Here's a video on the alleged 9/11 flights I haven't seen before . . .

[defendandprotect]

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/752033/9_11_wtc_unbeleavable_update_flight_93_175_9_11/



Basically, "Flight 93" was spotted at Chicago's O'Hare airport by UAL employee who

noted the tail number #N591UA of flight 1111 -- a UA 757.

Further -- FAA reports both N591UA and N612UA -- originally "Flights #93 and #175" as

still valid. But "Flight #11 and #77" are listed as destroyed, though they were not

even scheduled to fly on 9/11.

[Theobald]

1. By 'alleged 9/11 flights' are you suggesting

that 1) Planes didn't fly into the building 2) Planes flew into the building but they weren't jumbo jets or 3) Planes flew into the building, they were jumbo jets, but they were not flights 93 and 175?

[defendandprotect]

2. I'm not suggesting . . .

I'm saying I agree with those who are questioning whether United Airlines is correct

when their schedule shows that two of the alleged flights were not scheduled to fly on

9/11 -- and with questions about whether the FAA is correct when they say that

the planes which flew as flights #93 and #175 (N591UA and N612UA) are still valid?

Also with those questioning how flights #11 and #77 were "destroyed" when they were

not even scheduled to fly on 9/11.

I'm also saying that I agree with those proposing that ONE plane could have been used

to fly in one direction over the NYC skyline and over the WTC towers and then from

the opposite direction -- and then flown down to DC to fly close over the Pentagon where

simultaneously explosions would have been set off.

Perhaps this is the same plane reported as going down in a field --

What we do know is that none of the official/coincidence theory presented by the

government is anything but myth.

[Theobald]

6. OMFG

So you think that it's possible that one plane flew by the first tower and an explosion was set off, then the plane flew around and came back towards the second tower a little while later and another expolosion was set off, and then it flew down to dc by the pentagon and another explosion was set off, and then it possibly flew to PA and crashed in a field? That scenario is ludicrous and the fact you would actually even entertain it beggers belief.

[LARED]

7. This easily wins the "Ironic Post of the Month" award

"I'm also saying that I agree with those proposing that ONE plane could have been used to fly in one direction over the NYC skyline and over the WTC towers and then from the opposite direction -- and then flown down to DC to fly close over the Pentagon where simultaneously explosions would have been set off. Perhaps this is the same plane reported as going down in a field --

To post this utterly ridiculous nonsense of mythical proportions and then finish with...

What we do know is that none of the official/coincidence theory presented by the government is anything but myth.

Is simply an award winning moment.

Congratulations

[Bolo Boffin]

4. Beware of looking into the abyss... n/t

[AZCat]

3. This is no longer true.

The aircraft formerly identified by N591UA and N612UA are deregistered, as of 9/28/2005. The tail numbers have both been reserved by United Airlines, though they are not associated with any aircraft.

[KDLarsen]

5. Sigh, that was debunked about 4 years ago

http://www.911myths.com/html/registration_numbers.html