PDA

View Full Version : Flight 1549 in the Hudson


Kaje23
01-16-2009, 01:11 AM
I've always thought something huge may occur close to the weekend before the inauguration. The emergency landing of Flight 1549 into the Hudson was quite incredible and if not for the excellent piloting and response from the airline crew, that plane could very well have crashed into some densely populated sections of NY or NJ, possibly killing the passengers as well as hundreds if not thousands of people depending on where it crashed.

I've seen videos of birds hitting planes and their engines, causing planes to go down, so I know it's quite possible although very rare. That being said, I can't help but also wonder whether the heroic actions of the pilot could've thwarted some sort of planned operation. It would have been much harder to find evidence for tampering, or a planted bomb, on the charred wreckage of a land crashed plane. Now that the plane is completely intact, whether it was a bird(s) or something else that could've caused both engines to fail (I believe it was both) can be investigated.

Mind you, I'm just wondering...as I always do whenever something this newsworthy takes place. I'm looking forward to the plane and engines being fully inspected and hope it's done in an open way for all to have access to the results.

I'm sure I'm not the only person wondering as well. What are your thoughts?

P.S. I'm new to this forum so let me just say once again.... I'm JUST wondering.... not making any claims, hehe.. I've seen how some treat others sometimes on here. I'm not blaming Bush, Obama, Zionists, Freemasons, Christians, Muslims..... or Canadians. :D

considerallpossibilities
01-16-2009, 11:15 AM
I agree with your thoughts on Flight 1549.

Here are a few other facts to consider: the bird migration patterns run primarily from April through October (it is now mid-Jan) and both engines being affected at the same time is extremely rare .

In addition, the wreckage will be studied "out of the sight of the public" in order to determine the cause.

BTW, all of the points above are from early national news coverage of this event.

The most telling information often comes out right after an accident or other negative event occurs (first interviews with victims before they are told not to talk, early photos, etc.) then mostly disappear as "the authorities" get involved and squelch information in an effort to protect us from our natural fears, anxieties and possible panic.

I hope at least some of the media will have open access to the wreckage-analysis process (or at least have good connected anonymous sources who will provide them with the facts as they are uncovered).

Will we ever REALLY know the TRUE cause? Hard to say, isn't it?

Here's something that struck me (other than the accident being so close to the inauguration): when I heard that it was Flight 1549 the numbers had a familiar pattern... 5 minus 4 is 1, and 1-1-9 is 911 in reverse--suggesting the possibility that this may have been caused by something other than "just birds".

Perhaps a confused terrorist used to reading right to left? ;)

Anyway, the gov't has ZERO incentive to admit the cause was something other than birds; after all, why create a public scare so close to the inauguration AND more importantly in this fear-driven economy. That would naturally only make things worse. We all remember what Sept. 11 did...:(

But Kudos to the truly amazing pilot and the fast-acting crew and rescuers--"Miracle on the Hudson" is an understatement, isn't it.

Take care and keep considering all possibilities (good and bad).

--Cat

Kaje23
01-16-2009, 12:19 PM
Here are a few other facts to consider: the bird migration patterns run primarily from April through October (it is now mid-Jan) and both engines being affected at the same time is extremely rare .


Hi Cat, and thanks for sharing. Interesting info regarding the bird migration patterns. I was expecting to see footage of flocks of birds flying on the runway sometime yesterday or today but figured that since I don't have cable and the news channels running the story constantly I just may have missed it. Plus I figured all the attention would be focused on the plane .. but surely some junior crew could have been sent to the airport.


In addition, the wreckage will be studied "out of the sight of the public" in order to determine the cause.

That's too bad.


The most telling information often comes out right after an accident or other negative event occurs (first interviews with victims before they are told not to talk, early photos, etc.) then mostly disappear as "the authorities" get involved and squelch information in an effort to protect us from our natural fears, anxieties and possible panic.



Too True!!



Here's something that struck me (other than the accident being so close to the inauguration): when I heard that it was Flight 1549 the numbers had a familiar pattern... 5 minus 4 is 1, and 1-1-9 is 911 in reverse--suggesting the possibility that this may have been caused by something other than "just birds".


Quite a stretch .. but ain't that what we're good at! :D Too coinkidinkie if ya ask me.



Perhaps a confused terrorist used to reading right to left? ;)



ROFLMAO .. Good one!!




Anyway, the gov't has ZERO incentive to admit the cause was something other than birds; after all, why create a public scare so close to the inauguration AND more importantly in this fear-driven economy. That would naturally only make things worse. We all remember what Sept. 11 did...:(



That's exactly where my concern lies. My initial fear of an event taking place so close to the inauguration was that it'd be done to incite fear and panic during the transition. I was afraid some 3rd term edict during national crisis would have gone into effect.... written as fine print in one of the many last minute bills put into place during the past couple of months.


But Kudos to the truly amazing pilot and the fast-acting crew and rescuers--"Miracle on the Hudson" is an understatement, isn't it.



Yessirree!!! What an awesome pilot and crew. I'm glad they can be considered the heroes in this incident instead of the corpse recovery crews ... or black clad military police immediately dispatched to control the population.


Take care and keep considering all possibilities (good and bad).



Thank you once again for replying and giving great input for me to continue to consider.

--- KJ

BlueAngel
01-16-2009, 05:35 PM
Interesting thought.

Of note, the pilot was instructed by an air traffic controller to land at a nearby New Jersey airport and used his best judgement when he decided to make a water landing.

Of note, as well, was Mayor Bloomberg's comment that he doesn't consider this a terrorist act because there weren't any others that immediately followed.

Kaje23
01-16-2009, 06:09 PM
Ok, I can now turn my Conspiracy alert to orange now as I'm just learning on the news that the engines are missing from the plane and searchers plan to search for BOTH of them at the bottom of the Hudson.

I can now make my claim that rogue Canadian Geese, frustrated and exhausted due to their yearly migration south en masse, flew not INTO the engines, but along side them with tools, dismantled them, and have taken them to their secret bunker where they plan to build their own jet liner to accommodate the geese who are tired of flying south on their own.

I predict that evidence will be found, in the form of sets of tools stolen from a La Guardia airport hangar, in a New Jersey storage unit filled with geese shit. The tools were stolen because the Canadian Geese only had access to metric tools and these will be american standard!!

Who's with me?!!!!

BlueAngel
01-16-2009, 06:14 PM
Ok, I can now turn my Conspiracy alert to orange now as I'm just learning on the news that the engines are missing from the plane and searchers plan to search for BOTH of them at the bottom of the Hudson.

I can now make my claim that rogue Canadian Geese, frustrated and exhausted due to their yearly migration south en masse, flew not INTO the engines, but along side them with tools, dismantled them, and have taken them to their secret bunker where they plan to build their own jet liner to accommodate the geese who are tired of flying south on their own.

I predict that evidence will be found in the form of sets of tools stolen from a La Guardia airport hangar will be found in a New Jersey storage unit filled with geese shit. The tools were stolen because the Canadian Geese only had access to metric tools and these will be american standard!!

Who's with me?!!!!

I laugh at your post only because all passengers survived.

From what untrustworthy news source did you hear this?

Obviously, the FAA will not be producing geese feathers from the engines of the plane as evidence of the cause.

Kaje23
01-16-2009, 06:20 PM
I laugh at your post only because all passengers survived.

From what untrustworthy news source did you hear this?

Obviously, the FAA will not be producing the geese feathers from the engines of the plan as evidence.


I'm currently watching the local 5 o'clock news and they did a lead in saying that both engines were missing. I've watched it through the plane coverage and now there's no mention of missing engines. Hmmmm... seems either my local news channel is desperate for ratings... or the B.C. Geese syndicate got to them.

I was just about to post a question to others whether they've heard anything of missing engines before you replied.

Kaje23
01-16-2009, 06:22 PM
I laugh at your post only because all passengers survived.



That wasn't part of the diabolical plan!! Geese aren't perfect.:p

Kaje23
01-16-2009, 06:28 PM
I'm just being ridiculous at the moment as humour's my way of dealing with this incident until further info comes to light.

BlueAngel
01-16-2009, 06:35 PM
Searching the HUDSON RIVER for the recovery of engines vital in determining whether or not BIRDS caused the emergency landing of Flight 1549.

Bloomberg.com: Transportation (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601209&sid=aMgPTRHZ7OvU&refer=transportation)

US Airways Plane’s Engines Are Focus of Crash Search (Update1)
Email | Print | A A A

By John Hughes

Jan. 16 (Bloomberg) -- New York’s Hudson River is being searched by U.S. authorities for two missing engines central to determining whether bird strikes forced the emergency landing of a US Airways Group Inc. jet.

Sonar is being used to search downriver from where the plane crashed into the water yesterday, said Kitty Higgins, a National Transportation Safety Board member, at a New York press conference today. It is too early to decide whether birds caused the crash, she said.

All 155 people aboard US Airways Flight 1549 survived after the pilot reported birds striking the engines following takeoff from LaGuardia Airport. New York Governor David Paterson called it a “miracle on the Hudson.”

“Having a successful ditching of an airplane is a very rare event,” Higgins said of the landing. The plane stayed afloat long enough for the passengers and crew to evacuate and be rescued by ferries and fire boats.

The plane, an Airbus SAS A320, will be lifted out of the river onto a barge tomorrow for further inspection, Higgins said. Authorities will also retrieve the “black boxes,” a flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder in the tail of the plane.

The recorders will be shipped to Washington for analysis, Higgins said, giving investigators information about what the pilots said in the cockpit and the manipulation of flight controls during the event.

