FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

Please adress these issuses Throat yogurt.

1. You have failed to show where you didnt insult ANY of the victims families.
2. You have failed to show where you are not disrespectful.
3. You have failed to show where you didnt laugh in their faces.
4. You have failed to show what victims family members ARE NOT currently seeking a "proper investigation."
5. You have failed to debunk of the evidence that I have presented.
6. You have failed to convince anyone that Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville on 911.
7. You have failed to show any evidence that the phone calls were not faked.
8. You have failed to show that the FDR recovered in Shanksville is not fraudulent.
9. You have failed to show that the CVR recovered in Shanksville is not fraudulent.
10. You have failed to show that any of the DNA evidence recovered is not fraudulent.


*Snip*
Removed Snide Remarks

[edit on 2-11-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 2-11-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 11/2/2008 by semperfortis]

How is it that it was being told on the news that flight 93 had been hijacked before it was intercepted by military jets? Shouldn’t our government have known long before news reporters did? Why is it that nothing was done about it?

This is not a thread bump.

Throat yogurt has failed to answer these questions hundreds of times in this massive thread.

This thread has been one big adhominen attack. But.....the truth still stands.

No evidence supports flight 93 crashing in shanksville on 911.

Although I do realize this your way of fishing for points, keeping your massive thread alive. I will answer you. Even though you have ignored MANY posts by me in this thread alone.


Question#1: The following is a list of the last 25 posts I made. There is not one insult to any family members. You can read through the next 225 here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you are interested in reading any of the threads I created, those too do not contain insults to the victims or the families:



CIT eyewitness points to South side flight path 16 11/5/0808 @ 13:45 5266626 thread posts
2 NEW: WTC7 and North Tower Collapse Video 93 11/4/0808 @ 16:25 5259822 thread posts
3 CIT eyewitness points to South side flight path 16 11/4/0808 @ 15:34 5259416 thread posts
4 On Morning Of 9/11 Attacks, McCain Immediately Began Making The Case For Iraq War» 8 11/4/0808 @ 12:04 5258175 thread posts
5 On Morning Of 9/11 Attacks, McCain Immediately Began Making The Case For Iraq War» 8 11/4/0808 @ 08:50 5257060 thread posts
6 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/4/0808 @ 08:42 5257015 thread posts
7 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/3/0808 @ 19:32 5254082 thread posts
8 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/3/0808 @ 19:23 5254023 thread posts
9 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/3/0808 @ 19:23 5254022 thread posts
10 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/3/0808 @ 19:18 5253994 thread posts
11 NEW: WTC7 and North Tower Collapse Video 93 11/3/0808 @ 18:20 5253668 thread posts
12 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/3/0808 @ 18:18 5253655 thread posts
13 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/3/0808 @ 17:28 5253306 thread posts
14 NEW: WTC7 and North Tower Collapse Video 93 11/3/0808 @ 11:12 5251160 thread posts
15 NEW: WTC7 and North Tower Collapse Video 93 11/3/0808 @ 10:09 5250832 thread posts
16 NEW: WTC7 and North Tower Collapse Video 93 11/2/0808 @ 19:20 5247681 thread posts
17 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/2/0808 @ 13:26 5245843 thread posts
18 FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun! 2482 11/2/0808 @ 13:15 5245789 thread posts
19 FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun! 2482 11/2/0808 @ 12:36 5245594 thread posts
20 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/2/0808 @ 12:25 5245544 thread posts
21 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/2/0808 @ 11:59 5245397 thread posts
22 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/2/0808 @ 11:57 5245379 thread posts
23 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/2/0808 @ 11:52 5245344 thread posts
24 Dissecting the Flight 93 OCT...or should i say debunking it? 92 11/2/0808 @ 11:34 5245261 thread posts
25 Alleged Light Pole Damage To Taxi - Possible? Impossible? 29 11/2/0808 @ 11:24 5245209 thread posts

Question #:

2. Please see above links.

3. Again, please see above links.

4. You have failed to show what victims family members ARE NOT currently seeking a "proper investigation."

Actually, there are a few that are. Your post claimed that 1/2 of them are.

5. You have failed to debunk of the evidence that I have presented.

Start reading from page one of this thread. You have been debunked worse than any other member in here. This is the reason why you would not respond to a challenge for a moderated debate with me.

6. You have failed to convince anyone that Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville on 911.

This is a conspiracy theory website not an easy task to do. But hey, go to the debate forum where I was declared the winner in a flight 93 debate. Seems I convinced a few mods.

7. You have failed to show any evidence that the phone calls were not faked.

This is trying to prove a negative. But, not ONE single person that spoke to a loved one that day stated that they thought the person they were talking to was a morphed voice or whatever. So, clearly the people that received phone calls agree that the people they spoke with, were in fact who they said they were.

8. You have failed to show that the FDR recovered in Shanksville is not fraudulent.

Once again, trying to prove a negative Ivan? Or also known as negative proof, the fallacy of appealing to lack of proof of the negative, is a logical fallacy of the following form:

"X is true because there is no proof that X is false."

9. You have failed to show that the CVR recovered in Shanksville is not fraudulent.

And again, trying to prove a negative Ivan? Or also known as negative proof, the fallacy of appealing to lack of proof of the negative, is a logical fallacy of the following form:

"X is true because there is no proof that X is false."

10. You have failed to show that any of the DNA evidence recovered is not fraudulent.

For the last time, trying to prove a negative Ivan? Or also known as negative proof, the fallacy of appealing to lack of proof of the negative, is a logical fallacy of the following form:

"X is true because there is no proof that X is false."

Time for you

[edit on 11/5/0808 by ThroatYogurt]

So what your saying is that you cannot prove that Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville.
Mabey it was that little white jet?

reply to post by IvanZana

---

Great thread IvanZana.



I agree with all the above about our lovely friend TY, however since our lying Government will not give up “anything” TY has no proof that flight 98 crash ( only the Government word) which is meaningless today.

reply to post by IvanZana

---

Your failure to appropriately respond to my answers is noted.

Your failure to answer ANY of MY questions is noted.

Your failure to present ZERO evidence is noted.

You are successful at two things in this thread:

1- collecting points
2- trolling

dbbl


[edit on 11/6/0808 by ThroatYogurt]

reply to post by IvanZana

---

I agree one hundred%

Were there pictures released of black body bags being carried away from the crash site of Flt. 93?

Was the bulk of the plane extracted from the underground mine shaft or cave?

Did FEMA reconstruct the plane? and What happened to the victims, was there a massive one day funeral that we missed?

very late but still important S & F

Considering there werent bodies found...just pitifully small fragments of bone/skin...according to the pathology folks about 600 pounds worth....they might not have used black bags. And I would hope that they would not allow pictures to be released showing what they did find.

As for the plane, it was stated by the FBI that approximately 95% of the plane was recovered, although it was suggested the Agent meant that 95% of the wreckage recovered was handed over to United's insurance company.

FEMA would not have reconstructed the airliner. That would have been for the NTSB/FBI to undertake, however, I do not believe it was done in this case because there were no indications that it was a mechanical problem that brought down the jet.

As for the victims of Flight 93, there was not a massive funeral. The identified remains were returned to the families for burial.

I see Flight 93 is a very interesting subject here.

I would like to know if the crater was made before or after the field of debris scattered throughout the forest? also


How fast was this plane traveling when it crashed?

[edit on 12-4-2009 by OrangeJuice]

The thing that i find kinda of amusing here.. and.. please forgive me for not reading all of the thread, but some.. is that.. To the original poster... Do you know, for a fact, what a plane crash at that speed, at that angle, is supposed to even look like? Has there ever been a time when a plane going at that rate of speed, and that angle, hitting the ground like that, has ever been photographed or even documented? Where exactly are your facts to back you up on that? How do you KNOW what a crash like this is even supposed to look like? You are going by other crashes that do not even met the same type of situation as this one. Most plane crashes happen at a much lower speed then this.. and usually no one is trying to drive the things nose first into the ground.. they are trying to land it, or stop the plane from doing just that.

Unless you can provide facts to back up that you know exactly under these conditions, what that plane is supposed to look like, you have nothing at all behind you to make yourself credible. It is impossible to sit there and say you know exactly what that plane should of looked like. This type of situation is pretty much the first time a crash like this, has happened.

A car hitting a wall at 800 mph is going to look completely different then one that hits it going 100. You can't use the wreckage of the 100 car crash as an example to how the 800 mph car should end up looking after its crash. And that's exactly what you are trying to do here. Using examples from past crashes that are no way the same as this crash. You are assuming. And nothing more.

That's the problem with most, if not all 9 11 truthers. This situation is the first time most of these events has ever happened in such a way. We DO NOT even know what the outcomes of such events are supposed to even look like. No planes have ever hit a high rise like that. Or much less crashed into the ground like that. Unless anyone can sit there and completely re-act the events again and show us all again, if doing all this ends differently, then it did on 9-11, then everything, everyone says, will never.. ever be 100% fact.

If you want to prove yourself. Go get a plane like that, and find a way to crash it at that speed, into the ground, and show us ALL exactly what its supposed to REALLY look like. Then I'll believe you. Until then, You don't know. You can only assume to know. And assumptions are Never facts. So stop acting like they are.