NSA Document Flight 93 intercepted coming soon

Status
Not open for further replies.
jaydeehess said:
You of course have some empirical evidence or reports of such, to support the idea tat the aircraft was gunned down , such as the shells casings being found, the distictive sound of a fighter's guns being heard as a fighter passed nearby.........................?
Click to expand...

In this case, there would not have been shell casings. Aircraft gun systems don't eject their shell casings IIRC. It would be a significant FOD hazard to the engines. It operates on a closed-loop feed and storage system.
 
JoeyDonuts said:
If I remember right, there are only 3 'Fox' codes and they refer to the type of guidance used by the particular missile - either IR, Active Radar, or Semi-Active. I don't remember which is which, and I didn't dabble around in Air Alley long enough to commit the proword for an Air-Air guns engagement to memory.
Click to expand...

Fox 1: Long down to medium range, from old Phoenix and Sparrow to current AMRAAM range.
Fox 2: Short range missile engagement: Sidewinder (or eastern bloc equiv.)
Fox 3: Gun/cannon engagement.
Fox 4: It's actually a joke, not a serious term (as far as I remember; Reheat or Beachnut can correct me if I'm wrong). If you're too close for guns, well... you're close enough for Fox 4 (for those needing blunt language: Midair collision. Which is why it's a joke).

JoeyDonuts said:
That brings us to another point. If it had been a missile, there would have been fragmentary evidence of it. If it had been a guns kill, there would have been fragmentary evidence of it as well. We have RADAR data on UA93's location, and nothing in said data is indicative of UA93 being approached or fired upon by another aircraft.

Plus if it had been a gun kill, what was left of the 20mm slugs would have been relatively easy to locate if they had the right kind of sensing gear. DU or Tungsten.

This whole thing is the same as it ever was.
Click to expand...

Yes, agreed. Keep in mind I was being very facetious. These are Ultima's claims we're talking about here. For the sake of argument, I was making an "if he's correct" statement. The idea of a gun kill of FL93 is indeed contradicted for the reasons you present, as well as the ones I do. It's a dead proposal, but Ultima's floundering here. Which was really my point: He's already declaimed a missile kill, so what's left for him? Answer: An even more ridiculous scenario. He's hit bottom and is furiously digging, and I was underscoring that point.
 
All this talk of missiles and guns! Fools. Don't you know that flight #93 was actually filled with therm*te and shot down over Pennsylvania by none other than disinfo agent Judy Wood and her Beams O' Death? Gawd, read a fricken book you dolts. The real passengers of flight 93 are alive and apparently forced to do NWO laundry on some mountain in Pennsylvania. Sheesh.
 
Last edited:
JoeyDonuts said:
In this case, there would not have been shell casings. Aircraft gun systems don't eject their shell casings IIRC. It would be a significant FOD hazard to the engines. It operates on a closed-loop feed and storage system.
Click to expand...

Point taken, I was envisioning the 20 mm helicopter guns.

I recall watching a recent air-ground strafing by F-18 fighter students. The Vulcan gun fires 100 rounds/second. One would expect to find some of those rounds pehaps. Then there is the almost electronic sounding rasp of its firing.
 
JoeyDonuts said:
In this case, there would not have been shell casings. Aircraft gun systems don't eject their shell casings IIRC. It would be a significant FOD hazard to the engines. It operates on a closed-loop feed and storage system.
Click to expand...

This is correct. The older fighter did eject casings, but newer one (all now in the inventory) don't.

ElMondoHummus said:
Fox 1: Long down to medium range, from old Phoenix and Sparrow to current AMRAAM range. Radar Missile

Fox 2: Short range missile engagement: Sidewinder (or eastern bloc equiv.) IR Missile

Fox 3: Gun/cannon engagement.

Fox 4: It's actually a joke, not a serious term (as far as I remember; Reheat or Beachnut can correct me if I'm wrong). If you're too close for guns, well... you're close enough for Fox 4 (for those needing blunt language: Midair collision. Which is why it's a joke).
Click to expand...

It's known as RAM. It is not a joke. Two of the Andrews F-16's actually discussed it on 9/11 because they were unarmed.

ETA: Apparently, the Fox Codes changed in 1997. The codes I listed above were in use since WWII, apparently they changed with the date of the below document.

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/service_pubs/lbrevity.pdf
 
Last edited:
AJM8125 said:
All this talk of missiles and guns! Fools. Don't you know that flight #93 was actually filled with therm*te and shot down over Pennsylvania by none other than disinfo agent Judy Wood and her Beams O' Death? Gawd, read a fricken book you dolts. The real passengers of flight 93 are alive and apparently forced to do NWO laundry on some mountain in Pennsylvania. Sheesh.
Click to expand...

In retaliation they always put too much starch in the collars. I think they've come to like the tasers.
 
Is this a clumsily phrased way of saying I don't have any data establishing why the engine is 300 yards away? That's right. I don't. [/quote

Thanks for admitting you have no real facts or evidence to support your theory.

Ahhh... so not only was your earlier report of a jet returning "without a missile" is irrelevant, right?
Click to expand...

No its not irrelevant, just more facts and evidence of things going on that day thsat are not in the official story.

And why was the heavy debris located where it was instead of miles away?
Click to expand...

You keep forgetting about the 2 distinct debris felds found miles away. Was the wind blowing in 2 directions/


What is missing is the sound of any impact, explosion, or disintegration. Which is the important part.
Click to expand...

So you did not hear the sound of rushing air on the CVR?
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Funny how there are no actual reports on this or any other plane on 9/11 let alone reports of shell casings or holes in the plane.
Click to expand...
Now you're debunking yourself. Thanks for clarifying that there could not have been a plane shot down on 9/11.
 
Sabrina said:
Another reason for this: He doesn't have it yet.

He CLAIMS to have seen the classified version of it and has stated that it says there was a jet near one of the hijacked planes on 9/11(which incidentally is a MAJOR security violation, assuming he is who he says he is, since that indirectly discloses the contents of a CLASSIFIED document on the unclassified internet) and has filed a FOIA request for an unclassified version which he claims he will post here as soon as he has received it.
Click to expand...

I am still waiting for you to explain how this is a security violation when the information on the critic is on the internet and can be found with minimal research.
 
Gavron said:
Sabrina, you are correct. Divulging classified information on a public internet (referencing he has seen it, what it may contain, and will post it soon) is a definite security breach.
Click to expand...

I am still waiting for an explanation of how this is a security breach when the information on this critic can be found on the internet.
 
Roger,

When will you explain to us what was in the debris fields outside the impact area?
 
lapman said:
Now you're debunking yourself.
Click to expand...

NO i am debunking people that believe the official story. Since no official reports have been released they have no actual evidence to support the official story as they keep stating.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom