I can't see why they bother with the "Flight 93" conspiracy.

[TC329]

In other words, you require a ridiculous amount of proof for the universally accepted course of events but you require only the most flimsy of evidence involving a tiny percentage of the witnesses (all of whom say Flight 77 hit the pentagon) who have been cajoled into saying the plane went vaguely north of the Citgo and an FDR found in the Pentagon misinterpreted by the dolts and hacks at PffffT.

Your reasoning skills are pathetic TC.

really wildcat?

where are the southside lightpole smashing treetop trimming generator crushing witnesses at? got any? film any?

whats that?

oh you got none. but the corporate media that skeered you and the rest of these people that saddam was linked to al qaeda and had wmd's and the next warning was going to be a mushroom cloud on the horizon went out and did it for you.......right?

to date there has not been a single piece of plane debris from any of the 4 crash sites that has been positively identified as being from the plane the united states government claim it is from......considering they recovered so much debris you would think this would have been the first thing they did since this is typical operating procedures in all incidents involving aircraft and then followed up with a reconstruction of those parts ......like every other crash in aviation history.

 

[WildCat]

really wildcat?

where are the southside lightpole smashing treetop trimming generator crushing witnesses at? got any? film any?

whats that?

So you require video of every claim? You are not a rational person TC.

oh you got none. but the corporate media that skeered you and the rest of these people that saddam was linked to al qaeda and had wmd's and the next warning was going to be a mushroom cloud on the horizon went out and did it for you.......right?

No TC, the overwhelming evidence did. And it is indeed overwhelming and conclusive.

to date there has not been a single piece of plane debris from any of the 4 crash sites that has been positively identified as being from the plane the united states government claim it is from......considering they recovered so much debris you would think this would have been the first thing they did since this is typical operating procedures in all incidents involving aircraft and then followed up with a reconstruction of those parts ......like every other crash in aviation history.

If this was an accident you'd have a point. But it wasn't, you lose again. In fact, yours is the paranoid ranting of a street-corner lunatic.

 

[TC329]

So you require video of every claim? You are not a rational person TC.

cit brought videos of eyewitnesses saying the opposite.

you guys cannot duh-bunk them except to make fun of them. perhaps you could find real breathing eyewitnesses to the attack to duh-bunk them?

come on, we both know you can't and neither can any of your brethern....

No TC, the overwhelming evidence did. And it is indeed overwhelming and conclusive.

remember how bush wasn't even in office for 30 days before firing the first missiles into iraq?

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/02/16/iraq.airstrike.03/index.html

remember how in march of 2002 time magazine reported [and cnn and other corporate news outlets all carried it] that bush said to 3 senators a full year earlier "**** saddam, we're taking him out".....?

how about when weapons inspector ritter stated multiple multiple times that saddam did not have a single wmd?

is that the overwhelming and conclusive evidence you speak of?

9/11 and osama bin laden all justified the invasion of iraq that the majority of the world supported even though the entire world was outraged when bush started firing missiles into iraq as soon as he was sworn into office.

my how murdering 3000 of your own people can change world opinion........

If this was an accident you'd have a point. But it wasn't, you lose again. In fact, yours is the paranoid ranting of a street-corner lunatic.

oh mildcat, a street-corner lunaitc?

your words are so flattering.

 

[Norseman]

USA Today

The relatives of the passengers and crewmembers also said they heard the sounds of screaming, yelling and rushing wind moments before the jet crashed in a field near Shanksville, Pa.

i bet even you can figure out whats wrong above....

Oh yes, we understand very well what you are hinting at here TC329. This is where you want us believe that an air to air missile caused an explosive decompression of the cabin.

The problem is that does who have listened to the tape does not support you:

Deena Burnett, the wife of Thomas Burnett, said that sounds appeared muffled and that the rushing of wind could be heard as the plane flew far too fast for its low altitude. In the final seconds, the jetliner hit the ground at 575 miles an hour, officials have said.

New York Times 2002: A NATION CHALLENGED: FLIGHT 93; Families Say Tapes Verify Talk of Valor

In New York's federal court, a handful of people watching the proceedings via closed circuit included Elsa Rensaa, a World Trade Center survivor who said that hearing the cockpit recording debunked some conspiracy theories.

