Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
Jammonius, do you believe the Titanic sank, or did that never exist either?
Flight 93
- Thread starter 9/11 Chewy Defense
- Start date
There is no jetliner debris and there are no remains visible. Moreover, the lack of remains and of debris is confirmed by the first of the first responders. Mind you, some of them made statements that made it appear as if they wanted to say there was a plane crash. This is understandable and already explained in terms of the desire by almost everyone to want to be perceived as going along with the program.
It was clear from the first moment of the 9/11 psyop that people were being specifically directed to think a certain way. That is why when a witness says what they saw, at first, it has greater weight than what they may have said either later or even later in the same statement.
Something else that is relevant to your photo is that the normal way of investigating a crash scene has been said NOT to have been followed at the FL 93 scene. This may have something to do with that whole "trust" issue that the Univ Colorado study touched on in such polite and indirect language that it was hard to determine what they were actually getting at. Anyway, proof that the FBI interfered with proper investigative technique can be found as follows:
"A report suggests the crash site of Flight 93 is being searched and recorded in 60 square-foot grids. [News Journal (Wilmington, DE), 9/16/2001] This approach is preferred by Wallace Miller, the local coroner, and Dennis Dirkmaat, a forensic anthropologist involved in searching the crash site. According to journalist and author Jere Longman, “The distribution patterns developed from such precise marking of airplane parts, remains and personal effects might have told them such things as exactly how the airplane struck the ground. Theoretically, by associating the location of particular remains with the location of parts of the airplane, they may have also gained some clues about which passengers had rushed the cockpit.” However, almost a year later Longman reports that this approach was not followed: “The FBI overruled them, instead dividing the site into five large sectors. It would be too time-consuming to mark tight grids, and would serve no real investigative purpose, the bureau decided. There was no mystery to solve about the crash. Everybody knew what happened to the plane.” [Longman, 2002, pp. 262]"
The above is a devastating quotation that almost in and of itself confirms both deception and a desire NOT to be able to find out what happened. Small wonder the local first responders were so upset.
Posters, let me ask this:
Is there anything more the FBI could have done to make sure claims about what happened to FL 93 could not ever be reliably proven? They gave away evidence; and, they interfered with and prohibited the standard procedure for investigating a plane crash site.
This is devastating to the integrity of the common myth, posters.
Last edited:
Sam.I.Am
Illuminator
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 4,627
The FBI's investigations showed that the crash was 100% caused by humans and not caused by something wrong with the aircraft. The aircraft performed exactly as designed, that the pilots were suicidal mainiacs is not the fault of the aircraft, the maintainace people or the builder and designer of the aircraft. The evidence is the black boxes recordings. Everything else that remained of the aircraft is not evidence. It is property owned by the airline, it's value is as scrap metal at that point. Do you think that every aircraft that ever crashed and was unsalvageable is saved in a hangar somewhere? If you do then you are an idiot. At some point it will either be discarded or recycled.
The NTSB didn't need to investigate the crash for just that reason, the cause was evident. Four men hijacked the aircraft, the passengers knew that they were going to die if they did nothing and tried to stop the hijackers then, in response to that, the hijackers augered the aircraft into a field. The crash wasn't a safety issue that might affect other aircraft and the only changes made were to beef up the cockpit doors on other aircraft of all types.
The NTSB didn't need to investigate the crash for just that reason, the cause was evident. Four men hijacked the aircraft, the passengers knew that they were going to die if they did nothing and tried to stop the hijackers then, in response to that, the hijackers augered the aircraft into a field. The crash wasn't a safety issue that might affect other aircraft and the only changes made were to beef up the cockpit doors on other aircraft of all types.
hokulele,
Your query is unkind. It makes it seem as if nothing I am posting is being read or understood for what it actually says. Do you dispute my assertion that the FBI gave away important evidence, such that what happened to alleged FL 93 can now never be proven?
Do you dispute that the coroner, Wallace Miller said he saw no remains at the scene?
Have I not been clear in posting up information confirming the FBI overrode the normal process for investigating a plane crash site?
Do you dispute that United Airlines no longer has the wreckage the FBI gave to them?
I am a bit nonplussed that you are seeking to label me, irrespective of the factual content of my posts.