The pilot, identified as Chesley B. “Sully” Sullenberger III, set down the A320 gently enough to keep it afloat, and the “sheer luck” of having ferries nearby hastened the recovery of passengers in freezing weather, aviation consultant Robert W. Mann said.

‘Inspiring’ Work

Sullenberger “is the reason my 2 1/2-year-old daughter has a dad,” passenger Brad Wentzell said in an interview shown on CNN. At a press conference today, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said he would present the crew with a key to the city for their “inspiring” work in bringing down the plane without serious injury to anyone.

One of the flight attendants suffered a broken leg, Bloomberg said.

The icy conditions of the recovery effort “make it even more remarkable,” said Peter Goelz, former managing director of the NTSB, which sent investigators to New York.

Temperatures were about 19 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 7 Celsius) at the time. John Perugia, chief of Emergency Medical Services for the Fire Department, said the survivors could have lived for no more than four minutes in water that Fire Commissioner Nicholas Scoppetta said was between 36 and 41 degrees Fahrenheit.

The accident occurred after the A320 left LaGuardia at about 3 p.m. for Charlotte, North Carolina, carrying 150 passengers and 5 crew members.

Radioed Controllers

As the plane climbed, the pilot radioed controllers that bird strikes had robbed the engines of power, said Doug Church, a spokesman for the Air Traffic Controllers Association. The pilot reported that he couldn’t return to LaGuardia or reach New Jersey’s Teterboro airport, and brought the jet down in the river, Church said.

“You can handle hitting maybe one bird, but not three or four,” Goelz said. The Federal Aviation Administration said there were reports of a large flock in the area, while saying it wasn’t sure whether the birds caused the accident.

Bloomberg told reporters that the pilot did a “masterful job” in pulling off the river landing and then walked through the partially submerged jet twice to ensure that it had been cleared of people. The mayor is the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News.

Sullenberger has worked at Tempe, Arizona-based US Airways since 1980, flying Airbus A319, A320 and A321 jets, according to the Web site of Safety Reliability Methods Inc., a consulting firm he founded in San Francisco.

‘Proud of Dad’

“Obviously, we’re very proud of Dad,” his wife, Lorrie Sullenberger, told reporters outside their home in Danville, California. President George W. Bush spoke to the pilot, said his spokeswoman, Dana Perino. Bush also released a statement praising Sullenberger’s skill and bravery.

Sullenberger, 58, has a total of 19,663 flight hours, US Airways said in a statement today. The copilot was identified as Jeffrey Skiles, 49, who has 15,643 hours.

Higgins of the NTSB said it hasn’t been confirmed which pilot was at the controls during the accident.

Touching down on the water means going without the landing gear that take the pounding of transitioning from flight to rolling down a runway. Instead, the fuselage absorbs the force of striking an ocean or river while traveling at 150 mph (241 kilometers) or more.

‘Tremendous Impact’

Passenger Bill Zuhoski, 23, who was seated in the back of Flight 1549, said he felt a jerk, saw flight attendants appear nervous and then heard the pilot order everyone to prepare for a crash.

“How do you brace yourself for impact when you know your plane’s going to crash?” Zuhoski, 23, of Long Island, New York, told reporters at Roosevelt Hospital in Manhattan. “The impact was the most tremendous impact you can imagine. My head slammed and I lost my glasses and the water immediately began rushing in.”

In 1968, all 107 people aboard a Japan Airlines Corp. DC-8 were evacuated after the plane landed in San Francisco Bay, 2 1/2 miles short of the San Francisco airport, according to safety Web site planecrashinfo.com.

More commonly, water crashes are like the March 1992 accident at LaGuardia when an ice-laden US Airways Fokker F-28 stalled on takeoff and plunged into Flushing Bay, killing 27 passengers and crew, according to the NTSB.

Icy Crashes

In January 1982, an Air Florida Inc. Boeing Co. 737 struggled for altitude after taking off with ice in the engines and on the wings, striking a bridge and then slamming into the frozen Potomac River, the NTSB found. The death toll was 78, including 4 fatalities on the ground.

Losing power on takeoff and landing is perilous for pilots because they’re close to the ground and moving relatively slowly, giving them scant time to restart their engines or steer to safety.

To contact the reporters on this story: John Hughes in Washington at jhughes5@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: January 16, 2009 20:05 EST

Kaje23
01-16-2009, 06:53 PM
Thanks so much for citing info to support my earlier post.

I remember yesterday a pilot being interviewed said he was impressed the 1549 pilot made the river landing as the engines are lower than the belly of the craft. Missing engines can explain the somewhat smooth landing and also can go to prove that the engines were missing BEFORE the plane hit the water.

I understand that they reported no communication between the pilot and Control Tower shortly before the plane is believed to have landed in the water. Key word being "reported" ....


Earlier BlueAngel you had mentioned something of seeds being planted (edited) ... Wish you had kept the entire post.

added--- I'm looking for sources to support the "engine lower than belly" quote. I'll try not to be so lazy in the future before I post something. :)

Kaje23
01-16-2009, 07:09 PM
By DAVID B. CARUSO and VERENA DOBNIK
Associated Press Writers


NEW YORK (AP) - Investigators trying to determine how birds could have brought down US Airways Flight 1549 were hampered by the swirling, bone-chilling waters of the Hudson River on Friday as they looked for the plane's two missing engines and tried to retrieve its black boxes.
The investigation ran into a series of obstacles one day after the pilot ditched the plane carrying 155 people into the river following an apparent collision with birds that caused both engines to fail. The jet went down just feet from the Manhattan skyline. All aboard survived.
Both engines broke off the plane sometime after the crash and sank to the bottom of the river, forcing investigators to use sonar to seach for them. The current was especially swift, making it impossible for crews to hoist the aircraft out of the water and remove its flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder.
Investigators also had yet to interview the pilot, Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger. (more)



I take back my earlier claim for now of engines not being on plane before it landed in water, as it's plausible it could've broken off upon impact I suppose. Of course I'm no expert either. I'll just continue to wait/look for more info. Haven't found any mention of engine/belly levels yet.



Forgive me in advance please for making further unsupported claims as I'm sure I will, hehe. :)

truth_by_war
01-19-2009, 12:28 PM
Something is happening tommorrow, I can feel it. Be ready America.

BlueAngel
01-19-2009, 02:08 PM
Something is happening tommorrow, I can feel it. Be ready America.

The sun will rise.

Any suggestions as to how we should prepare in order to be ready?

How often do you get these feelings that something is going to happen and when you do, what has happened?

BlueAngel
01-19-2009, 07:56 PM
This thread sure took a dive.

I assume all possibilities were considered.

xopatriot
01-28-2009, 10:55 PM
Any word on who was aboard the plane? Anyone of importance? I ask because I heard a rumor that some bankers of banks orchestrating the massive bank merger were aboard can anyone verify or post link?

BlueAngel
01-29-2009, 10:39 PM
Any word on who was aboard the plane? Anyone of importance? I ask because I heard a rumor that some bankers of banks orchestrating the massive bank merger were aboard can anyone verify or post link?

You could always do a GOOGLE search.

BlueAngel
02-05-2009, 11:50 PM
Well, I thought it was pretty cool when the flight controller asked the caption where he was going to attempt a landing and he said:

The Hudson!

tpomerian01
02-08-2009, 09:33 PM
I've been reading another forum where a person questioned the official response. He was not treated well. You will not be either. I will not be either.
One post said all passengers thought geese hit the plane. Untrue. Most said the engine exploded. Strangely the pilot said nothing about a explosion.

The same article said both engines were in the Hudson. Untrue.

I live 150 miles north on NYC. We don't see many geese in the middle of January although there are lots of them in the summer.

There is no question that the captain & crew are heros but someone should question how many geese are around at this time of year. Is there any possibility it was a missile? it would have been a good time for one.

Most likely we will never know.

BlueAngel
02-10-2009, 08:44 PM
I've been reading another forum where a person questioned the official response. He was not treated well. You will not be either. I will not be either.
One post said all passengers thought geese hit the plane. Untrue. Most said the engine exploded. Strangely the pilot said nothing about a explosion.

The same article said both engines were in the Hudson. Untrue.

I live 150 miles north on NYC. We don't see many geese in the middle of January although there are lots of them in the summer.

There is no question that the captain & crew are heros but someone should question how many geese are around at this time of year. Is there any possibility it was a missile? it would have been a good time for one.

Most likely we will never know.

Why would it have been a good time for a missile?

BlueAngel
02-10-2009, 10:10 PM
I've been reading another forum where a person questioned the official response. He was not treated well. You will not be either. I will not be either.
One post said all passengers thought geese hit the plane. Untrue. Most said the engine exploded. Strangely the pilot said nothing about a explosion.

The same article said both engines were in the Hudson. Untrue.

I live 150 miles north on NYC. We don't see many geese in the middle of January although there are lots of them in the summer.

There is no question that the captain & crew are heros but someone should question how many geese are around at this time of year. Is there any possibility it was a missile? it would have been a good time for one.

Most likely we will never know.

Oh, my.

You read on another forum that a poster said most passengers thought that the engine explosion wasn't due to the ingestion of geese.

Really?

Did this poster interview all of the passengers?

If so.

Please post the passenger's remarks on this thread.

Do you always believe everything your read?

Quite extraordinary.

Don't cha think?

If I were a passenger on that plane, I wouldn't have a clue and, I highly doubt, any of the other passengers would either as to whether or not geese were ingested into the engine or the engine exploded due to other reasons.

So, please provide evidence to this community to back-up your claim that most passengers believe there was an engine explosion that didn't involve the ingestion of geese.

Thanking you in advance.

I remain,

A goose in waiting...

tpomerian01
02-11-2009, 07:14 PM
here is one.
Witnesses hear a blast - but watch US Airways Flight 1549 glide in for a perfect landing (http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/01/15/2009-01-15_witnesses_hear_a_blast__but_watch_us_air-2.html)

There are many questions. The captain heard geese hitting the plane as mentioned in his 60 minutes interview but the passengers heard a loud explosion.

Why was the captain not allowed to talk to the press for 24 hours after the crash?

How do you know it was geese? How many geese have you seen in NYC in January? I would appreciate if you could prove it was geese.

tpomerian01
02-11-2009, 07:22 PM
It was just before Bush was to address the nation with his "no additional terrorist attacks" theme.

BlueAngel
02-11-2009, 08:46 PM
here is one.
Witnesses hear a blast - but watch US Airways Flight 1549 glide in for a perfect landing (http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/01/15/2009-01-15_witnesses_hear_a_blast__but_watch_us_air-2.html)

There are many questions. The captain heard geese hitting the plane as mentioned in his 60 minutes interview but the passengers heard a loud explosion.

Why was the captain not allowed to talk to the press for 24 hours after the crash?

How do you know it was geese? How many geese have you seen in NYC in January? I would appreciate if you could prove it was geese.

I can't prove ANYTHING about this flight.

I can't prove geese were ingested in the engines.

I can't prove there was an explosion not due to geese.

I can't prove it was a missile.

I can't prove ANYTHING about this flight other than it landed safely in the Hudson.

I would like to understand why some people believe this was/is a CONSPIRACY.

What does it matter that this incident occurred right before Bush WAS to address the nation with his "no additional terrorist attacks" theme?

Did he or did he not address the nation with his no additional terrorist attack theme?

If not, why not?

Apparently, the engines exploded due to the ingestion of geese?

Please post a link to his speech or something that infers he was to give a speech of this nature.

Are you implying that it was a terrorist attack and because it was just before Bush was to address the nation with his "NO ADDITIONAL" terrorist attacks theme, the CAPTAIN was aware of his impending speech; knew it was a terrorist attack; so he radioed to the flight controllers that his engines ingested geese?

WOW!

You consider the PILOT was involved in the cover-up of a terrorist attack in order to protect the President's speech!?!

An additional one, for that matter.

How could or why would Bush assure us of no additonal terrorist attacks?

Their goal is to leave us with the feeling that there will be more terrorist attacks.

Instilling fear in the masses and altering our psychological state of mind is their main priority.

Every single person on the plane survived.

That says something as far as the skills of the pilot are concerned.

He landed that BIRD in the HUDSON without a problem.

Is that a conspiracy, too?

Shortly after this incident, a small plane, I believe in Australia, landed safely in the ocean.

Perhaps, this Captain has taught some pilots a thing or two.

If you want to believe it's a conspiracy, go ahead.

But, again.

Everyone survived.

P.S. I don't live far from New York and I have witnessed GEESE flying over my home recently on many occasions.

BlueAngel
02-11-2009, 09:15 PM
I apologize for being abrupt, but not everything is a conspiracy.

Keep that in mind as you are lead around the web to various sites that exist for the sole purpose of instilling fear and propagating every act of GOD, nature and anything unexplainable as a conspiracy wrought by the controllers.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

It's a DUCK!

tpomerian01
02-12-2009, 08:17 PM
Look there are serious questions about the crash. If you choose to ignore them that is your business.

There is a bigger problem here anyway. Your bullying does not allow other people to have opinions. This is not an open forum where people can voice opinions. It is a forum where people can voice opinions only if they agree with you.

Have you ever heard the quote "though i disagree with everything you say i will defend to the death your right to say them" I don't see any of that attitude here.

BlueAngel
03-21-2009, 09:44 PM
Look there are serious questions about the crash. If you choose to ignore them that is your business.

There is a bigger problem here anyway. Your bullying does not allow other people to have opinions. This is not an open forum where people can voice opinions. It is a forum where people can voice opinions only if they agree with you.

Have you ever heard the quote "though i disagree with everything you say i will defend to the death your right to say them" I don't see any of that attitude here.

My opinion is that a BIGGER PROBLEM doesn't exist and, therefore, the reason that you perceive it is being ignored.

emerson24
03-21-2009, 09:48 PM
Why would it have been a good time for a missile?


I'm suprised with all the people around, didn't someone take a photo of the plane being hoisted out of the water? I'm sure it was a big to-do in the local community, and even the news. So it's like this plane crashes in the water, but then no one reports on it after? Seems odd.

BlueAngel
03-21-2009, 09:54 PM
Links:

Yahoo! Image Detail for blogs.usatoday.com/sky/images/2009/02/01/skyfuselage2xlarge.jpg (http://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view?back=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fs earch%2Fimages%3F_adv_prop%3Dimage%26ni%3D20%26va% 3Dflight%2B1549%2Bnew%2Bjersey%26fr%3Dyfp-t-501%26xargs%3D0%26pstart%3D1%26b%3D41&w=180&h=119&imgurl=blogs.usatoday.com%2Fsky%2Fimages%2F2009%2F 02%2F01%2Fskyfuselage2xlarge.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Ftravel%2Fflig hts%2Fitem.aspx%3Ftype%3Dblog%26ak%3D62246660.blog&size=7.4kB&name=Amazing+photos%3A+US+Airways+jet+stops+traffi c+in+Ne...&p=flight+1549+new+jersey&type=JPG&oid=367dc6a7a3cd731a&no=49&tt=147&sigr=12b0vgnf2&sigi=11vg071vo&sigb=13v6nj2tr)

Yahoo! Image Search Results for flight 1549 new jersey (http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?_adv_prop=image&fr=yfp-t-501&va=flight+1549+new+jersey&sz=all)

emerson24
03-21-2009, 10:02 PM
Well, it makes sense that a cone tip/tubular craft would part the sea with much less force coming across it than the big engines, where the engines would be ripped off, but I wonder when this photo of the plane was taken? And did the water in fact tear the engines off? Plus, the wings are off on the picture, so this tells me that someone had already done some dismantaling of the plane.

emerson24
03-21-2009, 10:10 PM
I apologize for being abrupt, but not everything is a conspiracy.

Keep that in mind as you are lead around the web to various sites that exist for the sole purpose of instilling fear and propagating every act of GOD, nature and anything unexplainable as a conspiracy wrought by the controllers.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

It's a DUCK!

I'm beginning to think you're a jackass by reading your posts, and your quick responses to mine of which you add the same flavor as you do all others. First of all, this post was just questioning the cause of the accident, with a disclaimer that he's not saying it was a terrorist, caused by the gov, etc.

Then someone else mentioned the migration of birds in January being interesting/odd. Yeah, OJ wasn't convicted yet we all know he did it.

How about sticking to the topic of conversation and let it be just that, conversation and exploring different thoughts. I see no fear inducing themes going on J.A.

BlueAngel
03-21-2009, 10:36 PM
Well, it makes sense that a cone tip/tubular craft would part the sea with much less force coming across it than the big engines, where the engines would be ripped off, but I wonder when this photo of the plane was taken? And did the water in fact tear the engines off? Plus, the wings are off on the picture, so this tells me that someone had already done some dismantaling of the plane.

Do you think the plane crash was a conspiracy?

If so.

Please.

Do tell us your opinion.

BlueAngel
03-21-2009, 10:38 PM
I'm beginning to think you're a jackass by reading your posts, and your quick responses to mine of which you add the same flavor as you do all others. First of all, this post was just questioning the cause of the accident, with a disclaimer that he's not saying it was a terrorist, caused by the gov, etc.

Then someone else mentioned the migration of birds in January being interesting/odd. Yeah, OJ wasn't convicted yet we all know he did it.

How about sticking to the topic of conversation and let it be just that, conversation and exploring different thoughts. I see no fear inducing themes going on J.A.

Geez.

You'd be wrong.

I'm not a jackass cause last time I checked, I'm not a donkey.

I helped you out and posted some pictures of the plane being lifted out of the water.

If you think this plane crash was a conspiracy.

Please.

Do tell.

emerson24
03-21-2009, 11:01 PM
Ok, well...my apologies for calling you a jack ass, while I disagree with you, and you seemingly have an agenda, no need for the disparaging comments.

As for my stance, not enough info. However, the fact that birds don't typically migrate at that time of year is interesting, which is what the general consensus is. That some people heard an explosion is interesting. That the pilot didn't speak for 24 hours, or was told not to, or whatever it was, is interesting and causes people to ask more questions.

If someone drove by your house every night, and you saw the same car, you would investigate. Doesn't mean anything is wrong, but if you don't, then it's foolish on your part. That is all people are doing, as I see it.

Although, if it was a conspiracy, I haven't heard of a good outcome it would have had if it did crash. Not exactly sure how it would have impacted things. I mean, sure, if Bush wanted to pull Martial Law and stay in office, that could be a reason, although, I don't see how this incident could have caused something like that to occur, just not big enough in magnitude IMO.

BlueAngel
03-21-2009, 11:31 PM
Ok, well...my apologies for calling you a jack ass, while I disagree with you, and you seemingly have an agenda, no need for the disparaging comments.

No need to apologize. I've been called worse.

I have no agenda other than posting my opinions/comments. If you think that posting a comment suggests a member of this forum has an agenda, I suggest you understand that an opinion and an AGENDA are not one in the same.

As for my stance, not enough info. However, the fact that birds don't typically migrate at that time of year is interesting, which is what the general consensus is. That some people heard an explosion is interesting. That the pilot didn't speak for 24 hours, or was told not to, or whatever it was, is interesting and causes people to ask more questions.

If you don't have enough information to make a stance as to why you think this plane crash is a conspiracy, then why insinuate same?

I live in the Northeast and there are geese flying above my house all winter long. Do you think that, perhaps, if geese are ingested into an engine it might cause an explosion?

If someone drove by your house every night, and you saw the same car, you would investigate. Doesn't mean anything is wrong, but if you don't, then it's foolish on your part. That is all people are doing, as I see it.

The plane didn't fly over my house every night so there wasn't any need for me to investigate Flight 1549 and, even if Flight 1549 flew over my house every night, I wouldn't have had a clue.

Although, if it was a conspiracy, I haven't heard of a good outcome it would have had if it did crash. Not exactly sure how it would have impacted things. I mean, sure, if Bush wanted to pull Martial Law and stay in office, that could be a reason, although, I don't see how this incident could have caused something like that to occur, just not big enough in magnitude IMO.

Pull marital law over a plane crash? You're kidding, right?

First of all you insinuate it could possibly be a conspiracy because no one took pictures of the plane being taken out of the water then you insinuate that it could be a conspiracy because geese don't normally migrate at that time of the year. So, what is it? Do you think the plane crash was a conspiracy or not? If you think it was a conspiracy, please state your hypothesis. The plane crash is over. Move on.

Comment inside the box.

emerson24
03-22-2009, 03:44 AM
I have no agenda other than posting my opinions/comments. If you think that posting a comment suggests a member of this forum has an agenda, I suggest you understand that an opinion and an AGENDA are not one in the same.

As for my stance, not enough info. However, the fact that birds don't typically migrate at that time of year is interesting, which is what the general consensus is. That some people heard an explosion is interesting. That the pilot didn't speak for 24 hours, or was told not to, or whatever it was, is interesting and causes people to ask more questions.

If you don't have enough information to make a stance as to why you think this plane crash is a conspiracy, then why insinuate same?

I live in the Northeast and there are geese flying above my house all winter long. Do you think that, perhaps, if geese are ingested into an engine it might cause an explosion?

If someone drove by your house every night, and you saw the same car, you would investigate. Doesn't mean anything is wrong, but if you don't, then it's foolish on your part. That is all people are doing, as I see it.

The plane didn't fly over my house every night so there wasn't any need for me to investigate Flight 1549 and, even if Flight 1549 flew over my house every night, I wouldn't have had a clue.

Although, if it was a conspiracy, I haven't heard of a good outcome it would have had if it did crash. Not exactly sure how it would have impacted things. I mean, sure, if Bush wanted to pull Martial Law and stay in office, that could be a reason, although, I don't see how this incident could have caused something like that to occur, just not big enough in magnitude IMO.

Pull marital law over a plane crash? You're kidding, right?

First of all you insinuate it could possibly be a conspiracy because no one took pictures of the plane being taken out of the water then you insinuate that it could be a conspiracy because geese don't normally migrate at that time of the year. So, what is it? Do you think the plane crash was a conspiracy or not? If you think it was a conspiracy, please state your hypothesis. The plane crash is over. Move on.

My bad, you really are a jack ass. I never implied it was a conspiracy, and I stated that, clearly. You obviously can't read. I simply stated that I would think pictures would have been taken when the plane was removed which should clarify some questions.

As for the martial law being pulled, I stated that I'm not seeing how this plane flight would fit any conspiracy, SUCH AS Bush pulling Martial Law, as someone else suggested. You need to read dude.

The plane flying over was an analogy for something looking suspicious. Hence, the explosion, birds causing both engines to go out, etc.

Simply put, you are a jack ass who obviously doesn't read what someone writes and just wants to argue for the sake of arguing. My bad for thinking you were anything but. No need to reply.

emerson24
03-22-2009, 03:46 AM
My bad, you really are a jack ass. I never implied it was a conspiracy, and I stated that, clearly. You obviously can't read. I simply stated that I would think pictures would have been taken when the plane was removed which should clarify some questions.

As for the martial law being pulled, I stated that I'm not seeing how this plane flight would fit any conspiracy, SUCH AS Bush pulling Martial Law, as someone else suggested. You need to read dude.

The plane flying over was an analogy for something looking suspicious. Hence, the explosion, birds causing both engines to go out, etc.

Simply put, you are a jack ass who obviously doesn't read what someone writes and just wants to argue for the sake of arguing. My bad for thinking you were anything but. No need to reply.

emerson24
03-22-2009, 03:48 AM
And furthermore, I stated that there isn't enough evidence either way to say one way or the other, just information that should be investigated further.

F'N READ DUDE!!!!! Do you read what people write before spouting your nonsense?

BlueAngel
03-23-2009, 09:04 PM
And furthermore, I stated that there isn't enough evidence either way to say one way or the other, just information that should be investigated further.

F'N READ DUDE!!!!! Do you read what people write before spouting your nonsense?

Yes.

Unfortunately, I read the NONSENSE people on this site spout.

It's a tedious job, but some one's got to do it.

As far as this plane crash is concerned, I state the following:

Flight 1549 ingested geese and the engines failed.

It made a safe landing in the Hudson RIVER.

No ONE perished.

It's over.

Move on!

In my humble opinion, there are more important matters to focus one's attention on and this ain't it.

BlueAngel
03-23-2009, 09:10 PM
My bad, you really are a jack ass. I never implied it was a conspiracy, and I stated that, clearly. You obviously can't read. I simply stated that I would think pictures would have been taken when the plane was removed which should clarify some questions.

My reading skills are impecible. If there weren't any pictures taken of the plane being removed from the Hudson, what do you suspect that would imply? A conspiracy? Pictures of the plane being removed from the HUDSON were taken. Please tell us what it clarified.

As for the martial law being pulled, I stated that I'm not seeing how this plane flight would fit any conspiracy, SUCH AS Bush pulling Martial Law, as someone else suggested. You need to read dude.

I read. You are backpeddaling now. You inferred it was a conspiracy to install martial law and keep BUSH in power. I think you should read what you write.

The plane flying over was an analogy for something looking suspicious. Hence, the explosion, birds causing both engines to go out, etc.

Simply put, you are a jack ass who obviously doesn't read what someone writes and just wants to argue for the sake of arguing. My bad for thinking you were anything but. No need to reply.

As I said, I'm not a jackass because I'm not a DONKEY and as I've also stated, my reading skills are impecible. I don't argue. I'm stating my opinon. You find it to be an argument beacuse it contradicts your theory. Yeah, definately your BAD!

My comments are INSIDE the box and are NOT in bold.

BlueAngel
03-23-2009, 09:19 PM
I have no agenda other than posting my opinions/comments. If you think that posting a comment suggests a member of this forum has an agenda, I suggest you understand that an opinion and an AGENDA are not one in the same.

As for my stance, not enough info. However, the fact that birds don't typically migrate at that time of year is interesting, which is what the general consensus is. That some people heard an explosion is interesting. That the pilot didn't speak for 24 hours, or was told not to, or whatever it was, is interesting and causes people to ask more questions.

If you don't have enough information to make a stance as to why you think this plane crash is a conspiracy, then why insinuate same?

I live in the Northeast and there are geese flying above my house all winter long. Do you think that, perhaps, if geese are ingested into an engine it might cause an explosion?

If someone drove by your house every night, and you saw the same car, you would investigate. Doesn't mean anything is wrong, but if you don't, then it's foolish on your part. That is all people are doing, as I see it.

The plane didn't fly over my house every night so there wasn't any need for me to investigate Flight 1549 and, even if Flight 1549 flew over my house every night, I wouldn't have had a clue.

Although, if it was a conspiracy, I haven't heard of a good outcome it would have had if it did crash. Not exactly sure how it would have impacted things. I mean, sure, if Bush wanted to pull Martial Law and stay in office, that could be a reason, although, I don't see how this incident could have caused something like that to occur, just not big enough in magnitude IMO.

Pull marital law over a plane crash? You're kidding, right?

First of all you insinuate it could possibly be a conspiracy because no one took pictures of the plane being taken out of the water then you insinuate that it could be a conspiracy because geese don't normally migrate at that time of the year. So, what is it? Do you think the plane crash was a conspiracy or not? If you think it was a conspiracy, please state your hypothesis. The plane crash is over. Move on.

My bad, you really are a jack ass. I never implied it was a conspiracy, and I stated that, clearly. You obviously can't read. I simply stated that I would think pictures would have been taken when the plane was removed which should clarify some questions.

As for the martial law being pulled, I stated that I'm not seeing how this plane flight would fit any conspiracy, SUCH AS Bush pulling Martial Law, as someone else suggested. You need to read dude.

The plane flying over was an analogy for something looking suspicious. Hence, the explosion, birds causing both engines to go out, etc.

Simply put, you are a jack ass who obviously doesn't read what someone writes and just wants to argue for the sake of arguing. My bad for thinking you were anything but. No need to reply.

The way you are responding to my comments in this post are incomprehensible and, therefore, I am unable to reply.

stompk
03-28-2009, 09:23 AM
Washington The Federal Aviation Administration is proposing to keep secret from travelers its vast records on where and how often commercial planes are damaged by hitting flying birds.

FAA: Bird strike data ought not be public - Salt Lake Tribune (http://www.sltrib.com/ci_12015605?source=rss)

It seems to me that the FAA/NASA have something to hide.

There is something sinister going on in our skies.

revolution60
10-14-2009, 01:25 AM
i heard there were bankers on board too

maybe the illuminati bankers were trying to take out the smaller not already bought out bankers?