Odd response from United Airlines

[RedIbis]

Personally I would have very little problem with that (I do think that saving it to perhaps bury at the memorial in Shanksville would be more appropriate).

Believing as some "truthers" do that the wreckage does/did not exist however would be calling all the volunteers that collected it liars. Are you willing to do this?

How do you know that what they collected was in fact pieces from Flight 93? They might have believed it was, but there's really only way to be sure, and we don't have that chance.

 

[T.A.M.]

Red:

Do you consider everything wrt to the 9/11 attacks to be made up/fabricated/planted until proven other wise?

That is a pretty paranoid, warped way of looking at things isn't it?

I mean why would you assume that the wreckage was planted???

TAM

 

[DGM]

How do you know that what they collected was in fact pieces from Flight 93? They might have believed it was, but there's really only way to be sure, and we don't have that chance.

The wreckage was not there early on September 11th and after witnesses saw the plane come down it was there. I don't have any reason to believe that the plane was not identified as United flight 93 on site. DNA was identified and lots of parts that would have had numbers on them were recovered (according to volunteers statements).

Can you tell me any reason not to believe what these regular people actually on the scene believed was flight 93? Unless you are willing to believe that some number (most likely large) of the volunteers were some how "in on it" I can't see justifiable believing it was not actually flight 93.

 

[tsig]

How do you know that what they collected was in fact pieces from Flight 93? They might have believed it was, but there's really only way to be sure, and we don't have that chance.

So the only way you can be sure is to be at the scene and feel the blood flow thru your hands.

 

[RedIbis]

parts that would have had numbers on them were recovered (according to volunteers statements).

Please post the source for this.

 

[beachnut]

How do you know that what they collected was in fact pieces from Flight 93? They might have believed it was, but there's really only way to be sure, and we don't have that chance.

IF the DNA had not matched the passengers on Flight 93, your lies, false ideas and fantasies on 93 would be the truth

now that is a fantasy

 

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

This may be a late hit, but it might be at:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/

Just a wild guess, though.

(It bucks you over to a place where you can download the entire report.)

 

[DGM]

Please post the source for this.

The FDR and CVR would be two components. Plus people reported seeing an intact plane falling from the sky. Just because you can't find (haven't looked hard enough) doesn't mean its not there.

 

[RedIbis]

The FDR and CVR would be two components. Plus people reported seeing an intact plane falling from the sky. Just because you can't find (haven't looked hard enough) doesn't mean its not there.

That's not what I was asking a source for.

 

[DGM]

That's not what I was asking a source for.

Although I'm not positive what you looking for (specifically).

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page1

Contains statements (or links to) concerning the recovery of aircraft parts and statements of witnesses of the crash itself.

Bottom line is, Intact plane falls from the sky (regardless of the reason) the parts that made it fly are there, 95% of which were recovered. As you know I'm working to find out what became of them and perhaps a lists of what was recovered.

Want to help? Fill out a few FOIA request or contact the people that were there. I have lots of contact info if you want it.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

That's not what I was asking a source for.

Otherwise you assume that serial numbers are only on the 5% of the plane that was not found?

 

[deep]

You will doubt that the plane crashed there until "someone" shows you the plane parts, and serial numbers. Since this will never happen: No plane parts, no crash. No crash, no 9/11.

I will doubt that it "crashed" there until someone can explain how debris & human remains wound up 2-8 miles away from the alleged crash site. For example, a burning seat cushion was found 2.5 miles away.

The physical evidence does not support the hypothesis that the plane simply crashed straight into the ground and blew up.

 

[TheWeirdSkeptic]

I will doubt that it "crashed" there until someone can explain how debris & human remains wound up 2-8 miles away from the alleged crash site. For example, a burning seat cushion was found 2.5 miles away.

The physical evidence does not support the hypothesis that the plane simply crashed straight into the ground and blew up.

I guess you're just going to ignore the other examples of this happening to other plane crashes also. Or say goverenment scam.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

I will doubt that it "crashed" there until someone can explain how debris & human remains wound up 2-8 miles away from the alleged crash site. For example, a burning seat cushion was found 2.5 miles away.

The physical evidence does not support the hypothesis that the plane simply crashed straight into the ground and blew up.

So you're saying that this plane crash should be different than how planes normally end up in this type of crash? How is that?

 

[DC]

Red:

Do you consider everything wrt to the 9/11 attacks to be made up/fabricated/planted until proven other wise?

That is a pretty paranoid, warped way of looking at things isn't it?

I mean why would you assume that the wreckage was planted???

TAM

Demanding evidence is Paranoid?
i will remember it, thx

 

[beachnut]

I will doubt that it "crashed" there until someone can explain how debris & human remains wound up 2-8 miles away from the alleged crash site. For example, a burning seat cushion was found 2.5 miles away.

The physical evidence does not support the hypothesis that the plane simply crashed straight into the ground and blew up.

The evidence does support 93's impact. You lack knowledge on aircraft impacts.

The PIECE of burning cushion was very small and was carried on the wind. You lack evidence to support your uneducated conclusion, based on hearsay, lies and false information. This is so simple to debunk the posts like yours that lack evidence, you have zero evidence. You can't even source your hearsay, or can you?

 

[deep]

I guess you're just going to ignore the other examples of this happening to other plane crashes also. Or say goverenment scam.

In which other plane crash was a burning seat cushion found 2.5 miles away?

 

[deep]

You can't even source your hearsay, or can you?

Blah, blah, blah.

http://www.flight93crash.com/MyPittsburghLIVE.htm

It's also archived at http://library.triblive.com - search burning seat cushion from 9-10-01 to 9-20-01.

The Indian Lake Marina is 2.5 miles away from the main crash site. Did human remains also get blown by the wind?

 

[johnny karate]

I will doubt that it "crashed" there until someone can explain how debris & human remains wound up 2-8 miles away from the alleged crash site. For example, a burning seat cushion was found 2.5 miles away.

The physical evidence does not support the hypothesis that the plane simply crashed straight into the ground and blew up.

What real world impact do you honestly think your incredulity will have?

 

[Arus808]

I will doubt that it "crashed" there until someone can explain how debris & human remains wound up 2-8 miles away from the alleged crash site. For example, a burning seat cushion was found 2.5 miles away.

still repeating this lie deep, after its been told to you many times, that hteo nly debris that was found "miles away" was lightweight and small in size.

MUCH of the debris and human remains, were found within FEET of the crash site, and many FEET DEEP in the crater that was created.

That you ignore this, is showing your willful ignorance.

the fact that you have to be told repeated that your claim above is a lie, shows that you are not above to continue lying about what is claimed