New British CT Book Alleges Flight 93 Shot Down

[Brainster]

Yet another jerk tries to cash in (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=401315&in_page_id=1770) on the growing 9-11 Denial Movement, this time by alleging that Flight 93 was shot down by the US military.

The article is written by the book's author, Rowland Morgan. He's a typical CT nutbar, having written other articles and books. His previous book (co-authored by Ian Henshaw) 9-11 Revealed (http://www.terrortimeline.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-2425) was apparently similar to Loose Change in the theory it proposed:

They examine theories that the twin towers and Building 7 of the WTC were brought down deliberately with explosives; that the Pentagon was hit by a military drone aircraft and a missile; that Flight 11 and Flight 175, which supposedly hit the twin towers, were in fact landed and replaced by remote-controlled substitutes; that cell phone calls from the hijacked planes were faked; and that the military’s response to the hijackings was hindered by an air defense exercise taking place at the same time as the attacks.

This book seems to be more of the usual CT: Mistakes, lies, and "questions". For example, talking about Todd Beamer's phone conversation with Verizon supervisor Lisa Jefferson:

She had not taken a recording of it, contrary to convention. She had not gone through the routine questions in her distress-call manual. She had not connected this agitated man to his wife waiting anxiously at home. Nor had she informed his wife subsequently of the call as promised.

Anybody who's been paying attention knows that Todd Beamer specifically requested not to be connected to his pregnant wife for fear she would lose the baby. And Lisa Jefferson did inform Lisa Beamer of the phone call a few days later. The reason she had not called earlier was that the FBI had requested (http://www.beliefnet.com/story/193/story_19399_2.html) that she hold off until they gave her the go-ahead.

[apathoid]

Yet another jerk tries to cash in (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=401315&in_page_id=1770) on the growing 9-11 Denial Movement, this time by alleging that Flight 93 was shot down by the US military.

Does he give an explanation for why the government would shoot down their own attack plane for absolutely no rhyme or reason?

The only possible reason would be to say that they had to act in preventing it from reaching the Capitol building. But, if that was the case, they gladly would've taken credit and given themsleves a nice pat on the back - but they didn't.

[Killtown]

The author is wrong about one point at least:

But a bigger mystery is why the engines went missing.

Considering their weight, they should have plunged deep into the earth along with the rest of the airliner.

Yet they weren’t in the crater and only a one-ton segment of an engine was ever recovered, again more than a mile from the crash site. The FBI said, unconvincingly, that it had ‘bounced’ there.

One was found in the crater:

http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/size600/P200060-1.jpg
"Exh. GX-P200060 (intr'd: 04/11/2006) Photograph of an airplane part found in the crater at the scene in Somerset County, Pennsylvania, where Flight 93 crashed." - http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/

However...

"The voice recorder would have picked up the last 30 minutes of conversation in the cockpit, unless the hijackers turned it off or it was too severely damaged in the crash. It was found around 8:25 p.m. Thursday, 25 feet below the ground in the crater gouged out by the doomed jet. It appeared to be in good condition." -Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (09/16/01)
http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html#engine_buried


The voice recorded penetrated further than the engine???

:confused:

[Killtown]

Does he give an explanation for why the government would shoot down their own attack plane for absolutely no rhyme or reason?

The only possible reason would be to say that they had to act in preventing it from reaching the Capitol building. But, if that was the case, they gladly would've taken credit and given themsleves a nice pat on the back - but they didn't.

Hey apathoid,

Your input is needed over here...

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=61633

[Dog Town]

The voice recorded penetrated further than the engine???Love to hear your reason why it should not have. Remember show your work!
DT

[gumboot]

Yet another jerk tries to cash in (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=401315&in_page_id=1770) on the growing 9-11 Denial Movement, this time by alleging that Flight 93 was shot down by the US military.


They obviously haven't read the Flight Data Recorder report, which indicates the aircraft was perfectly intact and functioning well at the moment of impact.

-Andrew

[twinstead]

They obviously haven't read the Flight Data Recorder report, which indicates the aircraft was perfectly intact and functioning well at the moment of impact.



But that's what they want you to think....(cue evil laughter)

[ryanebelhar]

if the goverment was behind this nefarious plot, then why would war games pose a hinderance to military planes intercepting the planes, if they just military drones in the first place?

[Killtown]

if the goverment was behind this nefarious plot, then why would war games pose a hinderance to military planes intercepting the planes, if they just military drones in the first place?
To distract them.

[ryanebelhar]

To distract them.


Distract who? Is the military distracting itself?

[Killtown]

Is the military distracting itself?

Yes. What, did you think we think the entire military was in on it???

[CurtC]

The voice recorded penetrated further than the engine???
I for one would expect it to. The recorders are in the tail, and the CVR had the advantage of having a >50 ton penetrator (the fuselage) to bore out the hole before it went in. The engines had to do their own penetrating.

[Killtown]

I for one would expect it to. The recorders are in the tail, and the CVR had the advantage of having a >50 ton penetrator (the fuselage) to bore out the hole before it went in. The engines had to do their own penetrating.
The fuselage had to do its own penetrating.

