What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.864 Comments
- ImperialRome, on 07/24/2008, -74/+1254B.S.
Hamdan believes the plane was shot down. That is not the same as the US Navy "admitting" that the plane was shot down. The title of the post is deceptive and wrong.
Planes do not "smash into their own footprint". Plane debris scatters, and considering the tumble effect, they throw debris for miles. Jets travel at about 500-600 mph except for landings and takeoffs. At that speed, the velocity of debris is 900 feet per second, so its not unusual for a "engine" to continue traveling after impact for several seconds.
The Black box taken from flight 93 shows the controls being pushed over, into a screaming dive, and the voice recorder carries the sounds of a struggle and the passengers crashing through the cockpit door.
Missiles when they hit planes usually fragment, not contact detonate, and the fragments destroy the fuel lines, hydraulic lines, and very precisely balanced turbines. Planes that are shot down also tend to lose velocity and stall out, not pitch over and nose in. There would be telltale signs of a shootdown, like internal fragmentation.
The engines on flight 93 show that they were turning full speed and were smashed by the impact, which flattens the turbine blades, where a missile hit would cause the turbine to tear itself apart from the inside through unbalanced centrifugal forces.
As for the comments from President Bush, the information he was referring to was about other terror attacks that had been planned but not carried out. There were other AQ operatives in the US, and they had other missions. Remember Jose Padilla?
This has all been debunked before. - canewediggit, on 07/24/2008, -17/+638it's not the lead b/c you didn't rtfa. the navy official is quoting an al-qaeda prisoner, not making a claim. buried as inaccurate. look at the digg title above and now look at the raw story title "Gitmo prosecutor repeats al Qaeda deputy's claim: Flight 93 was shot down on 9/11"
see the difference? - vexingmodstwo, on 07/24/2008, -144/+440A perfect illustration of how a statement, taken out of context, can spawn the wildest conspiracy theories.
Anyone who thinks 9/11 was in inside job is an idiot. - JohnReb, on 07/24/2008, -11/+244Person who rad the actual article 1
Person who simply believed the title of the Digg submission 0 - obliviousfool, on 07/24/2008, -79/+307All four planes should have been shot down. NORAD was asleep, doing drills, standing down, and playing war games. I'm glad at least a portion of our air defenses didn't get that memo.
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -32/+237Buried as inaccurate for the deliberately misleading headline.
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 07/24/2008, -22/+215Navy official quoting terrorist captured in Afghanistan who wouldn't know better: 9/11 Flight 93 was shot down.
fixed - inactive, on 07/24/2008, -27/+182""If they hadn't shot down the fourth plane it would've hit the dome," Stone, a Navy officer, said in his opening remarks, repeating Bin Laden's deputy's claim.
The tribunal's chief prosecutor, Col. Lawrence Morris, later explained that Stone was quoting Hamdan in evidence that will be presented at trial. Morris declined to say if the "dome" was a reference to the U.S. Capitol."
You freaks will do ANYTHING to spin a story towards your lies, won't you? Truth be damned, if you can trick someone.
Now, tell us that Bin Laden's driver got the memo from the state department after the fact, letting him know we shot down the plane. That is your contention? ***** idiots. - Cordier, on 07/24/2008, -272/+398Why isn't this the lede on page 1 above the fold on every newspaper across America?
- CrazyEddie041, on 07/24/2008, -6/+128Comment dugg, article buried.
- FeargusMcDuff, on 07/24/2008, -18/+135Because the newspapers would lose credibility over being associated with such a ridiculous and unsubstantiated theory
- louise12345, on 07/24/2008, -42/+155Question is, if it was indeed shot down. Why not just say that's what had to be done? The truth has a way of turning up when you least expect it.
- ImperialRome, on 07/24/2008, -107/+209Go read Popular Mechanics series on the myths of 9-11 and then tell me about how this was an inside job.
- Hetman, on 07/24/2008, -8/+96Who benefits from school shootings? Anti-Gun lobbyist. Therefor Anti-Gun Lobbyist must be behind school shootings.
- didiman, on 07/24/2008, -28/+110raw story is pathetic, this headline is one of the most misleading i've ever seen. Rawstory = always buried as inaccurate.
