denial can be found at this ABC footage starting at 11:00:
http://www.archive.org/details/abc200109111609-1651

[911thology]

I would like to inform every one that there is a new evidence just discovered and uploaded for everyone’s use. This time it is in English - two military officers give their testimonies and they even name the actual pilot who shot down the Flight 93 - his rank, name, surname and military unit are specified. You can get it here:

http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com/911_flight_93_shot_down.htm

It was just added may be an hour ago. All video files, audio files and transcripts are inside the archive. Size of the zip archive is about 50 Mb.

Enjoy this new evidence.

[ScottyMate]

I would like to inform every one that there is a new evidence just discovered and uploaded for everyone’s use. This time it is in English - two military officers give their testimonies and they even name the actual pilot who shot down the Flight 93 - his rank, name, surname and military unit are specified. You can get it here:

http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com/911_flight_93_shot_down.htm

It was just added may be an hour ago. All video files, audio files and transcripts are inside the archive. Size of the zip archive is about 50 Mb.

Enjoy this new evidence.

Where is the video of the pilot that shot down 93 giving a few words? I downloaded the last Zip. Is there a point in downloading this one? Silly question.
Also, just upload it to youtube.

[T.A.M.]

Post in youtube or shut the **** up. No one should have download unknown zip file to see it.

TAM

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I would like to inform every one that there is a new evidence just discovered and uploaded for everyone’s use. This time it is in English - two military officers give their testimonies and they even name the actual pilot who shot down the Flight 93 - his rank, name, surname and military unit are specified. You can get it here:

http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com/911_flight_93_shot_down.htm

It was just added may be an hour ago. All video files, audio files and transcripts are inside the archive. Size of the zip archive is about 50 Mb.

Enjoy this new evidence.

You know, I live about 20 miles from Shanksville, PA in Johnstown, PA & not a single witness (nor I) have heard anything about Flight 93 being "shot down". WJAC-TV NEWS would've heard about it the minute Flt. 93 crashed that a military jet blew it out of the sky, but nothing.

I can't help that you're a delusional Russian!

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Of course those idiot Truthers who claim that Flight 93 was "shot down" apparently didn't talk with the eyewitnesses themselves.

"Then it just rolled over and was flying upside down for a few seconds ... and then it kind of stalled and did a nose dive over the trees. It was just unreal to see something like that."
http://www.pittsburgh.com/partners/wpxi/news/flightheroes.html

Bob Blair of Stoystown was driving a coal truck on state Route 30 when he saw the jet plummet "straight down." Barn windowpanes for half a mile around shattered as the jet dived into a reclaimed strip mine and exploded at 10:10 a. m.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2001/09/17/MN40630.DTL

A witness told WTAE-TV's Paul Van Osdol that she saw the plane overhead. It made a high-pitched, screeching sound. The plane then made a sharp, 90-degree downward turn and crashed.
http://newsandviews.tripod.com/news/091101tv2.html

"There was no way anything was left," Pluta added. "There was just charred pieces of metal and a big hole. The plane didn't slide into the crash. It went straight into the ground. Wings out. Nose down."

Bits of metal were thrown against a tree line like shrapnel, said state police spokesman Trooper Thomas Spallone of Troop A in Greensburg.

"Once it hit, everything just disintegrated," he said. "There are just shreds of metal. The longest piece I saw was 2 feet long."
http://www.mypittsburghlive.com/mypittsburghlive/scripts/editorial.dll?render=y&eetype=Article&eeid=5245814

[911thology]

Where is the video of the pilot that shot down 93 giving a few words? I downloaded the last Zip. Is there a point in downloading this one? Silly question.
Also, just upload it to youtube.
I have NEVER promised you this particular one. I would love to have that particular clip too, of course, but unfortunately the US Government was faster than me... But, please, don't play this cheap trick on me ever again - it does not work with me in any case. And in any case I know how to defend myself from such cheap accusations. But it consumes space on the Forum. I am serious. I am responsible only for what I state and for what I promise. So I will bear responsibility for what you attempted to accuse me only in case if you can point to my post where I particularly promised you that clip with the pilot saying few words. But you can’t point to any post of mine like that. Because, in fact, I have NEVER promised that one. I promised: 1) in the first archive the news that openly stated the '4th flight was shot down'. I did it. 2) in the second archive statements of two military officials including also naming of the pilot who shot the flight 93. It is there. I did it. I have never violated any promise of mine.

[T.A.M.]

how convenient...welcome to ignore liar.

TAM

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I have NEVER promised you this particular one. I would love to have that particular clip too, of course, but unfortunately the US Government was faster than me... But, please, don't play this cheap trick on me ever again - it does not work with me in any case. And in any case I know how to defend myself from such cheap accusations. But it consumes space on the Forum. I am serious. I am responsible only for what I state and for what I promise. So I will bear responsibility for what you attempted to accuse me only in case if you can point to my post where I particularly promised you that clip with the pilot saying few words. But you can’t point to any post of mine like that. Because, in fact, I have NEVER promised that one. I promised: 1) in the first archive the news that openly stated the '4th flight was shot down'. I did it. 2) in the second archive statements of two military officials including also naming of the pilot who shot the flight 93. It is there. I did it. I have never violated any promise of mine.

