posted on Nov, 29 2014 @ 01:40 AM
I was never too impressed with the theories that 93 was shot down or that there wasn't any debris or whatever.
If you think about it in a common sense sort of way, if this was a government conspiracy or whatever, it would have obviously been planned by people
who should have been capable of making it look legit. So regardless of what any of us think of "evidence photos" no one should be surprised if they
can produce photos of the evidence.
If they wanted this to look like terrorism, that's exactly what it would look like. It's not like a conspiracy would be done in a seat of the pants
sort of way where they didn't know exactly how they were going to do it until they got there. No. It'd have been planned to look exactly like what
they said it was.
So we have to assume that no matter what happened there, the wreckage does exist and for whatever reason, they didn't go out of their way to prove
their story to the truthers. Most likely, they just didn't want to have the argument and they knew that whatever they said would either be believed or
disbelieved anyway, depending on what an individual wanted to believe.
In other words, they apparently felt they had enough people who believed them and didn't want to complicate things with a noisy public argument.
And it's not really that unusual. When you have a plane crash or something, you generally don't see graphic photos on the front page of every
edit on 29-11-2014 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)