(In response to editor's questions on the 7/7 thread in UK politics)
Whenever 9/11 comes up, the evidence for the official theory is invariably concentrated on the phone calls from flight 93, and now we have a transcript of the CVR from flight 93.
The point about these pieces of evidence is that they prove absolutely nothing about flights 77, 11 and 175. Nor do they say anything about how WTCs 1, 2 and notably 7 collapsed. When it comes to hard evidence about these flights, everything is missing - no CVRs, no Flight Data recorders, films of the Pentagon impact, no plane parts identified, etc.
I venture, as before, that there is a simple reason for this - they weren't the flights in question. The people that orchestrated the attack couldn't get hijackers to kill themselves, not that they would have been capable of flying into the Pentagon in any case.
So what was the point of flight 93? Well this is my current belief.
Flight 93 'sold' the illusion. It could have been 'really hijacked', but with the hijackers having no knowledge they were about to meet their doom. In this instance we could have had genuine phone calls from the passengers who by this time got to know about the fate of the other three flights, and who really did set about trying to force their way into the cockpit (apparently unsuccessfully).
Having served the purpose admirably, it then gets shot down - for who is going to crash it for you? Tie up the loose end.
Having said that, I am still puzzled about the calls and they have to be described as 'soft' evidence - there are all kinds of ways in which such a call would not be what it seemed. They are certainly not hard evidence.
Think you couldn't get some patsies to hijack a plane? Well, you haven't seen Heist by Derren Brown, which was repeated the other day, in which he got three very ordinary people to rob a security guard. Plus, you could tell them that this was a war game, and they were playing the part of hijackers, and you tell that to the pilot and crew too, who let themselves be tied up and taken to the back.
Where are the missing plane parts?
Where are the black boxes from the other flights?
Where is the seized footage of the Pentagon impact?
Where are the hijacker's names on passenger lists?
and why not answer these other questions too...
Doesn't it say it all that the evidence for the official theory of 9/11 concentrates on the phone calls from flight 93 which, despite their emotional appeal, are little more than hearsay as evidence? Meanwhile all the actual hard evidence that would prove things one way or the other has been controlled and/or disposed of.
Whenever 9/11 comes up, the evidence for the official theory is invariably concentrated on the phone calls from flight 93, and now we have a transcript of the CVR from flight 93.
The point about these pieces of evidence is that they prove absolutely nothing about flights 77, 11 and 175. Nor do they say anything about how WTCs 1, 2 and notably 7 collapsed. When it comes to hard evidence about these flights, everything is missing - no CVRs, no Flight Data recorders, films of the Pentagon impact, no plane parts identified, etc.
I venture, as before, that there is a simple reason for this - they weren't the flights in question. The people that orchestrated the attack couldn't get hijackers to kill themselves, not that they would have been capable of flying into the Pentagon in any case.
So what was the point of flight 93? Well this is my current belief.
Flight 93 'sold' the illusion. It could have been 'really hijacked', but with the hijackers having no knowledge they were about to meet their doom. In this instance we could have had genuine phone calls from the passengers who by this time got to know about the fate of the other three flights, and who really did set about trying to force their way into the cockpit (apparently unsuccessfully).
Having served the purpose admirably, it then gets shot down - for who is going to crash it for you? Tie up the loose end.
Having said that, I am still puzzled about the calls and they have to be described as 'soft' evidence - there are all kinds of ways in which such a call would not be what it seemed. They are certainly not hard evidence.
Think you couldn't get some patsies to hijack a plane? Well, you haven't seen Heist by Derren Brown, which was repeated the other day, in which he got three very ordinary people to rob a security guard. Plus, you could tell them that this was a war game, and they were playing the part of hijackers, and you tell that to the pilot and crew too, who let themselves be tied up and taken to the back.
Where are the missing plane parts?
Where are the black boxes from the other flights?
Where is the seized footage of the Pentagon impact?
Where are the hijacker's names on passenger lists?
and why not answer these other questions too...
Doesn't it say it all that the evidence for the official theory of 9/11 concentrates on the phone calls from flight 93 which, despite their emotional appeal, are little more than hearsay as evidence? Meanwhile all the actual hard evidence that would prove things one way or the other has been controlled and/or disposed of.