You know what Thology, I live about 20 miles North of Shanksville, PA in Johnstown, PA & that whole "Flt. 93 was shot down" theory is based on pure BS.

You have no right to say anything about Flt. 93 because you simply don't live in Pennsylvania nor did you have any relatives that died on the flight.

You say you're from Russia, well WTF is a Russian doing saying **** about the Heros of Flight 93? It's not ok to put up a wall in the heart of Berlin, Germany, it's not ok to bring your retarded BS theories about Flt. 93 because it's NOT RIGHT.

The thing that pisses me off more than ever is arrogant pricks who don't know a damn thing about 9/11 & think it's funny to assume or point fingers at innocent people for profit or political gain.

[Quad4_72]

You know what Thology, I live about 20 miles North of Shanksville, PA in Johnstown, PA & that whole "Flt. 93 was shot down" theory is based on pure BS.

You have no right to say anything about Flt. 93 because you simply don't live in Pennsylvania nor did you have any relatives that died on the flight.

You say you're from Russia, well WTF is a Russian doing saying **** about the Heros of Flight 93? It's not ok to put up a wall in the heart of Berlin, Germany, it's not ok to bring your retarded BS theories about Flt. 93 because it's NOT RIGHT.

The thing that pisses me off more than ever is arrogant pricks who don't know a damn thing about 9/11 & think it's funny to assume or point fingers at innocent people for profit or political gain.

It's all a game to them. Makes them feel like they are sooper sekrit investigators. Gives some meaning to their otherwise useless lives.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

It's all a game to them. Makes them feel like they are sooper sekrit investigators. Gives some meaning to their otherwise useless lives.

They do have useless lives. Look how many of those lunatics go to Ground Zero & parade their little pamplets of propaganda in order to induce mass hysteria & paranoia & trumpet thier chants of "9/11 was an Inside Job" like a bunch of drunken & drug induced morons.

Then when someone who lost a friend or a relative comes to pay their respects they get in their faces saying: "You know, your relative worked for the Government & is still alive somewhere & that they were behind the attacks."

The FDNY & NYPD get harassed & assaulted by those retards also. It's an outrage!

[A W Smith]

I have NEVER promised you this particular one. I would love to have that particular clip too, of course, but unfortunately the US Government was faster than me... But, please, don't play this cheap trick on me ever again - it does not work with me in any case. And in any case I know how to defend myself from such cheap accusations. But it consumes space on the Forum. I am serious. I am responsible only for what I state and for what I promise. So I will bear responsibility for what you attempted to accuse me only in case if you can point to my post where I particularly promised you that clip with the pilot saying few words. But you can’t point to any post of mine like that. Because, in fact, I have NEVER promised that one. I promised: 1) in the first archive the news that openly stated the '4th flight was shot down'. I did it. 2) in the second archive statements of two military officials including also naming of the pilot who shot the flight 93. It is there. I did it. I have never violated any promise of mine.
Do you not remember your own opening post in this thread?

Many people still remember that during September 11 contemporary coverage many news agencies reported that the 4th hijacked passenger flight was shot down - it was reported by at least CNN, BBC, NBC, ABC, FOX. Even a pilot who actually shot down the aircraft was present himself in the CNN news release and said a few words.

However, later it became virtually impossible to find that seditious footage. It seem that the US Government took the greatest effort to quash the public distribution of that dangerous piece of 9/11 news and most probably the US agents simply redeemed all copies of that footage from all people who could possess them and who could publish them on YouTube. Because if not, this news release would exist on YouTube all these years - along with footage of the WTC collapse and other 9/11 evidence. But, as everyone could see, it was not so in reality. No one has ever been able to successfully publish that important news release.

Now, after many years of research, this missing piece of evidence was, at last, discovered and made publicly available! Don't miss the point - it is not an infamous slip of the tongue by Rumsfleld that is known to many. This is an OFFICIAL PUBLIC NEWS REPORT where it is OPENLY STATED that the US Air Force jet fighter SHOT DOWN the 4th passenger aircraft ! This is EVIDENCE admissible in the court-room!

Download links for the footage are here:
http://www.dimitri-khalezov-video.com/911_flight_93_shot_down.htm

Enjoy, you 911-truthers!
Apparently demitri, you aren't even bright enough to recall and keep track of your own lies.

[Captain_Swoop]

By driving to the location! LOL! :D

So you never actualy saw the crash?

[funk de fino]

No I don't have any evidence. I have only a news report. It is up to the people - if the take a news report for 'evidence' or not...

The Sun newspaper reported 10,000 dead. Is it true?

[alienentity]

That's not true, for example an official denial can be found at this ABC footage starting at 11:00:
http://www.archive.org/details/abc200109111609-1651

Good job. This guy is not only lying, he's asking people to download zip files of unknown provenance.

Watch out!

[Sabretooth]

Yes, this is Dimitri Khalezov

So I took a look at your clever little zip file of evidence. I’m not getting you at all. The title of this post suggests that you have “new [missing] evidence” that UAL93 was shot down. All I see here is old rehashed garbage.

First of all, with regards to your “evidence”, this NTV video is Russian…I guess my response to this is “so what?” They were getting their information as second-, third-, or possibly fourth-hand. Why would I assume that any news they are reporting from 9,000 miles away is any better than locally?

So I read your little “info” doc that accompanied your convenient little zip file. I can only assume your translation is accurate because I can understand one word of Russian. But I digress…

Let’s start here:
An exact English translation: “… anti-aircraft defense of the USA discovers the fourth airliner – presumably heading towards the Pentagon. A pursuit plane wards off the threat. The aircraft falls down not very far from Camp David, the presidential residence…”

Where did NTV get this info? Some old prison grapevine? When passing along info to viewers, the anchor will advise the audience where that bit came from (such as ABC, NBC, etc.) So who gave this report to NTV? I see that later in your text you say that “Russian NTV reporters simply repeated what they got from CNN and from other US-based agencies”, but this does not prove accurate data on their part or your part.

It is difficult to establish which of the two shot down planes was reported at that news release – Flight 93 or Flight 77, but most probably it was the latter. However, in one of its latest news releases ABC mentioned words “not very far from Camp David” in relation to the “crash” of Flight 93, so this is still an open question whether it was Flight 93 or 77 reported as being shot down by that particular news release.

How does this half-hearted, regurgitated report show any proof of a shoot down? You can’t even decide what flight was “shot down” based on the NTV clip.

Now on to this nonsense:

An infamous video with the Freudian slip of the tongue by Donald Rumsfeld where he claims that the “plane was shot down over Pennsylvania” is widely available too

Here is the actual text of Rumsfeld’s comments:

… And I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon, the people who cut off peoples' heads on television to intimidate, to frighten –

In context, Rumsfeld is describing the attacks and that the “[terrorists] shot down the plane…” and not what the U.S. military did. “Freudian slip”? Hardly. Cleverly taking a statement out of context to fit some delusional agenda? Definitely.

This unprecedented piece of 9/11 evidence has been recently discovered by Dimitri A. Khalezov – a serious 9/11 researcher and an eye-witness to the actual 9/11 conspiracy. Contacts: www dot dkhalezov dot com

Eye-witness to what, actually? The same series of news reports on the television that billions of others were privy to?

Make sure to download and to read 120 pages e-book by Dimitri A. Khalezov “V for Vendetta and R for Reality - The Third Truth about 9/11 or Defending the US Government which has only the first two…”, otherwise known as “9/11thology” … This book written by a former officer of the Soviet nuclear intelligence (who really knows the subject) explains in detail what actually happened with the Twin Towers, the WTC building#7 and the Pentagon. No question is left of the former 9/11 mystery. The 26 parts video presentation by Dimitri A. Khalezov dealing with the WTC nuclear demolition and the Soviet “Granit” missile used in the 9/11 missile strike against the Pentagon are also available

So you’re a former Soviet nuclear intelligence officer? Then, without question, you should know very well the aftermath of an uncontained nuclear reaction. Primarily the fact that all of lower Manhattan would have been leveled by even the smallest available nuke and would have instantly killed hundreds of thousands of people in the initial flash. Not to mention the radiation fallout afterward that would cause the death of possibly a million more.

Do you actually read what you write? How you are taking a harmless tiny bit of mis-information and spinning it into the greatest conspiracy coverup of all time[!] is way beyond my comprehension. Nothing you have insinuated makes a damn bit of sense. I have more evidence that Elvis is alive than you do about any of your crazy ideas.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

So you never actualy saw the crash?

Enough to see Wallace Miller picking up material a week later. :D

[INRM]

How would Flight 93 getting shot down confirm 9/11 Truth?

Assuming the official story was true in that the plane was hijacked by terrorists, three already crashed into buildings, wouldn't it be logical to shoot the last one down before it could hit another?

[Horatius]

How would Flight 93 getting shot down confirm 9/11 Truth?

Assuming the official story was true in that the plane was hijacked by terrorists, three already crashed into buildings, wouldn't it be logical to shoot the last one down before it could hit another?



It's the thin edge of the wedge. They think that, if they can prove the government lied about what happened to 93, it will call into question all the other things the government has said about 9/11.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

How would Flight 93 getting shot down confirm 9/11 Truth?

Assuming the official story was true in that the plane was hijacked by terrorists, three already crashed into buildings, wouldn't it be logical to shoot the last one down before it could hit another?

Depends if they could find it without the help of the transponder. Although there are plenty of witnesses who saw Flight 93 fly overhead, there wasn't a jet fighter any where near it.

However, Bill Wright was close enough to Flight 93 to see what was happening:

http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/r/966339/detail.html

[George152]

Good job. This guy is not only lying, he's asking people to download zip files of unknown provenance.

Watch out!



And this sort of geek is pretty good at infecting your machine while you're downloading.
50 meg takes enough time...
However if you're running Linux it might be fun to see what he's trying to do

[fess]

Has the Russian Rouge posted anything that resembles new evidence as yet?

[TraneWreck]

This is EVIDENCE admissible in the court-room!


That phrase...

I somehow involved myself in an argument with a moron on YouTube who said that over and over. It was on the topic of 9-11 as well, so either it's a popular phrase in the fantasy world of the paranoid or this is the same guy.