- whataboutdave, on 07/24/2008, -8/+84Buried inaccurate. It's obvious that he is quoting the detainee.
- MacEnvy, on 07/24/2008, -4/+77Why stop quoting in the middle of the sentence? Or right, because you're trying to mislead people. Here's the continuation FTFA:
""If they hadn't shot down the fourth plane it would've hit the dome," Stone, a Navy officer, said in his opening remarks, repeating Bin Laden's deputy's claim.
The tribunal's chief prosecutor, Col. Lawrence Morris, later explained that Stone was quoting Hamdan in evidence that will be presented at trial. Morris declined to say if the "dome" was a reference to the U.S. Capitol." - inactive, on 07/24/2008, -10/+78It defies logic, but this story would have you believe that after they did intercept, and shoot down the plane, they gave Bin Laden a call to let him know. Cuz, you know, that's what best buds do.
"Sorry Osama, I know we agreed to let you fly that plane into the White House, but we had a last minute change of plans. I know this was planned out meticulously, with the planes hitting some places, but then blowing up the buildings, then not using planes elsewhere, then using planes but shooting them down. We thought we'd call to let you know we shot the last plane down, just to ***** up our evil plan a little more. Thanks for understanding", or something like that. Yeah, makes PERFECT sense. - BohicaTwentyTwo, on 07/24/2008, -19/+87NORAD was first notified of a possible hijacking at 8:37 am, nine minutes before flight 11 hit WTC 1. How could they possibly have made an intercept in that amount of time?
- JohnReb, on 07/24/2008, -29/+98Typical 9/11 fantasy brigade submission. Taking a quote out of context and refusing to actually read the article since that might burst the bubble of the "inside job" myth.
- TreatsTheBear, on 07/24/2008, -12/+79I agree. Buried for inaccurate, 'truther'-baiting headline.
Shameful. - DreadPirate, on 07/24/2008, -9/+72Bohica - truthers have an overinflated expectation of our military when it suits them. Despite the fact that we do not normally have planes around the NY area on ready alert, they expect the military to shoot down planes within seconds of getting a warning.
- Origin415, on 07/24/2008, -2/+61Columbine was an inside job.
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -16/+74Anyone want to be the VERY SAME people who say "the FBI doesn't even have Bin Laden on their arrest list, because they know he had nothing to do with it", will be here saying his driver making this claim proves the plane was shot down?
Not involved, but then so directly involved, we are calling him afterward to let him know...
Congratulations, everyone who Dugg this story up, You are all excellent candidates for losing everything you own to a low level scam artist... - GlobalistShill, on 07/24/2008, -72/+125Rupert Murdoch. David Rockefeller.
- Gryffydd, on 07/24/2008, -4/+53Yes, because a crashed plane leaves a hole in the ground shaped just like its outline, kind of like when cartoons hit the ground.
- drmangrum, on 07/24/2008, -12/+59Buried as inaccurate, sensational, completely out of context, misleading *****.
- scheibs14, on 07/24/2008, -14/+61Buried as inaccurate
- GeorgeStone2, on 07/24/2008, -11/+54That's better. This ***** makes me so angry.
9/11 "truthers" swarm over this *****, come out of the woodwork and spout their crap.
They never put forth a coherent argument, only ever quote little discrepancies then let other idiots fill in the blanks.
For example:
Truther:"Did you know that fire has never made a skyscraper fall until wtc7?"
Moron:"OMG, in that case it was george bush"
Sane person:"Well another much bigger building did fall on it.. Maybe that cou-"
Truther:"GET A CLUE! STOP BEING SUCH A SHEEP AND USE GOOGLE AND STUFF! DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA LOGICAL ARGUMENTS HURT MY FEELINGS WAAAAAA"
See you at -10000 diggs. - IphtashuFitz, on 07/24/2008, -19/+60Truthers will just claim that that the Bush administration forced Popular Mechanics to print all that stuff to deflect scrutiny of the true conspiracy...
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -16/+57Obliviousfool is both oblivious and a fool. Discuss.
- vexingmodstwo, on 07/24/2008, -7/+45After careful consideration of your lunacy, I'll stick to my initial assessment. Thanks.