Adherence to the common myth does not require that sort of tactic, hokulele. I have been clear here. I have said I understand if people insist on sticking to the common myth. There is an emotional need to do that. However, the emotional need to stick to the common myth, no matter what, should not result in the need to label me as nuts, irrespective of the factual content of what I am posting.
take care
I Ratant
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2008
- Messages
- 19,258
Attachments
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
I didn't label you nuts, I asked if you believe the Titanic sunk, or did that never exist either. Well, do you believe it existed?
EXCUSE # 1
Your claim even if true, cannot be asserted as true because by destroying evidence and by not investigating in normal manner, and, instead, investigating in a less precise manner, reliance on the FBI is untenable, unscientific and inconsistent with evidence standards.
Stating that something is "evident" is not considered a proper, reason-based approach to reality. Self-serving declarations about what is or is not "evident" do not count or matter and cannot be deemed credit-worthy.
Not only that. The evidence that did come out has not consistently confirmed the common myth.
I say "no plane" was involved.
Others say "the plane was shot down."
Unfortunately, no claim can be either verified or falsified now because the investigation was not properly done and vital evidence was destroyed.
Posters, you can post excuses, rationalizations, justifications, playground putdowns from now on; but, you cannot change the fact that no proper investigation was done and evidence was destroyed.
Deal with it, posters.
BigAl
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 5,397
You haven't got the right to take us off topic in that manner. So, would you stop this nonsense, please.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
jammonius:
I'd like your comment on this article.
Seems the NTSB still doesn't investigate crimes
I'd like your comment on this article.
Seems the NTSB still doesn't investigate crimes
Last edited:
.
And from the Pentagon... same Plymouth wheel cover... or is it?
Off topic. Go start a thread on Flight 77 if you want and start it by providing a rational explanation of what happened and source your claims.
How do you come up with this stuff? Those that were there first do make statements about a plane crashing and seeing a lot of plane wreckage. Where are you getting that they didn't?
The only witness I know of who have changed their stories about what they saw on 9/11 are "truthers."
This passage that you have quoted doesn't say anything about the standard way a plane crash is investigated. It only shows that a way that was preferred by some people was not taken because of the time consumption. Plus, this wasn't a standard plane crash. They knew why the plane crashed, they weren't investigating to find the cause. They were not investigating why the plane crashed!
Completely wrong, as usual.
The FBI hasn't done anything that could ever deem the overwhelming physical evidence that FL93 crashed unreliable.
What evidence did they give away? How did they interfere and prohibit the standard procedure for investigation a plane crash?
The only thing devastating here is your assault on logic and common sense.
Hey look, posters, I will respond to EXCUSES, but I am not going off topic down various and sundry primrose paths.
When I said "Deal with it" I did not mean change the subject.
Of course, if you want me to interpret your attempts to change the subject as confirmation that you concede the FBI did not properly investigate FL 93 and mishandled evidence, such that no determination of what happened can ever be made, then please say so.
Painful though that may be to admit, I'm afraid it is factual and true.
Instead of changing the subject, you should demand accountability for that egregious violation of public trust.
Get on it, posters. You all are responsible citizens, right?
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
Well, that is one way to avoid answering a direct question. It is relevant to the topic, as it can help me determine what evidence you would consider acceptable and why. If your standards apply to the events of 9/11 and those events alone, the use of special pleading can be noted.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Nice dance.
First you have to show how the plane itself is actually evidence in a crime.
Are you ready to admit that you were wrong about the NTSB's role?
We cant help you with your dillusions. We cant cure you of your over active imagination. Your obviously not content with the cards that life has dealt you. Being gullible and easily lead is a sad trait to carry through life. Perhaps you dont have a partner or job right now. Who knows what the problem is but clinging to a fantasy of make believe fed to you by idiots is not the way to go. Do your parents know what your beliefs are? Do your brothers and sisters know? What about your work colleagues? Or your girlfriend/boyfriend?But you probably hide it from them. Shame, they could possibly help you.
May i suggest that you take up a different hobby because your not very good at this one - and maybe get out more. Skydiving, Scuba Diving and Skiing are very theraputic and you may even make some new friends and take your mind off all this woo. Seriously, you need to calm down, get a life and find a different release from all that built up hatred and claptrap ignorance thats welled up inside you.
In the meantime, handwave all you like chump. We have nothing to prove here. We accept that 19 terroists with box cutters hyjacked commercial aircraft and killed thousands. The evidence is with us. The evidence wont change. Never! Like it or not the evidence is here to stay. The onus and burden to prove differently is on you - not us. You have failed and will continue to fail because you cant alter the truth. The narrative has remained constant. Why? Because the truth always does! 9 years and its still the fresh truth it always was.