[Gravy]

I see that Killtown is discussing flight 93 now. Killtown, please address the eyewitness reports that you refused to address earlier. Do you have any evidence to show that these reports do not describe the crash of flight 93?

Yes or no?

[twinstead]

I wonder how many of the volunteers who searched inch by inch of the crash site to fill plastic buckets with human bones and personal effects would agree that it all was planted before hand, and indeed no crash ever occurred.

[pgwenthold]

The only possible reason would be to say that they had to act in preventing it from reaching the Capitol building. But, if that was the case, they gladly would've taken credit and given themsleves a nice pat on the back - but they didn't.

This is what ends up being one of the dumber aspects of this claim. Let's suppose, for a minute, that Flight 93 was shot down. Given the whole story of "it was on its way to crash into some building in Washington DC," why would the government deny they shot it down? Particularly, given that it crashed in a remote, unpopulated area? Not only would it be a pat on the back, but the government would be holding it up as a great successful defense of the capitol!

Not only would the government not cover this up, if they had any way they could, they would be advertising it (particularly given the criticisms of the air defense on that day).

[Loss Leader]

They obviously haven't read the Flight Data Recorder report, which indicates the aircraft was perfectly intact and functioning well at the moment of impact.

-Andrew

Not only that, but the cockpit voice recorder shows that the terrorists were in control of the plain and purposefully decided to crash it when they realized the passengers were going to get to them. If the government shot the plane down and then covered it up with fake data and voice recordings, why would they put out that the terrorists purposefully crashed the plane? They could have faked a recording showing the passengers triumphantly taking the cockpit and killing the terrorists before losing control of the aircraft.

It's just ... so ... stupid.

[Killtown]

This is what ends up being one of the dumber aspects of this claim. Let's suppose, for a minute, that Flight 93 was shot down.
The "shoot down" claims of 93 are the worst conspiracy theory in the 9/11 thruth movement IMO.

No plane was shoot down, or crashed anywhere around that area.

[Mercutio]

The "shoot down" claims of 93 are the worst conspiracy theory in the 9/11 thruth movement IMO.

No plane was shoot (sic) down, or crashed anywhere around that area.

Ok, where are you hiding it?

[Dog Town]

Ok, where are you hiding it?
Think Rock n Roll! Pathetic but true! Well,...Ct true?

[Killtown]

Ok, where are you hiding it?
Hide what?

[Mercutio]

Hide what?

Well, for one, my student's dad, who was on that alleged plane...

[Dog Town]

Well, for one, my student's dad, who was on that alleged plane...
O'... Merc, if he only knew how to bite his thumb at thee! LOL!
Meaning KClown!

[Killtown]

Well, for one, my student's dad, who was on that alleged plane...
Oh, I don't know. I wasn't one of the conspirators.

[Mercutio]

Oh, I don't know. I wasn't one of the conspirators.
Aw....you sounded so certain.

Do you want to tell her, or shall I?

[Killtown]

Aw....you sounded so certain.

Do you want to tell her, or shall I?
Tell her what?

[Mercutio]

Tell her what?

That's OK; everybody else here gets it.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

That's OK; everybody else here gets it.

Good grief. KT is truly a cretinous pile and waste of prescious oxygen. Hey, this being on ignore thing ain't so bad.

[CurtC]

Let's suppose, for a minute, that Flight 93 was shot down. Given the whole story of "it was on its way to crash into some building in Washington DC," why would the government deny they shot it down?
One CT explanation for flight 93 is that they wanted the whole "Let's Roll" meme to rally the country for war.

The shot-down idea among CTs is in a strange boxed-in area. If the government needed to shoot it down, that means it was really out of their control, that terrorists were really at the helm. That seems to indicate that terrorists would have really been at the helm of the other three flights.

It's another one of those "just asking questions" thing that, if examined, would lead them to contradictory conclusions.

[Loss Leader]

One CT explanation for flight 93 is that they wanted the whole "Let's Roll" meme to rally the country for war.

Which is why I wonder why the government would release the flight and cockpit recorders that show the terrorists deciding to purposefully crash the plane rather than let the passengers retake the flight deck.

Or why the government would cover up the fact that they shot down one of the planes when so much CT criticism has centered around the fact that they purposefully failed to intercept the planes.

Or why the government ever believed that a terrorist attack by Saudis and Pakistanis would rally the country to war against the amazingly uninvolved Iraq.

Or why I've devoted even this much thought to a theory that is so ... very ... stupid.

[Hutch]

Merc, since I don't know if you get over to the LC Forums (however, you may be please/appalled to know there is a CTist there who calls himself Merc), Killtown tends to fall into the "No-planer" category, in that the flights never hit what we all believe they hit, that those were drones/missiles/fakes of some sort and that the missing flights (and their passengers) landed somewhere secret and were "disposed" of.

This hypothesis is often denounced by many LC'ers, but KT and others tend to stick to it.

If you already knew this, then nevermind...

Press on.

[Regnad Kcin]

The "shoot down" claims of 93 are the worst conspiracy theory in the 9/11 thruth movement IMO.

No plane was shoot down, or crashed anywhere around that area.Sure. Certainly. Of course.

[Regnad Kcin]

What, did you think we think the entire military was in on it???How much of "the military" then?