"It clears up the fact that the U.S. Air Force did not shoot down the plane in Pennsylvania," Rensaa said. "You could hear from the cockpit voice recorder that the hijackers flew wildly and erratically to get people away from the door."

Clayton Patterson, another survivor, called the trial a chance to air key facts and dispel myths about Sept. 11.

USA Today 2006: Sept. 11 families say tape shows heroism

 

[Grizzly Bear]

really wildcat?
where are the southside lightpole smashing treetop trimming generator crushing witnesses at? got any? film any?

whats that?

oh you got none. but the corporate media that skeered you and the rest of these people that saddam was linked to al qaeda and had wmd's and the next warning was going to be a mushroom cloud on the horizon went out and did it for you.......right?

Let's see if you notice the question I asked you in the other thread this time... So, if flight77 did not hit the light poles knocking them over, what did? Or doe you think they were planted... in front of hundreds of bystanders?

I'd like to hear your thoughts on this one

considering they recovered so much debris you would think this would have been the first thing they did since this is typical operating procedures in all incidents involving aircraft and then followed up with a reconstruction of those parts

Why do they reconstruct the plane TC? Tell me... Usually reconstruction is a follow up to determine what caused the plane to crash do they not? For the trade centers they know the planes crashed because well... they were intentionally rammed into both towers. The Pentagon crash, which you reject, another plane was driven into a building... In shankeville the plane was essentially out of control with the chaos inside... None of the four planes had anything particularly wrong with their mechanical systems....

Flight 800 for example was reconstructed for that purpose: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A01E7DD1F30F935A15753C1A960958260

Suggesting how confounding the mystery of the crash of Trans World Airlines Flight 800 has become, Federal officials have tentatively decided to take a series of new steps in the inquiry, including reconstructing a large section of the Boeing 747 that exploded on July 17 and blowing up another 747 to test various theories about the crash.

The object is to determine whether the explosion that destroyed the plane and killed all 230 people on board was caused by a mechanical failure, a bomb or a missile.

At a meeting yesterday, officials of the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Bureau of Investigation reached a tentative decision to rebuild as much as 92 feet of the 230-foot-long plane by affixing the pieces of plane to scaffolding, officials who participated in the meeting said. The area of the plane they are considering rebuilding is roughly from the forward door to just behind the wings, a board official said.

Investigators working in a former Grumman hangar in Calverton, L.I., are working on a reconstruction of the plane's center fuel tank, but they hope that by more than doubling the area of the reconstruction they will get a more complete view of the damage to the plane. The investigators have determined that the center fuel tank exploded, but they do not know the cause.

They can identify the plane from radar pickups, and other methods non exclusive to the debris itself.

......like every other crash in aviation history.

Give me one example of a hijacking where a plane was intentionally crashed to kill several thousand people... Last I checked... most aviation crashes are accidental and the reason for the crash isn't known until after wards... It's pretty self-evident why they crashed

 

[TC329]

Oh yes, we understand very well what you are hinting at here TC329. This is where you want us believe that an air to air missile caused an explosive decompression of the cabin.

The problem is that does who have listened to the tape does not support you:


New York Times 2002: A NATION CHALLENGED: FLIGHT 93; Families Say Tapes Verify Talk of Valor


USA Today 2006: Sept. 11 families say tape shows heroism

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905E4DC153FF93AA25757C0A9649C8B63

The families were not allowed to take notes or use recording devices as they listened to the voice recorder and viewed the transcript of the final 30 minutes of the flight, which crashed outside of Shanksville, Pa.,

Before they listened to the tape at a hotel here, family members of the passengers and crew were required to sign a waiver issued by the Department of Justice, agreeing not to sue the F.B.I., Justice Department or the federal government for any matter connected to the playing of the tape.

Family members were also strongly urged not to reveal the contents of the voice recorder, because federal officials plan to introduce it into evidence in the forthcoming trial of Zacarias Moussaoui.




seems like even if there was a shoot down the family members would not be allowed to discuss such.

 

[beachnut]

.....considering they recovered so much debris you would think this would have been the first thing they did since this is typical operating procedures in all incidents involving aircraft and then followed up with a reconstruction of those parts ......like every other crash in aviation history.