Lie all you want. Handwave all you like. Talk the talk as much as you like. The result will always be the same. You will achieve zilch because you cant overturn the truth.
That is the real world. Acting all coy and ignorant dont wash. We have our evidence. We are happy with our evidence. We know that UBL and KSM got some friends to do it. They admit it.
We understand the reality of how real life works. If you dont like it - tough ****. If you dont agree with it - tough ****. If you want to prove otherwise then please feel free to start. You have to do far more than handwave and showboat to anonymous people who are simply laughing at you. We cant help you.
911 happened the way the world knows it happened. It is constant truth. Reality is a bitch and you cant alter it. Handwave all you like. Talk as much crap as you like. Belittle all the evidence as much as you like. Nothing changes. It remains the same.
Now off you go and do something really constructive for your beliefs. You have some work to do. People to speak to. Evidence to trace. FOIA's to complete. Foot work to do. Lawyers to see. Families to interview. Airlines to question. FBI to bring to task etc. Dont hang around. Do it. Do it now. Start with the airlines. Make those calls. Ask those questions. Seek out those firefighters and police officers. Do it now. We cant help you. You need first hand evidence dont you.
What are you waiting for. Go. Go now. Cut out all those incompetant middle men. Go direct to the sources that you refer too. Do it now and stop pissing about with childish games on here. Shouldnt see or hear from you for quite some time. You need to be thorough dont you. Do it know though.
Sam.I.Am
Illuminator
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 4,627
It's not my fault that you don't understand what does and does not constitute evidence. There is tons (that's a metaphor) of evidence showing that the aircraft was hijacked and intentionally flown onto a field. Radar tracks, FDR recordings, cockpit voice recordings, DNA, witnesses that saw the aircraft crash and the people with the grisly task of collecting up what was left of the aircraft. All of it is consistent and they all corroborate each other. Nutball claims of it being shot down or there not even being a plane at the crash site received the level of investigation that they deserved.
But let's play nutball make believe shall we? What would be the motive to either a) plant parts to make it look like an airplane crash or b) shoot it down and not take credit for it? What would the evidence have to be in order to prove your delusional fantasies of these hypothetical events?
But let's play nutball make believe shall we? What would be the motive to either a) plant parts to make it look like an airplane crash or b) shoot it down and not take credit for it? What would the evidence have to be in order to prove your delusional fantasies of these hypothetical events?
wargord,
EXCUSE # 2
You seek to distinguish the fact that the FBI curtailed the investigation in such a way as to prevent the collection of evidence as not being a definite "standard practice" and as only being what the local authorities wanted to do. You do not source that assertion, you merely make it.
Furthermore, the main fact is seen in the devastating admission that the FBI trashed out an investigation such that a determination of what happened cannot be made.
Thus, your excuse makes no difference to the essential fact of the matter.
As to witnesses and what they saw, I think one of the best, both because of what he said, when he arrived and his area of expertise, is Wallace Miller, the coroner of Somerset County. He is one of the first people to arrive at the Flight 93 crash scene. He is surprised by the absence of human remains there. He says, “If you didn’t know, you would have thought no one was on the plane. You would have thought they dropped them off somewhere.” [Longman, 2002, pp. 217]
Wallace Miller:
EXCUSE # 2
You seek to distinguish the fact that the FBI curtailed the investigation in such a way as to prevent the collection of evidence as not being a definite "standard practice" and as only being what the local authorities wanted to do. You do not source that assertion, you merely make it.
Furthermore, the main fact is seen in the devastating admission that the FBI trashed out an investigation such that a determination of what happened cannot be made.
Thus, your excuse makes no difference to the essential fact of the matter.
As to witnesses and what they saw, I think one of the best, both because of what he said, when he arrived and his area of expertise, is Wallace Miller, the coroner of Somerset County. He is one of the first people to arrive at the Flight 93 crash scene. He is surprised by the absence of human remains there. He says, “If you didn’t know, you would have thought no one was on the plane. You would have thought they dropped them off somewhere.” [Longman, 2002, pp. 217]
Wallace Miller:
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Are you claiming that Wallace Miller believes that there was no victims at the site? You do know in later interviews he explains what he meant by this statement. Stop the stupid cherry picking.
Last edited: