Flight 93

[peteweaver]

Why do conspiracy theorists insist that flight 93 was shot down ?
Surely, if it had been hijacked, the USAF would have had justifiable reason to shoot down a hijacked plane if they could.
If passengers had not phoned their loved ones from it, there would have been no need to go to elaborate lengths to pretend that they had.

Had a hijacked plane been shot down that day, it would have been an unfortunate but necessary action on the part of a fighter pilot.

Had a fighter pilot shot down a hijacked jet that day he'd have been a hero, as he'd have prevented a greater loss of life by protecting the target of the hijacked airliner.

Flight 93 conspiracy theories are the silliest of the lot.

 

[Alt+F4]

If Flight 93 was shot down by the military that would be catastrophe for the airline industry who then would demand a multiple billion dollar federal bailout....

....oh wait.....nevermind.

 

[Southwind17]

Why do conspiracy theorists insist that flight 93 was shot down ?
Surely, if it had been hijacked, the USAF would have had justifiable reason to shoot down a hijacked plane if they could.
If passengers had not phoned their loved ones from it, there would have been no need to go to elaborate lengths to pretend that they had.

Had a hijacked plane been shot down that day, it would have been an unfortunate but necessary action on the part of a fighter pilot.

Had a fighter pilot shot down a hijacked jet that day he'd have been a hero, as he'd have prevented a greater loss of life by protecting the target of the hijacked airliner.

Flight 93 conspiracy theories are the silliest of the lot.

This makes no sense. None of your stated invalidations of your opening question have much if anything actually to do with the question! You simply offer your justifications for shooting down Flight 93 (which I don't necessarily agree with), as though that's what actually happened.

I think I know what point you're trying to make, but you've not actually done a very good job at all of making it. You might have been better simply stating your last sentence, although I'm not sure I would agree that they're any sillier than many other CTists.

 

[Brainster]

Remember, Truthers start with the conclusion: 9-11 was an inside job! Then they go looking for the evidence. Inevitably individuals coalesce around particular aspects of the event, and fiefdoms are established. Initially the groups may be supportive of each other, but that will change once any one theory starts to dominate the interest and passion of newer members. Then you get the "crabs in a bucket" phenomenon, where the crabs will all try to climb out of the bucket, but at the same time try to prevent any of the other crabs from succeeding.

You can start out with four basic locations: WTC 1, WTC 2, Pentagon, Shanksville. Add in WTC 7. You also have four different flights. You have Osama and the Hijackers. Those are the basic foci, but as time goes on the groups splinter further, because proposed methods differ, because proposed villains differ, etc.

And many of these people are fantasizing that they'll be the one to break it wide open, and reap the rewards of fame and fortune that will inevitably follow. So they plug away at their small corner of the conspiracy theory, and bitterly deny that any of the other groups are doing anything useful. As I have often noted, outstanding debunkings of almost all the various flavors of the conspiracy theory have been assembled, not by debunkers but by Truthers working to defeat theories they think are sidetracking the movement into unproductive areas. Greg Jenkins has published not one, but two papers at JONES on Judy Woods' beam weapon. Catherder (who I assume was/is a Truther) did a magnificent job on his post over at ATS on the Pentagon. Arabesque, Caustic Logic and Russ Pickering have been pretty solid on the CIT Madness. Don't get me wrong here, either, I am sure that in many cases it has to do with legitimate concerns with the theories, but I'm sure there's also some fief-protecting as well.

 

[RedIbis]

Where is it?

 

[HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP]

Where is it?

In your head, or too stupid to figure it out?

 

[fezzic]

Why do conspiracy theorists insist that flight 93 was shot down ?

Because, like the other, various theories proffered about 1 WTC, 2 WTC, 7 WTC, and the Pentagon, they will grasp at straws to find some "evidence" to expose the alleged conspiracy. It is a given that the conspiracy had to be involved in all of the events of 9/11 otherwise there would be no point in using the recordings from 9/11 to attempt to prove the activities of said conspiracy.

 

[GT/CS]

You're right, it makes no sense. First they claim the adminstration knew the attacks were coming so they grounded the military, then they claim 93 was shot down.

Brainster's point regarding fiefdoms seems to be spot on.

 

[DGM]

Where is it?

I don't understand this question.

Red; Is it that you don't believe that flight 93 crashed in Shanksville or that it was shot down and thus disappeared because of this?

If a plane is shot down it doesn't "vaporise" so you would have the same wreckage as if the plane crashed on it's own.

Are you saying the wreckage is being hidden so no one can see the "missle hole"?

What gives RedIbis?

 

[RedIbis]

I don't understand this question.

Red; Is it that you don't believe that flight 93 crashed in Shanksville or that it was shot down and thus disappeared because of this?

If a plane is shot down it doesn't "vaporise" so you would have the same wreckage as if the plane crashed on it's own.

Are you saying the wreckage is being hidden so no one can see the "missle hole"?

What gives RedIbis?

Well it wasn't in the ditch. CNN reported that 95% of the plane was recovered but it was never laid out in a hangar as usually happens with wreckage. So where is it?

Gravy has a pic on his links of a dumpster, about a third full, or what looks to be rusty scrap. Is that it?

 

[Garb]

Well it wasn't in the ditch. CNN reported that 95% of the plane was recovered but it was never laid out in a hangar as usually happens with wreckage. So where is it?

Gravy has a pic on his links of a dumpster, about a third full, or what looks to be rusty scrap. Is that it?

The FBI handed the wreckage to the airlines. Are the airlines in on it?

 

[RedIbis]

The FBI handed the wreckage to the airlines. Are the airlines in on it?

Where is it? Did anyone photograph it? Has it been laid out? Was there an investigation? Link to your claim?

 

[peteweaver]

of course there was an investigation.

But that investigation wasn't brought about to placate paranoid conspiracy theorists.

 

[WildCat]

it was never laid out in a hangar as usually happens with wreckage.

Was mechanical failure suspected as the cause of the crash Red?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

And now the twoofer tape loop begins repeating another cycle.

 

[funk de fino]

Where is it? Did anyone photograph it? Has it been laid out? Was there an investigation? Link to your claim?

Are all planes that are shot down reconstructed afterwards?

They know why it crashed therefore the NTSB did not have to follow the usual investigation procedure.

Do you believe it was shot down?

If it had been shot down there would have been a damn site more wreckage strewn over a larger area. The FDR would also have shown the damage inflicted by the "missile"

 

[RedIbis]

Please post a source which suggests that investigations are limited when terrorism is suspected.

As far as I know, Pan Am 103 was jointly investigated, extensively.

 

[Disbelief]

Please post a source which suggests that investigations are limited when terrorism is suspected.

As far as I know, Pan Am 103 was jointly investigated, extensively.

Who said anything about terrorism. The reaspon for the inestigation into 103 was to determine what caused the explosion to help prevent something like this happening. So, how does this relate to the crashing of an airliner on purpose?

 

[RedIbis]

Who said anything about terrorism. The reaspon for the inestigation into 103 was to determine what caused the explosion to help prevent something like this happening. So, how does this relate to the crashing of an airliner on purpose?

So there's no value in reconstructing 93 if 95% of it was recovered?

 

[Drudgewire]

Please post a source which suggests that investigations are limited when terrorism is suspected.

As far as I know, Pan Am 103 was jointly investigated, extensively.

Pan Am 103. Oh, you mean the plane that was bombed? This one?

Wreckage was strewn over 50 square miles. Twenty-one of Lockerbie's houses were completely destroyed and eleven of its residents were dead. Thus, the total death toll was 270 (the 259 aboard the plane plus the 11 on the ground).

Spallone said the plane was still smoldering at 12:30. He said officials were trying to keep people from scene and confirmed that there are no survivors. He said the "debris field spread over an area size of a football field, maybe two footballs fields." The impact of the crash was so severe that the biggest piece of debris he has seen there is no bigger than 2 feet.

Secondary (and tertiary) debris fields

The Pennsylvania state police said debris from the crash has shown up about 8 miles away in a residential area where local media quoted some residents as seeing flaming debris from the sky.

But investigators were unwilling to say whether the presence of debris in two separate places evinced an explosion.

Hey, you made the analogy. vv