How can you be more wrong? No major parts survive to put back together! Why would they put the plane together in a CRIME? When the cause is unknown they try to put plane back together to figure out the cause. The only people who do not know the cause of 9/11, CIT, you, p4t and other groups too dumb to understand the reality of 9/11, an event which you think is some political crap with aliens, small planes flying over vans and under wires, etc. Explain? The NTSB puts planes back together to figure out WHAT did it. 9/11, I know you have problems, massive problems understanding 9/11, but it was cause by a WHO, not a WHAT, and the WHO committed a crime, not an ACCIDENT. Do you understand on purpose and an accident. We learned this in grade school. When a terrorist take a plane, that is a crime, when a terrorist crashes the plane while committing a crime it is murder, and another crime. The terrorist committee lots of crimes on 9/11. When we know who did it we do not need to reconstruct a plane which is smashed beyond all possible recognition due to a 600 mph impact into the ground. Your lack of logic is noted, and confirms you are you posting things you usually say. Identification confirmed!

This idea is like most of your stupid ideas, and make you easy to debunk, at many levels of abstraction.

 

[LashL]

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905E4DC153FF93AA25757C0A9649C8B63seems like even if there was a shoot down the family members would not be allowed to discuss such.

What a remarkably stupid thing to say.

There is and was nothing prohibiting the family members from discussing what they heard.

Exhibit 1: the New York Times article to which you linked, in which family members discussed what they heard.

 

[Dr Adequate]

yeah i cant figure out why the government would shoot the plane down out of fear the revolt would be successful and their entire operation would have been exposed had there been a safe landing.

So, let's see if I've got this straight.

(1) 93 was shot down, which would of course have left a crater, wreckage, fragments of bodies.

(2) At the Shanksville site, there were, according to all the evidence we have, a crater, wreckage, and fragments of bodies.

(3) Nonetheless, the whole Shanksville site is a fake, and 93 actually came down somewhere else. There are no witnesses to this, but what the hey.

 

[chillzero]

Several off topic posts removed. Keep it on topic, and don't personalise matters, please.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero

 

[TC329]

So, let's see if I've got this straight.

(1) 93 was shot down, which would of course have left a crater, wreckage, fragments of bodies.

(2) At the Shanksville site, there were, according to all the evidence we have, a crater, wreckage, and fragments of bodies.

(3) Nonetheless, the whole Shanksville site is a fake, and 93 actually came down somewhere else. There are no witnesses to this, but what the hey.

i do not support statement #3.

parts of flight "93" came down somewhere else but the majority of it came down in shanksville.

 

[eeyore1954]

yeah i cant figure out why the government would shoot the plane down out of fear the revolt would be successful and their entire operation would have been exposed had there been a safe landing.



yes it does the passengers revolting would jeopardize the entire operation. you don't put your 'critical thinking' hat on when you come here, do you?

So it appears to me from these statements that you believe the government wasn't planning to shoot down the flight but it happened because the government was afraid when the passengers were took over if they were able to land safely the whole plan would be exposed.

So they weren't planning to do this yet they were ready at a moments notice to get the fake debris and hole planted somewhere in Western PA.
Also does this mean you believe the plane was hijacked by someone.

 

[HENTAI DOUKYUSEI JP]

cit Brought Videos Of Eyewitnesses Saying The Opposite.

so What Are Those Idiots Doing With That Evidence? What Are They Waiting For To Bring The Real Criminals To Justice?
why are you sucking up to CIT?

 

[Norseman]

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905E4DC153FF93AA25757C0A9649C8B63

The families were not allowed to take notes or use recording devices as they listened to the voice recorder and viewed the transcript of the final 30 minutes of the flight, which crashed outside of Shanksville, Pa.,

Before they listened to the tape at a hotel here, family members of the passengers and crew were required to sign a waiver issued by the Department of Justice, agreeing not to sue the F.B.I., Justice Department or the federal government for any matter connected to the playing of the tape.

Family members were also strongly urged not to reveal the contents of the voice recorder, because federal officials plan to introduce it into evidence in the forthcoming trial of Zacarias Moussaoui.




seems like even if there was a shoot down the family members would not be allowed to discuss such.

As pointed out already by LashL nothing prevented the relatives from discussing it. They were only urged not to reveal the content of the tape because of the upcoming Zacarias Moussaoui trail. Despite this they discussed it to some extent with the press.

This is why they had to sign a waiver, in case you did not understand it TC329:

The participating family members were asked to sign a release excusing the government from any responsibility for emotional distress the family may experience.

Source: CNN - Families hear tape from hijacked Flight 93


And as should be evident from the second article I linked, the tape was played at the Zacarias Moussaoui trail in public with the press present on april 12th 2006. So once again since you obviously missed this part or conveniently ignored it:

New York's federal court, a handful of people watching the proceedings via closed circuit included Elsa Rensaa, a World Trade Center survivor who said that hearing the cockpit recording debunked some conspiracy theories.

"It clears up the fact that the U.S. Air Force did not shoot down the plane in Pennsylvania," Rensaa said. "You could hear from the cockpit voice recorder that the hijackers flew wildly and erratically to get people away from the door."

Clayton Patterson, another survivor, called the trial a chance to air key facts and dispel myths about Sept. 11.

USA Today 2006: Sept. 11 families say tape shows heroism

My bolding.

None of the Flight 93 relatives who have listened to the tape supports your idea that the plane where shot down, not in 2002 and not in 2006. Neither does others who listened to tape in 2006 as should be evident from the above quote. Quiet the contrary, they are convinced that it was the passengers who singlehandedly prevented the terrorists from reaching their intended target with Flight 93.


Here are some other reports from the 2006 playing of the tape:

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/12/moussaoui.trial/index.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-04-12-moussaoui_x.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/12/u...600&en=7a9a1d555088255e&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY

 

[sleahead]

i do not support statement #3.

parts of flight "93" came down somewhere else but the majority of it came down in shanksville.

I see. Please describe what the crash scene should have looked like if an airplane was deliberately crashed at high speed. I'm hoping you're not going to use that drawing of a tail section sticking up out of the ground which someone (Avery?) produced.

 

[TC329]

So it appears to me from these statements that you believe the government wasn't planning to shoot down the flight but it happened because the government was afraid when the passengers were took over if they were able to land safely the whole plan would be exposed.

correct that is my current belief.

i also believe tom burnett told the truth when he told his wife one of the hijackers had a gun.

So they weren't planning to do this yet they were ready at a moments notice to get the fake debris and hole planted somewhere in Western PA.

uhhhhhhhhh no.

 

[Dr Adequate]

i do not support statement #3.

parts of flight "93" came down somewhere else but the majority of it came down in shanksville.

So you think Shanksville's the real deal? This did not come over in your posts, but that's excellent. You can turn your attention to the Truthers who think it's fake, and I shall get the popcorn and watch.

 

[TC329]

So you think Shanksville's the real deal? This did not come over in your posts, but that's excellent. You can turn your attention to the Truthers who think it's fake, and I shall get the popcorn and watch.

yeah like suddenly you're not the enemy anymore......

 

[pomeroo]

cit brought videos of eyewitnesses saying the opposite.

you guys cannot duh-bunk them except to make fun of them. perhaps you could find real breathing eyewitnesses to the attack to duh-bunk them?

come on, we both know you can't and neither can any of your brethern....




remember how bush wasn't even in office for 30 days before firing the first missiles into iraq?

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/02/16/iraq.airstrike.03/index.html

remember how in march of 2002 time magazine reported [and cnn and other corporate news outlets all carried it] that bush said to 3 senators a full year earlier "**** saddam, we're taking him out".....?

how about when weapons inspector ritter stated multiple multiple times that saddam did not have a single wmd?

is that the overwhelming and conclusive evidence you speak of?

9/11 and osama bin laden all justified the invasion of iraq that the majority of the world supported even though the entire world was outraged when bush started firing missiles into iraq as soon as he was sworn into office.

my how murdering 3000 of your own people can change world opinion........




oh mildcat, a street-corner lunaitc?

your words are so flattering.

Tell us about the survivors of the Titantic who thought the ship went straight down. They were watching from nearby lifeboats, you know. Were they "lying"? Did they prove that the ship didn't sink?

You can run, but you can't hide.

 

[Calcas]

correct that is my current belief.

Oh, finally, a theory!

Please tell us more what you believed happened at Shanksville...or anywhere else on 9-11.