I will say now as I said then that even people who are really wrong, distort facts, and blatantly lie admit evidence into a courtroom. In fact, many cases hinge on the quality of that evidence:

"Mr. Forensics Expert, the Defendant claims that this rod, admitted into evidence, was the actual murder weapon, is this true?'

"In my opinion this couldn't have been the murder weapon..."

Notice that trials are often about things entered at evidence. They may be authenticated before, but the legitimacy isn't confirmed by admission.

[ElMondoHummus]

I'm gone for a few days, and our narcissistic "russian" shows up trying to garner traffic to his website with yet another supposed smoking gun? Yeech... there truly is nothing new in 9/11 conspiracy peddling, is there?

Has anyone looked at the supposed evidence our "intelligence officer" here is proffering? If it's not another rehash of the supposed "Col. De Grand-Pre" bullpucky (remember? The guy who supposedly ID'd a "Major Rick Gibney" as the guy who fired missiles at FL93 (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-flight-93#f16pilot)?) it's probably another contextual abuse of the witness testimony a-la Killtownian "evidence". Either way, until the proposal explains

The debris trail not being miles long,
The lack of military aircraft on radar in the area
The lack of a missile track on radar
The lack of any explosions or pilot panic in the CVR, and
The lack of any mechanical or electronic failures in the FDR data prior to impact
... then the proposal fails. We know what the pattern of debris was, we know what the CVR and FDR contained, we know what the radar data was... in short, we have facts we can compare claims to. And when the conspiracy proposal does not meet up with or explain those facts, then there's nothing else to say except: Fail.

Come up with something better Dmitri. This one's lame.

[dafydd]

How would Flight 93 getting shot down confirm 9/11 Truth?

Assuming the official story was true in that the plane was hijacked by terrorists, three already crashed into buildings, wouldn't it be logical to shoot the last one down before it could hit another?

Truthers are incapable of thinking that far ahead.

[Horatius]

Has anyone looked at the supposed evidence our "intelligence officer" here is proffering? If it's not another rehash of the supposed "Col. De Grand-Pre" bullpucky



I looked at it, and about 90% was as you said, De Grand-Pre rehashed. He's added a Russian TV report from 9/11, that he claims repeats the "shot-down" message*. All the other stuff about "Even a pilot who actually shot down the aircraft was present himself in the CNN news release and said a few words" is still unsupported BS.



*Anyone here speak Russian? Since I've already downloaded it, I suppose I could post it on YouTube, if people really want to see it.

[Captain_Swoop]

Enough to see Wallace Miller picking up material a week later. :D

While there isn't any evidence that the aircraft was shot down and there is a whole mountain of evidence that it crashed due to the actions of the hijackers, I don't think living 20 miles away is any evidence at all if you didn't witness the event.

[commandlinegamer]

Just like to add two news reports that turned out to be wrong:

The headline 'All saved after collision' about the Titanic sinking.

And the July 2005 bombings in London; initially TV was stating that there had been some sort of power surge on the Underground.

Unfortunately the truth in both cases was much worse.

[Sabretooth]

I looked at it, and about 90% was as you said, De Grand-Pre rehashed. He's added a Russian TV report from 9/11, that he claims repeats the "shot-down" message*. All the other stuff about "Even a pilot who actually shot down the aircraft was present himself in the CNN news release and said a few words"

Here's the thing that really gets me. Dimitri has basically claimed that all the news reported to us is part of the cover-up, right? But then turns around and presents "evidence" which is nothing more than the Russians repeating CNN. So the fact that the info is second-hand and being reported in mother-russia...it makes it valid? Hypocricy at its finest :boggled:

I spent some time this morning googling his name. He is part of every truther forum out there and even they think he's nuts.

Oh, and he's peddling that 500 page book of his (the Third Truth) for the low-low price of $49.99. :jaw-dropp

He's not even willing to prove that he's a "Soviet Nuclear Intelligence Officer", let alone his "theories". IMHO, I believe this guy is certifiably bat **** crazy. :eye-poppi

[ElMondoHummus]

I looked at it, and about 90% was as you said, De Grand-Pre rehashed. He's added a Russian TV report from 9/11, that he claims repeats the "shot-down" message*. All the other stuff about "Even a pilot who actually shot down the aircraft was present himself in the CNN news release and said a few words" is still unsupported BS.



*Anyone here speak Russian? Since I've already downloaded it, I suppose I could post it on YouTube, if people really want to see it.

That's exactly what I thought.

For the record (and for people who might not have heard of this before): Anyone who tries to claim that there is a US military officer on record confirming the shootdown is inevitably talking about a retired officer Col. Donn de Grand-Pre. More info here:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=65156

... and yes, cue the "that's so 2006!" posts because this linked thread is indeed from 2006.

The "substance" :rolleyes: of De Grand-Pre's claims is that he supposedly knows the F-16 pilot who supposedly shot down FL93. He names a Major Rick Gibney, and then goes on to claim that he fired a pair of sidewinder missiles at the jet. That is contradictd by the radar and FDR data, but let's also not forget the following:

On 9/11, Rick Gibney was a Lt. Colonel, not a Major.
Lt. Col. Gibney was, at the time of the event, documented to have been en route from Fargo, North Dakota to Bozeman, Montanna, to pick up a New York state government official and take him to NY to coordinate the state-level response to the Twin Towers attack. So during the time of the United 93 events, Lt. Col. Gibney was nowhere near Shanksville. And no, a sidewinder doesn't have that much range :cool:. That official - Ed Jacoby Jr., director of the New York State Emergency Management Office - confirms Gibney's whereabouts.
De Grand-Pre claims a friendship with then Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Hugh Shelton, the insinuation being that this is an example of the sorts of contacts De Grand-Pre has access to; or in short, it's a one-degree of separation argument from authority. Problem is, Popular Mechanics interviewed Gen. Shelton, and was told that he doesn't even know who De Grand-Pre is.
In short, De Grand-Pre gets basic facts wrong, plus is not known by the authority he claims to have access to and cites as a source of one of his claims (De Grand-Pre is on record as having pushed the "no hijackers" myth (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1967244#post1967244)). On top of that, he never validates his claims with verifiable evidence.

More info:

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/09/donn-de-grand-pre-returns.html
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-flight-93#f16pilot
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=104587


And that puts to rest the claim once again. For what, the 3rd or 4th time now?

-----

In other news: Can we rename this subforum "The Fridge"? All that seems to get put in here by truthers are leftovers...

[triforcharity]

Truthers are incapable of thinking that far ahead.

There, that's better....

[Sabretooth]

In other news: Can we rename this subforum "The Fridge"? All that seems to get put in here by truthers are leftovers...

Absolutely, but I get dibs on the day old pizza :D

[ElMondoHummus]

Absolutely, but I get dibs on the day old pizza :D

I hate to tell you this, but: It's more than a day old. (*Knocks slice on tabletop, gets dull thud demonstrating fossilization state*)

:covereyes

[ElMondoHummus]

How would Flight 93 getting shot down confirm 9/11 Truth?

Assuming the official story was true in that the plane was hijacked by terrorists, three already crashed into buildings, wouldn't it be logical to shoot the last one down before it could hit another?

In a way, it would contradict large swaths of 9/11 conspiracy fantasy because it would be a validation that the jets were hijacked. But as was pointed out, truthers don't think that far ahead (or at all, as Tri's noted :D). They're only grabbing at anything that they could use to say "See! Government Coverup!!". They're not worried about internal contradictions. Hell, they're apparently not even affected by them; if they were, whole groups of conspiracy peddlers would've dropped unconscious from sheer cognitive dissonance. Obviously, they're able to function in spite of such contradictions.

[Macgyver1968]

Hmmm.....fossilized pizza....drool. The microwave will freshen in up!

[alienentity]

In other news: Can we rename this subforum "The Fridge"? All that seems to get put in here by truthers are leftovers...

LMAO! Move over, Meatloaf! Bat**** out of Hell is coming.

[alienentity]

Leftovers from 2006....Yum.

[leftysergeant]

Anyone who even brings up De Grand-Pre is too ignorant to be taken seriously. DGP was a figment of his own imagination. there is, as far as I can determine, no evidence that he ever so much as swabbed a latrine floor.

The moron lied a lot. He pulled stuff out of his underwear. His ear crickets were the loudest in the country.

You get where I"m going with this?

Dmitri, you've brought us mushroom food. Compost pile is thataway.--->

[sheeplesnshills]

I'm gone for a few days, and our narcissistic "russian" shows up trying to garner traffic to his website with yet another supposed smoking gun? Yeech... there truly is nothing new in 9/11 conspiracy peddling, is there?

Has anyone looked at the supposed evidence our "intelligence officer" here is proffering? If it's not another rehash of the supposed "Col. De Grand-Pre" bullpucky (remember? The guy who supposedly ID'd a "Major Rick Gibney" as the guy who fired missiles at FL93 (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-flight-93#f16pilot)?) it's probably another contextual abuse of the witness testimony a-la Killtownian "evidence". Either way, until the proposal explains

The debris trail not being miles long,
The lack of military aircraft on radar in the area
The lack of a missile track on radar
The lack of any explosions or pilot panic in the CVR, and
The lack of any mechanical or electronic failures in the FDR data prior to impact
... then the proposal fails. We know what the pattern of debris was, we know what the CVR and FDR contained, we know what the radar data was... in short, we have facts we can compare claims to. And when the conspiracy proposal does not meet up with or explain those facts, then there's nothing else to say except: Fail.

Come up with something better Dmitri. This one's lame.


Add in no credible reason why they would lie about shooting it down......thats what the air force would have done if they could have and only idiots would have complained about it. Its simple Math, 40 or so people in a jet versus possible hundreds or thousands if they hit a well chosen target. I wouldn't have wanted to be the pilot that did it but I would have fired the missile........

[Sabretooth]

Add in no credible reason why they would lie about shooting it down......thats what the air force would have done if they could have and only idiots would have complained about it. Its simple Math, 40 or so people in a jet versus possible hundreds or thousands if they hit a well chosen target. I wouldn't have wanted to be the pilot that did it but I would have fired the missile........

Agreed. From my POV, it would have lended credibility to the military for the ability to defend the country from inside its own border. An unfortunate and abysmally sad set of circumstances for those passengers on 93, absolutely, but it was an act of war. This is an instance of the good of the many would have outweighed the good of the few.

I also agree with that last statement...it'd be awfully hard for me to pull that trigger... :(

[BaaBaa]

They do have useless lives. Look how many of those lunatics go to Ground Zero & parade their little pamplets of propaganda in order to induce mass hysteria & paranoia & trumpet thier chants of "9/11 was an Inside Job" like a bunch of drunken & drug induced morons.


That's a really mean thing to say.

About alcoholics and stoners, I mean.

[leftysergeant]

The rebellion of the passengers was an act of heroism. It showed the kind of spirit needed in a free people in times of war.

It is not what a petty and murderous dictator needs.

Rummy thought that his DoD had taken out the last aircraft. This would have been good for the Bush gang. Their mantra from the first attack was "Be afraid. Be very afraid. You need us."

You cannot cow a nation into submission if they all feel that they can, when need be, be heroes.

[catsmate1]

So you’re a former Soviet nuclear intelligence officer? Then, without question, you should know very well the aftermath of an uncontained nuclear reaction. Primarily the fact that all of lower Manhattan would have been leveled by even the smallest available nuke and would have instantly killed hundreds of thousands of people in the initial flash. Not to mention the radiation fallout afterward that would cause the death of possibly a million more.

Do you actually read what you write? How you are taking a harmless tiny bit of mis-information and spinning it into the greatest conspiracy coverup of all time[!] is way beyond my comprehension. Nothing you have insinuated makes a damn bit of sense. I have more evidence that Elvis is alive than you do about any of your crazy ideas.

Indeed. Even a weapon close to the lower limit for a fission weapon (~10t TNT equivalent), such as the old US W54 and variants of it or the British Purple Passion, would produce lethal radiation effects out to ~4-500m. In addition there'd be the residue of the fissionable material (such small bombs are inefficient versions of bigger bombs) and material irradiated by neutrons from the weapon.
This picture (http://nuclear-weapons.info/images/wee-gwen200px.png) shows projected radiation effects of the British Wee Gnat/Gwen weapon, a 10-20t tactical bomb. Where are the radiation casualties from the WTC complex? Where are the cancer sufferers? Those rendered sterile?
No-one with knowledge of the characteristics of nuclear weapons would entertain "Dmitri's" story for an instant.

[leftysergeant]

Where are the radiation casualties from the WTC complex? Where are the cancer sufferers? Those rendered sterile?

Patheticly short list, dude. you forgot the blind people who were looking directly at the fireball at close range and all the digital cameras that didn't burn out and all the miles of film that were not fogged beyond recovery.

And why, with all that silica and calcite and iron was there no trinitite in the rubble?

Go get the long version of the NWO talking points. I'm sure someone left the latest update in the "IN" box on you desk.

[911thology]

Hi to everyone.

This time there is a genuine FOX news release that 4th aircraft was SHOT DOWN by the US National Air Guard - even names and Wing No. are mentioned!

This time it is in English and published on YouTube. No downloads of zip files and no translation required.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMrF1caOmOw

Enjoy.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

This time there is a genuine FOX news release that 4th aircraft was SHOT DOWN by the US National Air Guard - even names and Wing No. are mentioned!



Air National Guard is organized by each of the 50 states, plus D.C. Mentioned in the clips were the D.C. ANG, not some "US National Air Guard". The reporter says it very clearly and yet you somehow managed to hear some different.
The first clip only mentions that a D.C. ANG fighter had been called upon for an intercept. No shootdown mentioned. A timeframe isn't even mentioned. This is very important.
The second clip mentions a D.C. ANG fighter deterring a plane; likely one already in D.C. airspace, not way the hell out in southwestern Pennsylvania. There's also no explicit mention of a shootdown. No timeframe mentioned again.


[...] even names and Wing No. are mentioned!


No, they aren't. Seek professional help. There is something very wrong with you.

[djlunacee]

That phrase...

I somehow involved myself in an argument with a moron on YouTube who said that over and over. It was on the topic of 9-11 as well, so either it's a popular phrase in the fantasy world of the paranoid or this is the same guy.

I will say now as I said then that even people who are really wrong, distort facts, and blatantly lie admit evidence into a courtroom. In fact, many cases hinge on the quality of that evidence:

"Mr. Forensics Expert, the Defendant claims that this rod, admitted into evidence, was the actual murder weapon, is this true?'

"In my opinion this couldn't have been the murder weapon..."

Notice that trials are often about things entered at evidence. They may be authenticated before, but the legitimacy isn't confirmed by admission.

My response to that is pretty simple, then why didn't the defense team for ZM bring all this evidence into the court and at least create a REASONABLE doubt?

Edited for civility. Please read the Membership Agreement, and pay particular attention to Rules 12 and 0.

[Horatius]

Hi to everyone.

This time there is a genuine FOX news release that 4th aircraft was SHOT DOWN by the US National Air Guard - even names and Wing No. are mentioned!

This time it is in English and published on YouTube. No downloads of zip files and no translation required.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMrF1caOmOw

Enjoy.



Ahem. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6245494#post6245494)

[911thology]

My response to that is pretty simple, then why didn't the defense team for ZM bring all this evidence into the court and at least create a REASONABLE doubt? Removed quoted moderated content

I remember when I made some ironic comment (without insulting anyone even to the least extent) some admin immediately jumped in and threaten that my account would be suspended if I would continue with irony. However, in the post quoted above there is a direct offensive words. Where is the admin?

Just to make it clear: I don't give a **** actually about instults - but this is merely a matter of principle, because apparent double-standards could be observed here.

So ????

Regarding "liar". I participated only in one thread here, not counting these about flight 93. That one was about my video on the WTC nuclear demolition. On that thread I did not lie to anyone. Moreover, I did mind to discuss that with some people there. But they did not want the discussion to continue and created the conditions that the discussion quickly came to the dead end. What I could do? But it does not mean anything - if you want to continue that discussion, open a new thread and call me there. I will be pleased to answer all questions regarding the WTC nuclear demolition (providing, of course, that general rules of discussion are observed).

Still, admin is called in to investigate the double-standards.

[Mr.Herbert]

Hi to everyone.

This time there is a genuine FOX news release that 4th aircraft was SHOT DOWN by the US National Air Guard - even names and Wing No. are mentioned!


There.... you are a liar.

[Horatius]

I remember when I made some ironic comment (without insulting anyone even to the least extent) some admin immediately jumped in and threaten that my account would be suspended if I would continue with irony. However, in the post quoted above there is a direct offensive words. Where is the admin?

Just to make it clear: I don't give a **** actually about instults - but this is merely a matter of principle, because apparent double-standards could be observed here.

So ????

Regarding "liar". I participated only in one thread here, not counting these about flight 93. That one was about my video on the WTC nuclear demolition. On that thread I did not lie to anyone. Moreover, I did mind to discuss that with some people there. But they did not want the discussion to continue and created the conditions that the discussion quickly came to the dead end. What I could do? But it does not mean anything - if you want to continue that discussion, open a new thread and call me there. I will be pleased to answer all questions regarding the WTC nuclear demolition (providing, of course, that general rules of discussion are observed).

Still, admin is called in to investigate the double-standards.



Have you reported that post? Because unless it's reported, the "admin" is unlikely to ever see it. Even they can't stand reading 9/11 nonsense.


Of course, I have reported it, just to show you that your "double standards" paranoia is unfounded.


Care to wager on the outcome of that report?

[beachnut]

Hi to everyone.

This time there is a genuine FOX news release that 4th aircraft was SHOT DOWN by the US National Air Guard - even names and Wing No. are mentioned!

This time it is in English and published on YouTube. No downloads of zip files and no translation required.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMrF1caOmOw

Enjoy. You posted no evidence, you posted hearsay and made up the shoot down!

It did not say a plane was shot down. Looks like you do need a translation. You have lied again, no nukes and no shoot down. At least you are always wrong on 911; you are consistent.

You made the video? You are pushing lies.

The FDR and crash site for 93 proved no shoot down. You can add another delusion to your Nuke delusion.

genuine BS

[djlunacee]

I remember when I made some ironic comment (without insulting anyone even to the least extent) some admin immediately jumped in and threaten that my account would be suspended if I would continue with irony. However, in the post quoted above there is a direct offensive words. Where is the admin?

Just to make it clear: I don't give a **** actually about instults - but this is merely a matter of principle, because apparent double-standards could be observed here.

So ????

Regarding "liar". I participated only in one thread here, not counting these about flight 93. That one was about my video on the WTC nuclear demolition. On that thread I did not lie to anyone. Moreover, I did mind to discuss that with some people there. But they did not want the discussion to continue and created the conditions that the discussion quickly came to the dead end. What I could do? But it does not mean anything - if you want to continue that discussion, open a new thread and call me there. I will be pleased to answer all questions regarding the WTC nuclear demolition (providing, of course, that general rules of discussion are observed).

Still, admin is called in to investigate the double-standards.

Yes, I received my punishment and now have to eat slop in the cafeteria for the next 48 hours, to the admin, I do apologize.

Now on to the point, simply put, nowhere in that video compilation of yours does it state definitavely that 93 was shot down. Can you please explain to the readers here, how you came to the conclusion that the words assist, deter, dispatched, conclude in a shoot down? And please present the physical evidence to support this theory.

[Bell]

Why do truthers lie so much about there so called evidence?

[T.A.M.]

Because without fabrications and speculation they have nothing.

TAM:)

[Sabrina]

Why do so many truthers also assume that "intercept" in military parlance translates to "shoot down"? In most cases, "intercept" merely means "locate and observe". Not "fire your weapon upon".

[Horatius]

Why do so many truthers also assume that "intercept" in military parlance translates to "shoot down"? In most cases, "intercept" merely means "locate and observe". Not "fire your weapon upon".



Because they're ignorant, both of military parlance and their own ignorance.

[dafydd]

I will be pleased to answer all questions regarding the WTC nuclear demolition (providing, of course, that general rules of discussion are observed).


How can we ask you questions about an event that never took place? I can't quite believe that you are serious.Please tell me that you are a troll.

