The truth about flight 93

[UnknownPD]

I am confused. Ron has suggested in the past we should be told the truth about Jessica Lynch, but today he seemed to imply we don't need to know the truth about flight 93. Why the difference?

[Furtherman]

I haven't heard the show yet, but if that is what he was implying, I would firstly guess a reason was behind the rumors.

Some witness claimed to see a jet that forced the plane down, or shot it down.

But whether or not that happened, those people should be remembered as heroes. Let them lie in peace.

The Lessica Lynch "rescue", however, was a PR stunt and not as dangerous as the press made it out to be. And that statement is not a crack at our marines over there, where every minute in dangerous, but a crack at the press.

[high fly]

You weren't listening closely enough.
Whether the passengers on 93 forced the plane down, or the terrorists forced it down in the face of the passenger revolt, the fact remains that the actions of the passengers prevented the plane from getting to DC.
Those passengers are gen-u-wine heroes and need to be remembered as such.
The Lynch story is different because the administration let a false story remain in the public domain even though it had contrary facts, not just about the rescue, but about whether she fought at all, the extent, nature and cause of her injuries, and more.
What it looks like now is that Lynch was a victim of circumstance and not Sgt. Fury, fighting off the Iraqis to the last bullet and was finally subdued by Iraqi bayonets. She is to be respected and admired for her service to our country. She deserves our sympathy for what she went through.
She performed no heroic deeds.

" and they ask me why I drink"

[reeshy]

She performed no heroic deeds.


You, Sir, are guilty of the same thing that you are claiming that the Administration has done. You were not there- therefore, you don't know what she did!!! Until Lynch herself or another credible witness comes forward, I, for one, will reserve judgement on what had really transpired!

<IMG SRC=http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:tURhE4auwTYC:www.iorr.org/iorr27/kruger2.jpg

[DJEvelEd]

I heard that parts were found miles before the main crash site indicating an explosion BEFORE impact. That is all.

<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/canofsoup15/images/dj-sig.gif">
I OFFEND THREADS & RUIN THE WEAK MINDED

[badorties]

the lynch and flt 93 stories represent two ends of the media's role in politics ....

the former is a fabrication in an attempt to put a cute face and lead story on an unpopular war, the latter is trumping the legacy of the passengers while ignoring the possible cause of how the plane came down .....

there's always been speculation that the plane was forced down by jets ..... i remember on the day of the eleventh that there were radio reports that flt 93 was shot down .... as the hours and days passed there was less said about it

regardless, of how the plane met its demise, the passengers should be remembered as hereos -- the black box and phone calls can attest to it

+|+|+|+|+

"Life is not a problem to be solved but a reality to be experienced." -- Soren Aaby Kierkegaard

[high fly]

You, sir, are guilty of the same thing that you are claiming the administration has done


Just what false story have I allowed to remain in the public's perception?



You were not there...


True, neither were you. We both must rely on other sources.We also must be ready to change our opinion as the facts emerge. My opinion is based on well-sourced articles in the Washington Post which discovered that Lynch's weapon jammed and she didn't get a round off, and that her injuries came early in the incident when her vehicle crashed.
If you have anything that shows something else, i'd like to see it.
If you're basing your opinion on a false story, you may wish to reconsider.

It's good to see you following the recent rule passed on pix of Keefer that say no photo of him may be published without the skull ring being in view.

" and they ask me why I drink"

[Knowledged_one]

High Fly you tell him to list the article that he has yet you claim reference to a Washington Post article but dont back it up with the reference to that. I agree with the consensus that until the true story is out we will never know, I am of the opinon however that she was probably brutally raped repeatedly. And I have seen the Al-Jazeera video clips and the interviewing of the soldiers and the injuries they mostly sustained looked alot like bullet wounds not accident wounds (imesh has the whole video clip from al Jazeera and Ogresh.com used to have it)

<IMG SRC="http://publish.hometown.aol.com/gpigking/myhomepage/`k1.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US">
ODB is free

[high fly]

....until the true story is out


KNOWLEDGED ONE Sorry I don't have the date of the Post article; it was a big one on the front page and was carried over the wire services and made a big splash in the news. I believe it was linked to in a Jessica Lynch thread about a month ago. it hasn't been refuted.

Sorry you missed it.

What makes you think that "the true story" is not out?

" and they ask me why I drink"

[curtoid]

It seems reasonable to assume that the truth about Jessica Lynch, whatever it is, will be revealed, meanwhile we will never be 100% certain about what really happened on flight 93.

That said, there are still things the public hasn't been told about 93 (unrelated to the direct cause of the crash). Much more survived the impact than has been let on - mostly stuff related to the highjackers. Not sure when it will (if ever) be revealed, however.

[KOP]

[UnknownPD]

The story I was referencing about flight 93 was that it was brought down by the terrorists not the passengers. If this is true then some suggest that the passengers were not the heroes the media built them up to be. Sort of akin to Jessica Lynch not being a hero if that story is not true. It seems that it is heresy to question the passengers, but ok to judge Jessica Lynch.

[reeshy]

True, neither were you. We both must rely on other sources.We also must be ready to change our opinion as the facts emerge. My opinion is based on well-sourced articles in the Washington Post which discovered that Lynch's weapon jammed and she didn't get a round off, and that her injuries came early in the incident when her vehicle crashed. If you have anything that shows something else, i'd like to see it. If you're basing your opinion on a false story, you may wish to reconsider.


If you had taken the time to read my ENTIRE post, you would have seen that I have already answered each of your questions and suppositions. I said that I would wait for further information before making a conclusion.
Good day to you!!!

<IMG SRC=http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:tURhE4auwTYC:www.iorr.org/iorr27/kruger2.jpg

[high fly]

I said that I would wait for further information before making a conclusion

Fair enough.
Did you too miss the Post story?
Have you seen anything not rebutted, that leads you to believe anything other than what I have said?
Have you found a false story that I have allowed to remain in the public domain?
Perhaps I should have said that there is no evidence that Lynch performed any heroic deeds.

On another note, to my original post in this thread, I should have added gratitude to the respect and admiration that we owe Lynch and all of our veterans.

...passengers were not the heroes the media built them up to be

Though I have not seen this report, what I have read is that right after the passengers came after the terrorists on the plane, one of the terrorists hollered "here they come!"; this was followed by a struggle that made it's way into the cockpit at which point the plane nosedived into the ground.
The most likely scenario to me is that the terrorists crashed the plane to keep it from being taken back by the passengers.
This makes the passengers that tried to take the plane back heroes, for they prevented even more loss of life had the terrorists been able to continue to D.C.There is evidence that they acted heroically.
There is no evidence that Lynch acted heroically. This is no slur on Lynch.
Lynch, like all our vets is deserving of our respect, admiration and gratitude for serving our country. Lynch was a victim of circumstance, suffered physical injury and certainly mental trauma in her service to our country. She merits our sympathy, concern and best wishes.
She is not to blame for the false story about the circumstances of her capture. This was leaked by unnamed sources. The administration quickly had the facts and intentionally withheld them from the public.

" and they ask me why I drink"

[Heavy]

This belongs in the politics forum. Shame on you.


In the meantime... (http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=87&Topic=30702)

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=JohneeWadd">
Mad props to Fluff for the sig and C.O.soup for hosting!

[Reephdweller]

This belongs in the politics forum.



I just got a weird image of Johnnywadd as a mod.

<center><IMG SRC="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=go2osirus"></center>

<font size="1" color="red">
<marquee behavior=alternate bgcolor="#FFFFFF">right now you could care less about me...
but soon enough you will care, by the time Im done</marquee> </font>

[UnknownPD]

The administration quickly had the facts and intentionally withheld them from the public.

So the answer is that the truth doesn't matter as long as we can find some conspiracy to lay on the administration.

[furie]

you'll never know the truth, so it doesn't really matter.


http://tseery.homestead.com/files/rom.jpg

[high fly]

An honest administration would be nice, for a change.

" and they ask me why I drink"

[KC2OSO]

I don't think you are going to get to that with this: Bush Family (http://www.nhgazette.com/cgi-bin/NHGstore.cgi?user_action=detail&catalogno=NN_Bush_Nazi_2) but it is fun reading anyway.

http://www.njmikec.com/Fester1.jpg

[keithy_19]

Do you really wanna know the truth? Aren't there somethings that you might be better off not knowing about? Can't we just view Jessica Lynch and the passengers of flight 93 as heroes? Is that to much to ask?

http://members.aol.com/thetoddsterlsp/sigpics/keithbobeefy1.gif

One thing I've never said. I'm truly happy in my heart and in my head...

[KC2OSO]

oh fuck i'll start a new post. did you read the link? i wanted to bury it and i guess i did.

http://www.njmikec.com/Fester1.jpg

[Jack_Doff]

The issue here, and in any case, really, is that truth is only what you remember, not necessarily what happened. It has been a proven fact that 10 people can watch the same event and each come away with a different story. Does that make any one of their versions of the truth less accurate? Not to them. So really, if I remember that the passengers and crew of Flight 93 rushed the cockpit, the terrorists panicked and downed the plane, that is what happened. That's what I remember, therefore, what is, to me at least, truth.

[HBox]

Can't we just view Jessica Lynch and the passengers of flight 93 as heroes? Is that to much to ask?

You can do whatever you want. Some of us don't want to be treated like children.

http://members.aol.com/joepersico/myhomepage/sig1.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US

[TheMojoPin]

How would Jessica Lynch and the passengers of flight 93 even be equatable?

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You might tell some lies about the good times we've had/But I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 12-12-03 @ 12:50 AM

[curtoid]

The issue here, and in any case, really, is that truth is only what you remember, not necessarily what happened.

Nah...that's a cop-out. The truth is what really happened, regardless of what people may think what happened. That's why we have historians and archeologists and others who try to uncover the truth of our past.

It has been a proven fact that 10 people can watch the same event and each come away with a different story.

"A proven fact"? - May be a bit of an exageration, but I know what you mean - I've seen Rashomon.

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00003CXC6.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Does that make any one of their versions of the truth less accurate? Not to them. So really, if I remember that the passengers and crew of Flight 93 rushed the cockpit, the terrorists panicked and downed the plane, that is what happened. That's what I remember, therefore, what is, to me at least, truth.

That's fine, and (to be honest) it may not be for this generation to understand what really happened, but for a generation or two that's less likely to view the events emotionally.

[KOP]

[Jack_Doff]

The issue here, and in any case, really, is that truth is only what you remember, not necessarily what happened.

Nah...that's a cop-out. The truth is what really happened, regardless of what people may think what happened. That's why we have historians and archeologists and others who try to uncover the truth of our past.

But how do we know what really happened? You refer to the truth as if it was something you could hold in your hand like a stone, something that never changes. As revisionist history has shown us, things that were presented to us as fact have turned out to not be so. On top of this, history as a study is really just book reports anyway. We don't do research, we regurgitate what someone else tells us.

It has been a proven fact that 10 people can watch the same event and each come away with a different story.

"A proven fact"? - May be a bit of an exageration, but I know what you mean - I've seen Rashomon.

There is a psychological term for this phenomenon (maybe one of our psychology scholars can help me on this one) and it is used primarily to describe the difficulty in getting witnesses to testify in accident proceedings. People who are at the same place, same time watching the same thing give different descriptions of what has happened.

Does that make any one of their versions of the truth less accurate? Not to them. So really, if I remember that the passengers and crew of Flight 93 rushed the cockpit, the terrorists panicked and downed the plane, that is what happened. That's what I remember, therefore, what is, to me at least, truth.

That's fine, and (to be honest) it may not be for this generation to understand what really happened, but for a generation or two that's less likely to view the events emotionally.

[KOP]



In the future, I think people will have the same confused ideas about this as they do now. In forty or so years, when people involved with this crisis are dying/dead, the government or these people in deathbed confessions may give up information. But why would we believe them then. These are the same people who are currently telling us that the people in Flight 93 were heroes. If, in 40 years, they say, Yeah, we shot down the plane, why would we believe them? Because we want to? And wouldn't our desire to believe that make us more easily duped?

[sr71blackbird]

This is the first Im hearing of this, are some of you suggesting we shot down the plane?

<center>
http://www.osirusonline.com/sr71.gif </center>


<center><B>My Thanks to Reefdwella for the sig-pic!</B></center>

<center><B><strike>Folgers and Lava</strike></B></center>

<marquee behavior=alternate><font size=1>( o Y o )</marquee>

[Locke]

I am confused. Ron has suggested in the past we should be told the truth about Jessica Lynch, but today he seemed to imply we don't need to know the truth about flight 93. Why the difference?



I know why. He is with THEM now. THEY bought him out and now he is just another puppet for the man.

[curtoid]

But how do we know what really happened? You refer to the truth as if it was something you could hold in your hand like a stone, something that never changes. As revisionist history has shown us, things that were presented to us as fact have turned out to not be so. On top of this, history as a study is really just book reports anyway. We don't do research, we regurgitate what someone else tells us.

Wrong - there are historians who are doing research here and now so that future historians can do the research and get to the bottom of it.

Regardless of what may be the most widely held belief that nothing survived the impact of the plane, a few things did. (http://americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/record.asp?ID=160) And there are more that the FBI has not released yet.

http://americanhistory.si.edu/september11/images/medium/160_752.jpg

It may take 100 years, but the truth does come out - just people refuse to believe it, and they accuse it as revisionist. There continue to be controversies about things proved (or disproved) 100s of years ago.

If I slap someone with Alzeimers who forgot I slapped him, the hand print on his face is proof that a slap occured.

There is a psychological term for this phenomenon (maybe one of our psychology scholars can help me on this one) and it is used primarily to describe the difficulty in getting witnesses to testify in accident proceedings. People who are at the same place, same time watching the same thing give different descriptions of what has happened.

The Rashomon Effect

In the future, I think people will have the same confused ideas about this as they do now. In forty or so years, when people involved with this crisis are dying/dead, the government or these people in deathbed confessions may give up informationBut why would we believe them then. These are the same people who are currently telling us that the people in Flight 93 were heroes. If, in 40 years, they say, Yeah, we shot down the plane, why would we believe them? Because we want to? And wouldn't our desire to believe that make us more easily duped?

My only point is that there is one truth about what actually happened, and history has a history (so to speak) of proving things. It might take 100 years, or it might take 200 years - 40 years, to most historians way of thinking, is too soon.

FOR THE RECORD, even though I think that the plane would have been (due to the timing of the events) had it flown much closer to Washington, I do not believe that the plane was shot down, however I do not think we should assume that the passangers brought the plane down. That said, everyone who was murdered on 9-11 is a hero, in my opinion.

[KOP]

[Jack_Doff]

My only point is that there is one truth about what actually happened

How do we find out what that is and why doesn't everyone's version of what happens match? There is no such thing as an absolute truth. I think you have to look at truth as an individualistic thing because everyone's version is different.

Wrong - there are historians who are doing research here and now so that future historians can do the research and get to the bottom of it.

My cousin's roommate's friend's...To support your theory, I really hope that no one who is doing research now makes a mistake. That will change "truth" through the rest of history. If someone bases their research on incorrect theories or research, they will come to false conclusions. That creates at least two truths, what happened and what researchers say happened, not the one truth you propose exists.

If I slap someone with Alzeimers who forgot I slapped him, the hand print on his face is proof that a slap occured.

Nitpicking sure, but to this Alzheimer's Victim, it isn't true. If he doesn't remember it, it didn't happen. Also, Alzheimer's is a disease that can not be definitively diagnosed until after death, however, as a society, we use the name as if it was the Kleenex of Dimensia. If after this person dies, they are found to not have Alzheimer's but senility or some other sort of brain malady, how does that change history. You didn't actually slap someone with Alzheimer's, yet this whole time, you thought you did.

[furie]

The main reason why the whole report has not come out and will never comeout is that report would reveal certain emergency proceedures that we don't want published.



<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/ghostrider.jpg" height=100 width=300>
MERRY CHRISTMAS!

[curtoid]

How do we find out what that is and why doesn't everyone's version of what happens match? There is no such thing as an absolute truth. I think you have to look at truth as an individualistic thing because everyone's version is different.

There is truth and there are perceptions of the truth. Just because I believe I can fly if I jump out of my 5th story window in my verison of truth, doesn't mean I can. The truth is I will fall because the truth is I can't fly.

My cousin's roommate's friend's...To support your theory, I really hope that no one who is doing research now makes a mistake. That will change "truth" through the rest of history. If someone bases their research on incorrect theories or research, they will come to false conclusions. That creates at least two truths, what happened and what researchers say happened, not the one truth you propose exists.

Historians today are not making assumptions on anything happening today - they collect data and archive it. It appears that you do not respect what they do as a science, that they are simply people off the street with one world view to promote, but that is what it is - this is not a case of people with agendas trying to spin anything, because they do not interpret current events.They collect what there is to collect. They hope they have information that will be of use to others, but ultimately they will never know because it is the job of the historians in the future to sift through the pile of data and information and arrive at the truth.

If I slap someone with Alzeimers who forgot I slapped him, the hand print on his face is proof that a slap occured.

Nitpicking sure, but to this Alzheimer's Victim, it isn't true. If he doesn't remember it, it didn't happen. Also, Alzheimer's is a disease that can not be definitively diagnosed until after death, however, as a society, we use the name as if it was the Kleenex of Dimensia. If after this person dies, they are found to not have Alzheimer's but senility or some other sort of brain malady, how does that change history. You didn't actually slap someone with Alzheimer's, yet this whole time, you thought you did.
[/quote]

Fine...ignore the anaology.

If the handprint was still there and was documented and the person died of a brain hemorage due to the slap in the head, after saying, "Ouch! My head feels like it was slapped!", and it was all caught on videotape, and I confessed to it right before they found a palm sized tumor that immediatly appeared under the skin...then...I don't know...

I am not someone who believes there is one way to live a life that is right - I do believe (in the immortal words of the opening theme to "Diff'rent Strokes") that what might be right for you, might not be right for some.

I am also someone who is of the belief that there is more to this world than we will ever know - that unexplained things do happen, and will happen, and at times it's best to just sit back and rely on faith.

However, I am of the opinion that when physical things happen to physical people, then there is only one truth. It may be complicated, and it may not be something that can be discovered now because it's too soon, but often times it's important to pursue.

One thing happened to Flight 93...

* Either they were shot down...

* Either they were rushed by the passengers, and the passengers forced it down...

* Either ther hijackers slammed it down...

* Or something else.

It is not a case of this OR that; one thing happened to kill those people. Right now the belief is the passengers took it over - years from now there may be an overwhelming backlash and the the conspiracy theorists make popular their belief - and then, 150 years from now, they may finally be able to say with some definitive cloute that the hijackers heard the passengers coming, and took it down before they had a chance.

The truth is, we don't know - but it's worth finding out and not being dismissed because it's more convenient to remember it another w

[Mike Teacher]

I am confused. Ron has suggested in the past we should be told the truth about Jessica Lynch, but today he seemed to imply we don't need to know the truth about flight 93. Why the difference?


Holy Shite I may actually be Re-Railing a Thread.

I didn't hear the show, but there is a difference I don't think I've seen mentioned on the thread yet that leapt out at me:

Jessica Lynch was Military

People on Flight 93 were Civilians

Now, how does this make it different? One some levels not at all. But there are definite differences in conduct and expectation of behaviour, and indeed, different Laws for Military; I believe the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Anyway; those differences are real, meaning, when people are just about anywhere, and especially in a hostage or war or terrorist act, there are different expectations of behavior from Mili as opposed to Civi.

This isn't about Lynch/Flt 93 specifically; but I do know there's a difference. The police came out to our house once, I forget after what rash of terrorism; either the airplane hijacking where the Soldier was singled out, shot, and dumped on the tarmac, or something else. Anyway, the Dad-ster was a former Marine officer and he flew the Marine flag under the Stars and Bars, and they came in and related that people flying Mili flags should perhaps be a bit cautious, and suggested my father, who was traveling a lot then, not carry anything on him that would put him as ex-Mili. I remember this clearly, as it scared the shit out of me.

[Edit; Opps, I de-railed. As to the "Truth" about these things, maybe, and I have no idea, but maybe Ron was thinking along the Mili/Civi lines and thinks that Lynch, a soldier, and the military, should be held to a higher standard, and again a total guess, since the passengers were Civilian, they perhaps get a Pass.

Which I would disagree with, but again I didn;t hear it, so, this is all conjecture.]

<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/newsig">

This message was edited by Mike Teacher on 12-12-03 @ 1:23 PM

[TheMojoPin]

How do we find out what that is and why doesn't everyone's version of what happens match? There is no such thing as an absolute truth. I think you have to look at truth as an individualistic thing because everyone's version is different.

A somewhat valid point, but not applicable here since all things seem to indicate the answer lies in the recordings found after the plane crashed. That's not a "verison"...that's what happened.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You might tell some lies about the good times we've had/But I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[TheMojoPin]

If he doesn't remember it, it didn't happen.

Only to him. Medically or not, it ultimately means he's in denial. Everyone else around him can clearly see and deduce what happened. And there's the person who delivered the slap in the first place, who no doubt remembers it VERY clearly. So it DID happen.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You might tell some lies about the good times we've had/But I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[Bill From Yorktown]

hmm Kop's comments led me somewhere - what if the passengers DID rush the terrorists, but while they were struggling to get the plane back, the plane was shot down, or the terrorists grounded the plane - does it really diminish what they (the passengers) did? No. It was clear from the evidence we were given that they were going to try to get control back, or ground the plane to prevent others from getting hurt. The plane came down. It doesnt matter the exact cause of the grounding. They tried. They are heroes for it. Let it go. Any further evidence will either reinforce this, or detract from what they did. I doubt anyone wants to decry them as NOT being heroes - so why do it?

<IMG SRC="http://hometown.aol.com/billb914/sigpic.gif">

[Mike Teacher]

A note on the Rashomon Effect:

When I saw this, I was ready to Google, but said, wait, don't want to bias myself here. And I will get 80923 results.

On Observations:

We Perceive our Perceptions

Meaning: Forgetting for a moment philosophical arguments about any Ultimate Reality, let us assume we share a common world. Meaning, at least physically. Assumed. Now each of us has our sensory input organs, and a Whole Lotta stuff goes in. Too much, usually; so the brain tends to selectively filter out what it, for whatever reason, wishes Not to perceive, and let in, for whatever reason, what it wishes to receive.

Example: You are reading this now. There are sounds around you and things in your visual field, right now, as you read this, that you are not aware of, on a real level.

Pause. Stop. Close your eyes; instead of taking in sounds, project your listening out. Hey! there's a tractor down the street. This is real for me, now. This is the experiment we do in my class.

The TV was on to CNN. That my mind was letting in. Until the Pause; I was utterly unaware of the tractor [i can still hear it]. Now, the sound was definately going in my ear, and the ear drum drumming and the sound impulses were translated into electro-chemical 'stimuli'.

Now, did it reach my brain? I don't know. Meaning, until I Paused, I had no idea it was there. If later on, someone came to my door, the police say, and said a Tractor had been vandalized down the street, and did I hear anything, I would have responded, 'Tractor? Nope. Don't recall hearing a tractor.'

At what point did it stop? I have no clue. But until then, my world, meaning my perception of what the world was, for me, at that time, did not include the sound of a Tractor. Tractor there? Well, I can still hear it, and get into that whole 'what is reality' thing, but I don't go that deep...

EXPERIMENT: Let's do another Real Experiment, Right Now. Let's say you were shown a number, some super important number. You saw it, you are almost positive. The police NEED THAT NUMBER!!!! You know you saw it, you think so at least...

Ok, now Please FOLLOW THIS EXACTLY.

x

x

x

DO NOT LOOK ABOVE the Xs in fact look down here and answer this.

Q: What was the number I put in the beginning of this post DONT LOOK UP!!!!

I mentioned a number on purpose. I made it up. You read it. Maybe you skipped it entirely, but the photons of that number entered your eye if you read this far.

How did you do???

If you did great; close your eyes after reading this: What's the count of this post? It entered your eye.

Mike the Teacher (http://www.miketheteacher.com)

<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/newsig">

[TheMojoPin]

Sorry Mike, but if you click on the page 2 link to get to this thread it takes you to the bottom of the last post first, so I read your suprise questions first.

And Bill, people aren't necessarily trying to actively diminish what happened...some just want to know what happened because it IS history. It's important.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You might tell some lies about the good times we've had/But I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[Bill From Yorktown]

good post Mike.


btw I remembered it was a 5 digit number that began with 8, but that's it.

It's like when I'm at the office and have a certain radio show on, and reading something and doing work.... I tune things out. When it's 3am and I'm lying in bed trying to fall asleep, the faint tick tick of a clock 2 rooms away can keep me awake. During the day I can't hear it. It's just below my radar.

<IMG SRC="http://hometown.aol.com/billb914/sigpic.gif">

[high fly]

One train leave Chicago at 2pm, heading east at 82 mph.
Another train leaves Cincinatti at 2pm heading west at 86 mph...

" and they ask me why I drink"

[Bill From Yorktown]

but so much of history is either misremembering, or modified by what people felt. For example, George Washington crossing the Pottomac in that famous painting - he was most likely sitting down huddled under a blanket keeping warm - he wouldnt have been standing up (easy target) freezing his butt off.

My point was people will remember what they want, and little will be gained by finding out if they versus the terrorists downed the plane. As for the Lynch discussion, the media made that what it was, and everyone's now blaming her.



<IMG SRC="http://hometown.aol.com/billb914/sigpic.gif">

[TheMojoPin]

But that's a painting. It's not an accurate historical representation. It's art. People CHOOSE to visualize that, but the truth clearly exists at the same time to be found and read and studied by all, as it's obvious you have done yourself.

Of course, people will remember things as they wish, but it's still important for the truth to be AVAILABLE for those that want it.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You might tell some lies about the good times we've had/But I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[Jack_Doff]

Great points everybody. There is a lot of stuff out there and in here about perception and its place in the concept of truth.

KOP-you do make some compelling points although they are a lot of "ifs" and certain things happening. The other thing is that you are taking into account evidence to infer truth. If the Alzheimer's guy has a mark on his face, if his head hurts, he has a brain hemorrhage then you slapped him. That's not necessarily true. Someone else could have hit him, he could have fallen, etc. etc.

I also don't mean to disrespect historians by inferring their incompetence. However, sometimes information is miscollected, misinterpreted or plain ignored because it is not deemed important.

And I'm not saying it's more convenient to remember it another way. I'm just saying that there are more than one way to look at events. Unfortunately, we rarely come up with definitive answers about anything and it is a tremendously frustrating thing.

MOJO PIN:
Only to him.
Exactly. But that is his reality. So if someone comes up to him and says did someone hit you? he'll say no and believe he is telling the truth.

[high fly]

That wasn't George Washington crossing the Pittomic, it was the Rappahannock.

" and they ask me why I drink"

[KC2OSO]

He was on a Jet Ski too.

http://www.njmikec.com/Fester1.jpg

[Yerdaddy]

We're not slaves to our own imaginations on these things; there are actual sources of evidence to consider before you're forced to live with an opinion. There's the <a href="http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_2003-05-23.htm" target="_blank">9/11 Commission Hearings</a> with textimony from the general in charge of NORAD during the attack, (it's good reading either way). There are also Senate hearings. Even if you think these guys would be lying, it seems pointless to argue without even hearing the official story.

And Lynch wrote a book.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
TEAR THE BITCH APART!

[high fly]

I'm right on Flight 93 and I'm right about Lynch.

" and they ask me why I drink"

[TheMojoPin]

Exactly. But that is his reality. So if someone comes up to him and says did someone hit you? he'll say no and believe he is telling the truth.

So? He's wrong. Ignorance is bliss ONLY when it's ignorance.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You might tell some lies about the good times we've had/But I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[sr71blackbird]

Can I buy a vowel here? What in the fuck are we talking about here? Ive read this whole thing 2 times and cannot figure out what you are trying to say about Flight 93. Spell it out for me because Im out of the loop.

<center>
http://www.osirusonline.com/sr71.gif </center>


<center><B>My Thanks to Reefdwella for the sig-pic!</B></center>

<center><B><strike>Folgers and Lava</strike></B></center>

<marquee behavior=alternate><font size=1>( o Y o )</marquee>

[furie]

SR- It boils down to truth. What is the truth on 93, has it been told, and/or should it come out.

the truth hasn't been told 100%, and nor should it.


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/ghostrider.jpg" height=100 width=300>
MERRY CHRISTMAS!


This message was edited by furie on 12-12-03 @ 9:57 PM

[sr71blackbird]

What truth though? Im not getting what it seems was hidden from us. Are some saying that more went on with the crash then the passengers rushing the cockpit and the terrorist and causing the plane to crash? Are we discussing a possibility that the plane was forced down by outside forces?

<center>
http://www.osirusonline.com/sr71.gif </center>


<center><B>My Thanks to Reefdwella for the sig-pic!</B></center>

<center><B><strike>Folgers and Lava</strike></B></center>

<marquee behavior=alternate><font size=1>( o Y o )</marquee>

[furie]

yes, some are suggesting that, and yes, that's what some are disscussing.


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/ghostrider.jpg" height=100 width=300>
MERRY CHRISTMAS!

[sr71blackbird]

I dont think anymore went on than the passengers attacking the hijackers and the plane goes down. Either the passengers wrestled control away but couldnt fly it or the guy flying it crashed it when he saw that there was no way he was going to be able to accomplish his attack.

<center>
http://www.osirusonline.com/sr71.gif </center>


<center><B>My Thanks to Reefdwella for the sig-pic!</B></center>

<center><B><strike>Folgers and Lava</strike></B></center>

<marquee behavior=alternate><font size=1>( o Y o )</marquee>

[furie]

<a href="http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_2003-05-23.htm" target="_blank">9/11 Commission Hearings</a>

wow. that article takes me back, thanks yerdaddy. I just remember confusion and chaos. The fear and confusion over missing planes beyond the four that went down.

I remember even after 9-11 for several weeks, planes would sometimes temporarily go off the radar, and ATC would freak out. We'd suddenly get calls from NORAD wanting me to get more info for them. Like I can go up in my bat-copter and check it out.


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/ghostrider.jpg" height=100 width=300>
MERRY CHRISTMAS!

[TheMojoPin]

I'd lay money the 9/11 Commission ends up being as attacked as the Warren Commission within a decade.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You might tell some lies about the good times we've had/But I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[furie]

hmm...that just gave me a thought; was the Warren Commission accepted and believe at first or was it as ridiculed and scrutinized as it is today?


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/ghostrider.jpg" height=100 width=300>
MERRY CHRISTMAS!

[TheMojoPin]

Depends on who you ask. Essentially from the moment of the assassiantion, a majority of the public believed there was a conspiracy. Like they just expected it. This has continued to this day. But the Report WAS accepted at the same time, just with an air of public disapointment. But by the 70's it was being attacked left and right by people that didn't want to believe what was in it.

Look at it this way...everyone assumed right away 9/11 was the work of many, many people once terrorism was brought up, which it was, even as the towers were still standing. But then say the government investigates it and finds all the planes were remote controlled by one dude in the middle of Afghanistan, and that was IT. It wasn't what was expected, and in an odd way, wanted by the public. It bucks public expectations, and people essentialy don't WANT to believe it because it's not "big enough."

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You might tell some lies about the good times we've had/But I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[CruelCircus]

It may take 100 years, but the truth does come out - just people refuse to believe it, and they accuse it as revisionist.
That's awfully convenient for the historian. Completely eliminate the possibility that there exists actual revisionism. "Oh, you disagree? Well, you just refuse to acknowledge the truth!"
He can't be wrong!

For example, George Washington crossing the Pottomac in that famous painting - he was most likely sitting down huddled under a blanket keeping warm - he wouldnt have been standing up (easy target) freezing his butt off.
Small point- it is a painting of Washington crossing the Delaware, for the Battle of Trenton.


<br>
<img src="http://home.netcom.com/~jjmace/gifs/Tgivingsig.JPG"><br><br>
It's your life.
How do you like it so far?

Another damn postcard with those damn chimpanzees! Argh!

[Mike Teacher]

Since the thread is bouncing nicely off the philosophy and hisory bumpers, come down here and chum of this shit:

Often, the most difficult conclusion to make, in science for example, for some reason is:

No one really knows.

The above has nothing to do specifically with Flt. 93, but with a willingness to look at something, in terms of data, and realize that there either

-is not sufficient evidence to justify a theory

-the data/evidence is such that a conclusion can not be drawn. It may be due to the quality of the evidence.

Some general rules as to the quality of evidence in science, as opposed to the term 'legal' evidence;

Good evidence is usually

-Measurable

-Repeatable

-From multiple, independent measurements or sources [corroboration]

Well, one of Those sure jumps out to me for these; the repeatability. How to study something that is a single event? Wanna study snowflakes? You have plenty. Wanna study why a particular aircraft went into a building [and I do not wish to sound callous about this] ? Well, the event can't be repeated.

This sounds so gay, but you know what brought down FLight 93? Audacity.

It's the one word answer Buzz Aldrin gave at a talk, where it wasn't a mob, and we could really talk a bit. He's a 'peculiar' guy, very complex, there's an ocean of thought and emotion under this guys hood. I mean how many people were Mig Killers in Korea who went on to get a Doctorates in Orbital Mechanics at MIT? There's some brains there, for sure. And he explained it so perfectly, it was along the lines of:

Look at what we have done. We take the dirt, the earth, and we form it into machines that do things no one really understands, but we go ahead anyway, without thinking of the real consequences. The Audacity to think that we can do this, and have any measure of control over it, is simultaneously thrilling, and terrifying.

Bringing this to it's stupidest extreme, and I'm always good for stupidest. Here's a Q: What's the truth on Apollo 11? Because here is an event with so many data points of evidence, AND the repeatability [not the exact one, but we landed five other times] that they are like grains of sahara sand. And still, people seriously, often Very seriously debate whether it happened, in fact, at all.



<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/newsig">

This message was edited by Mike Teacher on 12-13-03 @ 5:56 AM

[Mike Teacher]

Sorry, Its 6am, and I'm bored, so:

Another thing about all of these types of events. The Monday Morning Quarterback.

You ever do something, or see something happen, and it's really strange and weird at first, but then you get the gestalt, the A-HA!!!, and say, Of COURSE!! Duh!!! How could it have been any different??

OK: Let's say you have a big Oxygen Tank. I mean big; fit a few people in big. Fill it with 100% Oxygen. Overfill it, in fact, because we want to test the tank for leaks. Gas leaks, ok? And fill the thing with plastic, like Velcro, plastic-fabric type material.

Then put in a few hundred miles of wires; thousands of wires, carrying electrical current.

Does this sound like a fucking bomb or what?

It's Apollo 1; the January 1967 fire that killed Grissom, White and Chafee. Around NASA, and in quite a few cities, it was a bit like when JFK was shot they say. White was a Huge Hero at the time, the first American to Walk in Space. Dead in less then a minute when a spark ignited the velcro in 100% oxygen. They had the whole thing, Horse drawn carraige into Arlington, just like in 63, all over again on TV. Betty Grissom was not quite as composed as Jackie, she was Livid at NASA, and went after them.

It's a bit difficult to get velcro to burn in air, which is only one-fifth oxygen. But in pure oxygen? It ignites so fast it looks pretty much like it's exploding. I saw a demo with a cigarette in an O2 tank. It burnt from end to filter in about half a second.

Now looking back, even less then 24 hours after this happened, everyone was looking at each other like Captain Obvious had pulled some horrific trick.

Why did No One realize the simple fucking fact that a capsule filled with pure O2 at, I believe at 17 psi, meaning you're just bathed in O2 molecules around your space suit, and you have ignitable materials: all the velcro, other plastic netting to hold stuff, lots of paper checklists, essentially, if it can burn, it will in these conditions. All that was needed was an ignition source. A few sparks, they think, from frayed wiring under a seat.

And [practically], no one even considered the possibility.

<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/newsig">

[high fly]

[quote]I'd lay money the 9/11 Commission ends up being as attacked as the Warren Commission within a decade.

You're right on the money with that one, Mojo.
One thing the two have in common is the administration has tried like hell to withhold information the commission needs.

It's also worth noting that the administration tried to put people on the commission like Kissinger who have been on the payroll of Saudi Arabia...

" and they ask me why I drink"

[DJEvelEd]

These people were "victims" not "heroes". They were victims of our government's inability to serve and protect us. Whether they were shot down or not, Bush and his Joint Chiefs failed these people and their families. You can be sure that the revelation of the truth will be "delayed" until after Bush leaves office.


I, for one, will NEVER forget hearing about the TWO debris sites in PA.

I, for one, will ALWAYS be skeptical and inquisitive of our government.

<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/canofsoup15/images/dj-sig.gif">
May Your Pockmarked Penis Penetrate A Puckered Poohole Pushing A Partially Processed Poop Pudding Product - (Old Arabic Blessing)

[furie]

These people were "victims" not "heroes". They
were victims of our government's inability to serve and
protect us. Whether they were shot down or not, Bush and
his Joint Chiefs failed these people and their families.

9-11 was a break down in civil aviation security. There was
at the time, only one agency responsible for CAS, and that
was the FAA. The problems in the FAA were deep rooted
and go back several administrations. It's unfair and
ridiculous to lay all the blame on Bush.


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/ghostrider.jpg" height=100 width=300>
MERRY CHRISTMAS!


This message was edited by furie on 12-13-03 @ 12:27 PM

[high fly]

To a certain extent, I agree with Furie.
It is also worthwhile to point out that Bush and Rice were advised that terrorism would or should be their top priority but they didn't believe it.

I think we must also be willing to be flexible in our conclusions until all the facts are in.
Of course that will be sooner if the Bush administration would quit stonewalling.



" and they ask me why I drink"

This message was edited by high fly on 12-13-03 @ 3:14 PM

[FollowThisLogic]

The basic idea is this...

The Lynch story was a feel-good PR thing during a war that a lot of people didn't like. Was she even the only one saved? I think there were others, not just her.... but she became a cute little poster child. And we want to know what REALLY happened, because it's just a stupid, pointless thing to lie about.

Flight 93 was a piece of the most tragic day in the history of the country. I'm sure that the passengers didn't take the plane down. I never did believe it, not since that day, and I never can. But in the face of such tragedy, people WANT a little feel-good story of hope. They don't really care if it's a huge lie, cause it gives the dark cloud of that day a silver lining, however small it may be.

There's a lot of really good info on this site if you're looking for more truthful accounts of Flight 93. (http://www.flight93crash.com/)

It was shot down. If you're really looking for the truth, that's what it is. Come on, you don't find an engine miles away, if the plane hit the ground in one piece. You don't have debris up to EIGHT miles away if it came down in one piece.

Not to mention all the eyewitness accounts stating that the plane was nearly upside-down as it passed over their heads. What, did Todd Beamer take control of the plane and decide to put on an impromptu air show, and it went wrong? Come on.

Speaking of Todd Beamer, I would go so far as to say that the ol' "let's roll" story is a load of crap. Yeah, that's right, I don't believe that the passengers even atempted to take the plane over. I think it was all made up. The whole story was thought up on the heels of the REAL hero stories about the NYPD/FDNY/PAPD. The country was hero-crazy, and they played off that. That's all it was.

But I'm a cynic. :) Frankly, I know how tragic the day was. Being lied to about HOW those people died doesn't make me feel any better... they're still dead.

<center><img src="http://www.followthislogic.com/stuff/rf-screw.jpg" alt="Just say 'Screw all ya'll.' It'll work. Trust me."></center>

This message was edited by FollowThisLogic on 12-14-03 @ 2:26 AM

[high fly]

In the struggle that took place in the cockpit, control was lost of the plane, and with people being thrown about the cockpit, the plane very well could have made some maneuvers that it was not designed to do and began to break up.
This would be nothing new in aviation.
The evidence that some of the passengers revolted is substantial and logical and consistent with the other facts known.
Do you think that suddenly they all had a change of heart and returned to their seats and went back to work on the crossword puzzle in the flight magazine?

" and they ask me why I drink"

[high fly]

It's unfair and ridiculous to lay all the blame on Bush

To an extent, I agree, but having listened to Liddy for years, I recall what he always said in these situations-----that if the ship hits a reef, the captain of the ship is at fault, even if he was asleep in his bunk at the time.
There's no getting around it- Bush's duty is to protect us and he failed.
Once all the facts are in, some blame may go to the Clinton administration, some may go to Bush underlings, but ultimately the responsibility is his and his alone.

How many heads have rolled since 9-11?
I recall it took only a few weeks for Kimmel and Short to be canned after Pearl Harbor, and even that was delayed because of ongoing operations with the defense of Wake Island...

" and they ask me why I drink"

[Yerdaddy]

There's a lot of really good info on this site if you're looking for more truthful accounts of Flight 93.
A website with broad conclusions drawn from snippets of discordant news stories, with mostly broken links and no information on who is even puting that information up there? If it wasn't on the internet I wouldn't believe it at all.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
TEAR THE BITCH APART!

[Bill From Yorktown]

back to my original statement - what do we have to gain in showing evidence that the terrorists crashed the plane versus the passengers? Yes if the gov shot down the plane they should tell us, but it doesnt seem likely.

<IMG SRC="http://hometown.aol.com/billb914/sigpic.gif">

[HBox]

back to my original statement - what do we have to gain in showing evidence that the terrorists crashed the plane versus the passengers? Yes if the gov shot down the plane they should tell us, but it doesnt seem likely.

It'd be good that we would know our government wouldn't lie to us. I know that's a naive, pie-in-the-sky hope, but it'd be nice.

http://members.aol.com/joepersico/myhomepage/sig1.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US

[FUNKMAN]

Gremlin

http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue286/twilight2.jpg

<img src="http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/funkman.gif">

and when you're bad you die when you die