'Truthers' have tried to twist the evidence in order to show that UA93 was shot down, even though this is in direct opposition to their own 'stand down' theory. This page takes those theories and examines them using cited evidence: http://unitedflight93.com/ So, having read the sourced page, does anyone have any rebuttal? In addition, does anyone have any evidence to offer regarding the stand down/ shoot down contradiction of the 'truther' camp?
Michael D Fortner's 99 cent e-book doesn't get very good reviews on Amazon (aside from the one obvious disinformation obligatory "review"). Seems folks think he's....well...I'll let the intelligent reader see for themselves. http://www.amazon.com/Truth-About-U...iewpoints=1&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending
Aww man...that's not right. I'm just following the example you guys set. Ignore the issues and attack the messenger. That not what goes on here? Seriously though.....Was his book 'peer reviewed'? Does his opinion agree with the accepted narrative? Etc,etc,etc. 99 cents is a pretty steep price to pay for.....something.
If you don't care for him, then why did you link to his site in the first place? I would remind the intelligent reader that the thread refers to the link in question, and not the e-book. Let's try to stay on topic.
I don't consider a bunch of hearsay evidence. Everyone has a story. Did the FBI or anyone else run tests on the debris? You know, to check. What was the scatter pattern like?
From the truther side, most assuridly. Truthers LOVE to attack the messenger because the truth rips their pathetic theories to shreds. Why attack the messenger when the truth is so much easier? Yes, we realize truthers are on very tight budgets after giving all their money to Gage, Wood, Jones, Jones and Griffen. And Lord only knows truthers don't think the truth is worth a buck. Why else would they trash it so?
Of course they did. They also turned over the FDR and CVR over to the NTSB for analysis. Both were linked to Flight 93 and both showed exactly what the rest of the evidence like radar logs, eyewitnesses, and the called loved ones claim. Do you have any real evidence Flight 93 was not as it should be? So far all I've seen is opinions from people who "think" flight 93 doesn't look like it should even when there are documented cases of other flight crashes with many similarities including the scatter pattern and debris being found eight miles away. What would convince you?
The crashing of United 93 is a paradox to me. I'm still reading the commission report, but I've gotten past the crashes. So I can gather some thoughts about what I think. To me, it seems odd that the hijackers prematurely decided to take the plane down. I realize that they realized that they were about to be breached, or that's what we've been told, but that is nevertheless odd. The hijackers were determined and steely. Failure was not an option. However, it is possible. The thing to think about, is probability. Would they abandon their mission at the first sign of trouble? Or would they see it through until the very end? I would have to imagine, with the size and scope of the mission itself, that they would see it through until the 'very' end. But that's just me. But it largely does not matter. I don't care one way or another if the plane was shot down or not. I did not see the plane crash. I have never seen video of the plane crashing either. All I have to go on is what people have said, and what the government said, and speculated as to what happened. Likewise, I never saw it get blown out of the sky either. I just have a hard time believing that the hijackers voluntarily took the plane down themselves, all things considered.
I'd call that propaganda....not evidence. The transcript proves somebody thought to put those words together...source unknown. It doesn't prove the "official" BS story ISN'T BS. Let's talk more about it.
The FDR and CVR were turned over to the NTSB for analysis. Both were linked to Flight 93 and both showed exactly what the rest of the evidence like radar logs, eyewitnesses, and the called loved ones claim. Do you have any evidence that these things were faked, or that the FBI and NTSB were complicit?
Yes...I do... http://careandwashingofthebrain.blogspot.com/2012/03/911-oddities-that-official-story-cant.html Note the FBI dude in video 3.
Opinion is not evidence ... Gunderson retired in 1979, how relevant is his knowledge of the operations of the FBI 21 years later? He does not offer evidence, he offers opinion.
So opinions of those people you want me to contact in Shanksville would not be evidence either? Correct? True...in his opinion. Him having been an FBI official does merit some consideration though, don't you think?
The transcript of the CVR is evidence that supports the narrative. The FDR also records the plane all the way to the ground - no missile strike recorded on either device.
No, they are quite different. The responders and workers at Shanksville were actually on the scene. They have personal witness, photos and videos that support their witness. Gunderson was not on any of the scenes, and is offering only opinion, with no evidence to back it up. In the video clip linked to, he mostly rehashes Richard Gage's talking points. Using an argument of authority from an FBI agent 21 years retired is a bit of a stretch, wouldn't you think?
I would say his expertise warrants some consideration, wouldn't you say? That's not the begin and end all, but a piece. I guess we'll agree to disagree here. Okay?
But it is in conflict with the characteristics of the hijackers themselves, as well, their mission. There is a conflict here that doesn't make sense. Is there not? They did prematurely crash the plane before the passengers breached the door.
Some consideration, certainly. But in the linked video, all of his expertise goes toward the government knowing about it beforehand (LIHOP), not being actively participating. When he gets around to that, he's not relying on his expertise, but repeating the talking points of someone else. In addition: he doesn't really offer up his expertise for the LIHOP theory, except to say: "I just knew it."
I had to Google that - LIHOP. Do you think that's a more credible belief system to hold than the others?
It's got way more credibility than MIHOP (made it happen on purpose). There's still that pesky lack of evidence, though.
