Re: Blow-by-blow account of Brothers to the Rescue tragedy

Dan Christensen wrote:
On Aug 23, 6:17 am, PL <pl.nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[snipping portion of PL's posting already debunked here, or too lame
to bother with]

by which comrade Dan means that he snips what he can't refute


"Three years ago and earlier, in 1992 and 1993, in Miami, a United
States Congresswoman from Florida organized a major campaign to
petition the Pentagon to provide several Cessna 337s or O2s to the
group that participated in the incident of 24 February. She was very
explicit and active, making many statements and taking a number of
initiatives. It would seem that she was successful, because on 19 July
of that year the Miami Herald published a report on its editorial
page, written not by just any journalist but by Mr. David Lawrence,
the editor of the Herald."
does not prove that any of the planes shot down had military markings


We have evidence here that the BTTR planes had USAF markings both
before and after the shootdown.


Nope.
It doesn't.
There only element that made it "seem" that planes were provided refers to a plane seen AFTER the incident.
NOTHING refers to the planes shot down.
One lie exposed.

In this account, Mr. Lawrence tells us of a trip he took with the
group known as Brothers to the Rescue, the group in question. Like any
good journalist, he accompanies his account with photographs,
including some of the plane that was used. In one, the marking
"N2432S" is quite sharp; in another, four letters are clearly visible
on its wing: "USAF". In other words, this is not merely a type of
plane that is used by the military; it is not, as the Congresswoman
claimed, just that similar aircraft were to be found in airports in
Florida ever since the end of the conflict in Central America; Mr.
David Lawrence Jr. actually flew in the one bearing the marking
N2432S, from which the United States Air Force marking had not even
been erased.
the conclusion that it is a USAF plane is incorrect
Lots of old planes bought second hand by military aficionados still
carry all markings.
The fact that letters are on a planes does not mean it is fully equipped
like a military plane.

If you fly without permission into enemy territory with military
markings, there may be consequences.

"Enemy territory"? Planes go from the US to Cuba all the time.

Again: no proof that any of the two planes had military markings.


Again, we have evidence here that the BTTR planes had USAF markings
both before and after the shootdown.


Nope.
It shows neither as the only plane seen was seen 5 months after the killings.
Ironically it can have been a replacement bought to replace the planes shot down.

"That is one thing. Another is that, today, 26 July, at 4.25 p.m.,
this aircraft is at the Opa Locka airport in Miami. It still bears the
markings of the United States Air Force; it still belongs to Brothers
to the Rescue and may be involved tomorrow, the day after, or at some
point in the future in one of that group's operations.
"On 26 June 1996, at the meeting of the ICAO Council, what I have said
here was acknowledged by Mr. Frostell, who said that, indeed, this
plane was still at Opa Locka and that it still bore United States
military insignia. It is true that the 'F' is a bit faded; it would
seem that it is beginning to wear out, but you can still see it. It
still belongs to Brothers to the Rescue and at any time could be used
for acts of provocation against Cuba."
again: no proof of use of that planes and no proof that any of the
planes shot down had military markings


Previous comment applies here, too.


and it is an invalid as the one before.
The only plane seen with the markings not yet overpainted was seen 5 months after the killings.
NOTHING supports any claim that the two planes shot down had military markings

The pictures and video of planes shows they
hadn't.http://www.miamiherald.com/548/story/192166.html
Link doesn't work.
View footage at Youtubehttp://youtube.com/watch?v=hR-ABOsDN9k
A trailer for your propaganda flick here -- nothing more.
(snip)
Nope.
A trailer with a reconstruction that exposes your lies.
How so? You have no documentation for any of the clips shown
(snip)

False.
it is film about the killing reconstructing what happened showing
identical planes.


You have no proof of this.

Have a look at the trailer.
That is what they say.

You have NO proof that ANY of the planes shot down had military markings.

[snip]

Again, we have evidence here that the BTTR planes had USAF markings
both before and after the shootdown (snip)

Nope.
the only reported sighting is a plane 5 months after the killings.
NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that any of the planes shot down has military markings.
Those are the facts.

PL
.

Relevant Pages