- birthofthecool, on 07/24/2008, -8/+46"Anyone who thinks 9/11 was in inside job is an idiot." +103 Diggs
Did Hell just freeze over? - Hortnon, on 07/24/2008, -12/+49Would you want to be the guy to make the decision to shoot down 100 innocent Americans over US soil?
Would you want to then admit this decision publicly and have it second-guessed for years to come?
My guess is, if it happened that way, it'll come out AFTER Bush is out of office. - Sornos, on 07/24/2008, -6/+42Planes do not "smash into their own footprints". During a crash landing (keyword being landing, where the pilot is trying to survive), sure the fuselage will remain intact, but during a high velocity crash, the plane does not stay in one piece. A 800,000 lb aircraft traveling at 560 miles per hour falling from 50,000 feet filled with explosive fuel, does not leave a small crater.
- DiggasWAttitude, on 07/24/2008, -9/+46Read The FA and bury accordingly.
- KungFooJesus, on 07/24/2008, -5/+40I'd rather have 500 articles about LOLcats on the front page than this drivel. Completely agree with your argument.
Poster is unintelligent at best or poorly manipulative at worst. - phoenixshard, on 07/24/2008, -1/+34Naval officer that quoted what he overheard.
"The tribunal's chief prosecutor, Col. Lawrence Morris, later explained that Stone was quoting Hamdan in evidence that will be presented at trial. Morris declined to say if the "dome" was a reference to the U.S. Capitol."
You might have missed that part I'm thinking. - DooM, on 07/24/2008, -2/+35The submitter was innaccurate - just to be (ahem) ACCURATE the Raw Story headline is: "Gitmo prosecutor repeats al Qaeda deputy's claim: Flight 93 was shot down on 9/11"
- vexingmodstwo, on 07/24/2008, -16/+49I'm astounded by the ***** that makes the front page.
- TrevorBelmont, on 07/24/2008, -19/+49I've had enough of people with unpopular opinions and theories being insulted. The whole, un-obscured truth of this event has clearly not been fully exposed. Attacking the intelligence and sanity of those with an opposing opinion is a cowardly and desperate act. It supports mob rule and discourages independent thought. If you assume that someone has to be stupid or crazy to come to a conclusion that is not your own it means that you have stopped questioning that which you believe to be true, and that means that if you're mistaken, you will persist in ignorance.
Please, to every one reading this, if you think someone's opinion is absurd or even insane, respond to it with substance. Illuminate the flaws in their arguments with facts. Leave out personal attacks and accusations of wearing tin foil hats. When the argument becomes about the man and not the idea, you victimize the truth. - mikedub1219, on 07/24/2008, -25/+54and i thought we were done with all these conspiracies
- brundlefly76, on 07/24/2008, -5/+35Other headlines featured on the same website's ad-banner-slathered frontpage:
"Moon-walker claims alien cover-up"
"ACLU OBTAINS CIA TORTURE MEMOS" (in caps)
Also note that there is no context given to the Naval officer's use of the quote - it is simply stated that he repeated the quote made by the defendant. I suspect he was simply quoting the defendant's testimony in reference, not reinforcing the assertion or in any way establishing his own knowledge of the incident.
Any clue whatsoever as to the context of the naval officer's remarks would have cleared this up, but 'rawstory.com' chose not to give any.
This is exactly the techniques tabloids use to back up sensational headlines to draw readers to sell advertising without exposing themselves to slander or libel. Don't be so freaking gullible - check your news source and your head when reading stories on the internet, don't be drawn into believing conspiracy because it excites you - that is exactly what is intended by the publisher. - NalosLayor, on 07/24/2008, -7/+36""If they hadn't shot down the fourth plane it would've hit the dome," Stone, a Navy officer, said in his opening remarks, repeating Bin Laden's deputy's claim."
All this proves is that Bin Laden's deputy BELIEVES that it was shot down. Considering that I'm sure he'd be predisposed to believe that passengers were unable to overpower his sh*tbag friends, I'd say he has no reason to believe that except his own delusions. - sockpuppets, on 07/24/2008, -4/+32Douchebag 0
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 07/24/2008, -8/+35Oh, a Youtube video. Didn't see that one coming.
- 4bit, on 07/24/2008, -3/+30How about the stack of logic and evidence he gave after that?
- fishbeef33, on 07/24/2008, -18/+45Aw jeez, not this ***** again...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 866 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is