[C_Felix]

I love stirring the pot...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Xoxaf1Al0

What bugs me about that, is how casual the remark is, like it is old news to him.

Could it have just been on honest mistake? Sure.
But, again, the casualness of it, kinda like, "Oh yeah, I remember when John Lennon was killed."

[beachnut]

I love stirring the pot...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Xoxaf1Al0

What bugs me about that, is how casual the remark is, like it is old news to him.

Could it have just been on honest mistake? Sure.
But, again, the casualness of it, kinda like, "Oh yeah, I remember when John Lennon was killed."

He was talking about what terrorists did. 911 truth failed on 911. The fact is morons take Rumsfeld talking about terrorists, and turn it into flight 93 being shot-down. How can someone take Rumsfeld talking about what terrorists did and make up a failed delusion?

What bugs me is you failed to catch he was talking about what terrorists did. What bugs me is 911 truth fails to use evidence, they use idiot failed comprehension and ignore facts and evidence.

[dafydd]

I remember when I made some ironic comment (without insulting anyone even to the least extent) some admin immediately jumped in and threaten that my account would be suspended if I would continue with irony. However, in the post quoted above there is a direct offensive words. Where is the admin?

Just to make it clear: I don't give a **** actually about instults - but this is merely a matter of principle, because apparent double-standards could be observed here.

So ????

Regarding "liar". I participated only in one thread here, not counting these about flight 93. That one was about my video on the WTC nuclear demolition. On that thread I did not lie to anyone. Moreover, I did mind to discuss that with some people there. But they did not want the discussion to continue and created the conditions that the discussion quickly came to the dead end. What I could do? But it does not mean anything - if you want to continue that discussion, open a new thread and call me there. I will be pleased to answer all questions regarding the WTC nuclear demolition (providing, of course, that general rules of discussion are observed).

Still, admin is called in to investigate the double-standards.

Er...there was no nuclear detonation.Please tell me that you are a troll.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Hi to everyone.

This time there is a genuine FOX news release that 4th aircraft was SHOT DOWN by the US National Air Guard - even names and Wing No. are mentioned!

This time it is in English and published on YouTube. No downloads of zip files and no translation required.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMrF1caOmOw

Enjoy.

And you're so wrong dude! I beat you to the punch on page 3.

Pilot Witnesses Flight 93's Final Moments: Bill Wright

http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/r/966339/detail.html

Bill Wright was the only 1 near to Flight 93 that his passenger & him noticed that it was rocking its wings back & forth & he said that it fits with the passengers fighting for control of the plane. So keep on believeing your little fantasy of the "shot down" theory, cause you ain't gonna prove anything.

For the record, Bill Wright was there & you weren't.

[C_Felix]

He was talking about what terrorists did. 911 truth failed on 911. The fact is morons take Rumsfeld talking about terrorists, and turn it into flight 93 being shot-down. How can someone take Rumsfeld talking about what terrorists did and make up a failed delusion?

What bugs me is you failed to catch he was talking about what terrorists did. What bugs me is 911 truth fails to use evidence, they use idiot failed comprehension and ignore facts and evidence.

So..uh..storming the cabin and making the terrorist pilots decide to fly the plane down is "shot down?"

FYI. I'm not a foil-hat guy. I just always found that little quote interesting.

[beachnut]

So..uh..storming the cabin and making the terrorist pilots decide to fly the plane down is "shot down?"

FYI. I'm not a foil-hat guy. I just always found that little quote interesting.

Ask Rumsfeld what he meant. He was talking about what the terrorists did on 911. And the terrorists did take down Flight 93.

It is sad 911 truth makes up lies based on a quote taken out of context. How can they make a logical step from Rumsfeld clearly talking about what terrorists did, to saying NORAD/USAF shot down Flight 93.

Simple research shows no USAF assets with the ability to shoot-down 93 in the area. Plus, the FDR shows the aircraft perfect at impact, no damage. In addition, the crash site is exactly that of an intact Flight 93.

Rumsfeld never said the USAF shot down Flight 93; it is a fact. Don't tell 911 truth they will dustify and melt into piles of purified liquid stupid.

Took down, shot down - 93 was flown into the ground by terrorists, the FDR proves it. If Rumsfeld wants to say the terrorists took down flight 93 by misspeaking with shot-down, who cares. Ask Rumsfeld, he will not answer because only an idiot would be dumb enough to turn what the terrorists did into the delusion from the OP. The OP is a delusion, could it be from a mind shaken, not stirred by a dull scalpel?

I have been shot down many times- now 911 truth has (many times over)! Does an attack by passengers forcing chicken terrorists to fly into the ground; can that be called, "shot down"? YES!

The terrorists were shot down by Passengers on Flight 93 who figured out 911 in minutes - makes 911 truth look like morons without functioning brains. And 911 truth was shot down on 911, self-inflicted.

911 truth - not as smart as a fifth grader

[Sabretooth]

So..uh..storming the cabin and making the terrorist pilots decide to fly the plane down is "shot down?"

FYI. I'm not a foil-hat guy. I just always found that little quote interesting.

It doesn't matter what he said...shot down, brought down, took down, pissed down...in context, he was making the point that terrorists brought the plane down...plain and simple, not to mention useless.