XPost: rec.aviation.piloting, alt.usenet.kooks, rec.arts.poems   
   XPost: rec.sport.pro-wrestling, alt.idiot.will-dockery   
   From: BtB@BB.not.aaaaaaa   
      
   "Orsen Wells w/Citizen Cain"  wrote in news:4da06   
   $497d385d$a6666851$25913@ALLTEL.NET:   
      
   >   
   > "Bertie the Bunyip"  wrote in message   
   > news:gljcf5$mr8$1@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...   
   >> spope33@speedymail.org (Steve Pope) wrote in news:glj9o8$5mp$3   
   >> @blue.rahul.net:   
   >>   
   >>> vaughn  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> The absence of immediate evidence to the contrary does not   
   >>>> in any way make "some design flaw or maintenance issue of the   
   >>>> other engine" likely.  It is possible I suppose, but not likely.   
   >>>> Remember, "conventional wisdom" is sometimes spectacularly wrong,   
   >>>> but it is dangerous to bet against it.   
   >>>   
   >>> Sure, although I'm not sure "conventional wisdom" states that   
   >>> each engine ingesting a bird simultaneously is all that likely   
   >>> either.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Yea,h it is actualy.   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> I'm not sure if you expect bird remains in an engine that lay at   
   >>> the bottom of the Hudson for a week, but there should be   
   >>> blade damage consistent with sucking a bird if the double-bird   
   >>> theory is correct.   
   >>   
   >> not neccesarily.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Bertie   
   >   
   > MAYBE THE GOVERNMENT DID IT LIKE THEY DID 9-11   
   >   
      
   And why shouldn't they? If they can't do it who could? Smersh?   
      
   bertie   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)