Comments by "cchris874" (@cchris874) on "Extended interview: F-16 pilots recall mission to intercept Flight 93 on Sept. 11, 2001" video.

  1. This thread is about flight 93. See if you can control your instinct to spam at every opportunity.
    2
  2. Because they didn't.
    2
  3. Why would they bother making up a story like that?
    2
  4. Easy to say. Impossible to prove.
    2
  5. Because you have a distorted sense of your own abilities.
    2
  6. The truth movement has always been a fraud, I totally agree.
    2
  7. Actually they could have fallen if you read the failure modes spelled out by not just NIST, but other science papers too. The key to understanding this is that due to the twisting motion of the upper blocks at the beginning of the collapses, the upper block columns were now no longer hitting the lower block columns, but instead twisted out of alignment and thus bearing down their weight on a single floor. One floor, with no other support columns between the core and perimeter columns, could not possibly support the weight of the entire upper block. How could it? I am not trying to prove this IS what happened. Merely that you cannot rule it out.
    1
  8. More evidence this was not an inside job.
    1
  9. I guarantee you don't have a proof.
    1
  10.  @tspan34  The problem is, you cannot prove to anyone but yourself that her body language = shoot down. There is no other evidence of a shoot down, either in the flight data recorder, the witnesses who saw it crash, and the absence of major crash debris anywhere else but within a thousand feet of the impact site.
    1
  11.  @jannops  I love how Youtube works. Never any evidence presented.
    1
  12.  @jannops  OK, that's fair. I think you're referring to Rumsfeld's comment "the people who attacked the United States . . .shot down the plane over Pennsylvania." It's claimed by CNN and others he misspoke, and that makes some sense if you consider the context: "the people," whom he surely meant to be the terrorists. Thus taken literally, he would be claiming the terrorists shot the plane down. That is clearly not what he meant. There was so much speculation, he momentarily forgot there was no shoot down. The same kind of mistake was made by a few people in regard to TWA 800. George Stephanopoulos referred to the shoot down, or bombing, of flight 800, because, I speculate, years later that's what people remember most about the coverage. I don't see any other major inconsistencies -we have the family members confirming the plans of the passengers. How likely is it they were all lying? Many say it was shot down, but there's a remarkable lack of evidence for that. The shoot down theory requires explaining where all the wreckage went, as all but about .001 percent of it was found within 1,000 ft of the main debris area. The FDR did not record any parameters consistent with a shoot down. No one saw a shoot down. I can also give you the names of 12 witnesses who state they saw an intact airliner crashing at Shanksville. I'm not claiming a proof one way or another, but I don't see a strong case for a shoot down. They also announced no shoot down before 2 o'clock on that day, a very risky thing to say if major wreckage were to be found later in more distant locations.
    1
  13.  @jannops  The furthest debris field was actually 8 miles away, and was only paper and insulation, a phenomenon most likely the result of the debris/smoke plume, acting much like a thermal, pulling light debris into higher air, and carried by air currents. The same thing was observed for PSA flight 1771, and US Air 427, where insulation and paper landed at a golf course 2 miles away only moments after impact. A missile needs to account for more than a few pieces of paper and insulation.
    1
  14. The phone calls do indeed admit to the truth. The passenger revolt foiled the hijackers.
    1
  15. I did do my own research. Virtually all the debris fell within 1,000 ft of the impact crater. About 1.3 miles distant a very few small fragments of seat, bone, and tiny pieces of metal were found. 8 miles distant, only paper and some insulation was found. The latter was carried there by air currents. The former could have easily been blasted there due to the kenetic forces. So the shoot down theory has to explain where virtually the entire plane went, as all but about .001 % of it was ever found outside the primary debris field.
    1
  16. Well the above is all quite speculative. Bush continuing to read "My Pet Goat" could well be interpreted as simply an incompetent president, which he surely was, paralyzed by the indecision one expects from a poor leader. In addition, no script writer in her or his right mind is going to come up with that pathetic screenplay. They would would want to make the president look on top of things. especially given the stinging criticism the government failed to stop a single attack. "Then the Missile that at the pentagon, it was proven that only a missile could make a huge hole that did not extend to the sides like an airplane would have made with its wings." Not proven to even most "truthers." Discussion welcome. "This shows that Govt, had to plant these explossives." Then by definition, this was not "let it happen" but active perpetration. "And people would have seen a big airplane coming in way before it hit the pentagon." So, the magical government somehow managed to convince most witnesses they saw a 757 (as most of them claimed) instead of a missile. And decided it would be perfectly sensible to fire a missile over rush hour traffic for all to see. No offense intended, but this is some of the worst speculation I've come across, even for Youtube, and has the distinct ring of someone who does not critically question the alleged proofs offered by truth sites: a movement which by and large is a collection of lies and misinformation that puts even the government to shame.
    1
  17. Neither can the twoof movement. For both, lies are their stock in trade.
    1
  18.  @somethinglikethat212  There were no whole bodies, but there were several hundred lbs of small body parts. I was from these that the county coroner was able to ID all the passengers except the hijackers. Look up the name Wally Miller if you honestly think he thought there were no remains at all.
    1
  19. You obviously can't do research. Ethiopian flight 302 also completely buried itself. About .02 percent of the wreckage of F93 fell more than a 1.5 miles distant, and all of it light paper debris and insulation. I keep forgetting this is Youtube.
    1
  20.  @stevevarTX  It didn't all "dissolve." There were pictures taken of flight 93 and presented in an exhibit for the Moussaoui trial, which included the black boxes, part of an engine and a 5-7 ft piece of 757 skin with window panes clearly in the UA livery. Thus it is not true there wasn't even "one suitcase." 911 represented a fairly rare type of plane crash: high speed, steep angle. But there have been a few others, such as Northwest flight 710, whose entire fuselage was swallowed whole by the earth. It can be just as shocking to investigators: "The residue of flight 710 was something even the most veteran investigators had never come across before. There were no bodies." In the case of PSA flight 1771, 1st responders had no idea they were looking at an ailriner. It was just confetti strewn on a hillside.
    1
  21.  @stevevarTX  The engine is not all titanium. Look up Ethiopian flight 302 wreckage engines, and you'll see the core part of an engine shorn of its cowling and outer parts. I mean, this is a no-brainer. "22 caliber bulle-t can tra-vel over 1 ½ mile. A center-fire bullet can travel several miles." That bullets can travel over 1.5 miles shows that unless you talk to a crash physics expert, you are speculating to claim tiny parts from an airplane cannot be blasted such distances.
    1
  22. If it was an inside job, why did they want to crash a plane in the middle of nowhere?
    1
  23. "guys somehow didn't figure" Not sure I see that point. Either way, the terrorists were not about to cancel their mission. Why would it matter to the government after the fact whether the terrorists did or did not know?
    1
  24. There was a plane on the ground: smashed up and mostly buried. Just like Ethiopian flight 302.
    1
  25.  @brucejensen3700  M West also writes: "Uniqueness has long been put forward as evidence of a conspiracy, and nowhere more so than in the highly unique events of 9/11. What are the odds, they will ask, that three tall building could collapse from fire when this has never happened before? These arguments are specious, of course, as the events of 9/11 were unique from the outset. Never before had hijackers attempted to fly four planes into large structures. The outcome was bound to be unique, even spectacularly unique. But this mantra of "what are the odd" and "never happened before" became such an integral part of the 9/11 conspiracy mythology, that when it finally DID happen again they were forced to either incorporate this new occurrence into their mythology or discard a huge swath of "evidence." Thus after the 17-floor high Plasco building in Tehran caught fire and then collapsed, we were faced with the bizarre spectacle of 9/11 Truthers, particularly the supposedly sensible Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, insisting that this collapse of an office building in Iran was somehow a continuation on 9/11. They pointed to the same things they pointed to in the World Trade Center: the expulsions of dust, the rapid descent, the fires after the collapse, the color of the smoke, reports of bangs. They did this because these were all pieces of evidence they used 16 years earlier to insist that the World Trade Center collapse was a controlled demolition. So the 9/11 Truthers became Plasco Truthers."
    1
  26. Well, Ethiopian flight 302 refutes you decisively.
    1
  27. It was not shot down. There is next to no evidence it was shot down.
    1
  28. = twoof movement and its insatiable desire for drama.
    1
  29. Your argument is based, it seems, on what the government "should" have, and could have done. But if we go by physical evidence and witnesses, there's not much of it. We also have a pretty well documented case that the passengers were indeed revolting. I think you discard a little too easily what that outcome might have been. I see your point about passenger fear in the future. But at the same time I believe the government would be dying to take the credit, given the stinging criticism they failed to stop any of the planes. The shoot down theory is not crazy, and might be true. But it's hardly a proven fact.
    1
  30.  @FirstLast-xr9lo  There have been, over the years, various versions of the engine story, including it being variously over a mile away, and 300 yard away. What does a scholarly minded person do when confronted with conflicting info? He does his best to reconcile the info. Firstly, when you have two different distances, you don't latch on only to the one that fits your bias. 2nd, e know the engine was found in a catch basin, which in point of fact was 900 feet away, well within the distance of debris fields from other crashes. No Easter Bunny here. Again we have different stories about the shoot down order. The most credible is that it was issued after flight 93 crashed. This was made clear by the release of a batch of new documents about 2010. "If the passengers were to rush the cockpit they somehow did it during the only 3 minute window when there would not be any casualties on the ground?!?!?! " And how do you know that? Did you plot the flight path?
    1
  31. Operation Twoofer ad infinitum.
    1
  32. The evidence for a shoot down doesn't add up for 2 main reasons 1) There would be major wreckage all over the place, or at least in one spot. There wasn't, except at Shanksville. 2) a dozen named witnesses testified they saw an intact airliner hit the ground in Shanksville. You have to prove they were all liars before getting any further with this theory.
    1
  33. It crashed in Shanksville. Most people figured that out 22 years ago.
    1
  34. How did the magical government manage to convince most witnesses they saw a 757 instead?
    1
  35. You will hear constantly that it was shot down. But the proof is lacking.
    1
  36.  @AB-mw8oz  And Ethiopian 302 also was swallowed whole by the ground. Just like flight 93. In fact even more so.
    1
  37. The CIA enabled 9/11, but did not orchestrate it.
    1