I don't care about any other flight. I want physical PROOF the 93 was buried, as the FBI claimed it was. A simple photo would suffice if one existed. There would have to be many if that actually occurred. Something showing 93 being unearthed perhaps??? Or admit there isn't any such photo in existence. Please people...this ain't that complicated.
That so? Well, the sites' getting ready to go down, but I'll post the specifics when I can sometime today.
So show us evidence everyone involved in the recovery of Flight 93 is a liar. They are the best source of information yet NOT ONE OF THE HUNDREDS INVOLVED have claimed much of flight 93 was buried. There are plenty of pictures of parts being removed from the crater, yet truthers pretend they are faked, so I find you whining about wanting a picture to be completely disingenuous. So how do you even have a picture? Extract all the parts and then throw them all back into the crater so you can get a picture? The request of a picture is in and of itself completely retarded since such a picture could not exist in any form that would show how much of the plane was buried and how much was not. What evidence do you have it WASN'T buried? Or are you trying to pretend Flight 93 didn't even crash there. If that is the case, why are you even whining about how much was buried? Man up and state what you believe rather than quibbling about you not getting evidence that does not and can not exist; specifically a picture showing most of the plane buried.
There are photos but out of curiosity, what is the minimum required amount and why? Pictures showing 93 being unearthed have been posted. You claim they were "doctored" yet you offer no proof. Which is amusing given your statement in your opening post.
Well correct, I won't accept evidence that doesn't show most of the plane buried, or your "ASSumptions" as you like to say. That's grade-school common sense. Why don't you post your BEST evidence the plane buried -- oops, I'm sorry, "mostly buried." Don't want to upset Sgt. Nitpicker. This should be interesting. OK, how am I the "king nitpicker"? Is it because I think the official story LIED by saying "most" of the plane buried, when in fact NOTHING buried? Yeah, that's really "nitpicking." LOL
You skeptics have FAILED in half a dozen threads now to prove most of 93 buried, a large Boeing 757. I think that negates that the premise is flawed. LOL
Tell us what evidence you would accept. Be specific. We've been down the road of "just give me your best". You ignore the evidence provided. So now we want to know exactly what evidence you would accept. Go. This is too funny to even respond to! Thanks for the laughs, suede. Now. It shouldn't be that hard to answer the question you've been asked repeatedly. It is a simple yes or no question. Now answer the question. Be specific. Are you claiming anyone who claims Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville is a liar? Why do you run from this question like a frightened little girl? Are you that insecure as to your beliefs?
No one ever said everyone involved there was lying. Why do 'skeptics' always make stuff up? That's not true. Hannibal says he's conversed with some of those involved who he says told him most of the plane was buried: Hannibal: "The people on the scene confirmed for me that the plane was mostly buried." "I believe the people on the scene, and they say the majority of UA93 was buried at the scene of the crash." "The links address the fact that most of the plane was recovered on that site, largely from within the earth." Me: "Flight 93 recovered underground?" Hannibal: "Most of it, yes." Are you calling Hannibal a liar? "Plenty" sounds like a lot. How many are there? A dozen? Two dozen? More than two dozen? Shouldn't there be piles and piles of plane debris near the hole where they supposedly extracted them from? That would be a good start. I would concede it would be near-impossible for the perps to haul in tons of debris and put them in piles next to the extracted hole without anybody noticing. That would be a Home Run pic for you guys. Have any of those? Excavating a hole down to 50 ft with just dirt coming out of it is pretty good proof!
As Op you wrote: A serious 'controversy' involves at least two reputable sides to an argument. A handful of Internet trolls disagreeing with reputable rescue workers in Shanksville and official reports of their actions is not a 'controversy', as you appear to suggest. If your point is to put a serious 'controversy' to rest, you have no point because there is no serious 'controversy'; in other words the premise if your thread is flawed.
We are talking about this thread, not the other threads you started or had people start for you. Thank you for confirming the premise is flawed, but please try to stay on topic.
Show us evidence ANYONE there was lying. Be specific. Use the same level of evidence you would accept. I misspoke. I didn't mean to say much. I meant to say none. No witness I know of says none of flight 93 was buried. What does it matter to you? You claim they are all faked. They weren't taking requests. Why don't you call them and ask if they do. You have the numbers. So you have proof that it was just dirt? Please present us with this proof. While you're at it, you STILL have not answered two very simple questions. What evidence will you accept and do you believe anyone who claims Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville is a liar. Simple questions. Why can't you answer them?
http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/232465-simple-request-flight-93-a-4.html#post1060868041 It's okay; it's easy to forget what you wrote if you didn't have your coffee yet.
Well if nothing was buried, those who made the claim most of the plane was buried would therefor be lying. Common sense, really. Your statement is a logical fallacy. How many there knew the story was "most of the plane buried"? Try me. How many photos do you got? You said you have "plenty." That sounds like a LOT. They had people there photographing the excavation. How could they MISS all that alleged debris supposedly coming out of that hole?! Common sense, really. Here's a gallery of photos of the excavation. Looks like just dirt came out of that hole to me. Shouldn't there be piles and piles of plane debris somewhere?
I said give us evidence. You told us who. This isn't hard. Try to follow along. So you think if someone doesn't see any of the plane buried, but they know the story, they're just going to go with the story and not question it? What... is skepticism reserved only for truthers with paranoid delusions? You haven't answered the question what would constitute valid evidence you would accept yet. Until you do that, you're not going to get anything else. I didn't say the pictures didn't exist. I said you know how to get in touch with the people who have them. Why haven't you done so? why do you need pictures when you already have a gallery? Mod edit: Insult.They would be going through the debris layer by layer right? They wouldn't just be excavating it all out in one lump and then trying to go through it. Wouldn't it therefore make much more sense the plane parts were removed as they were excavated? They wouldn't just leave them in the dirt. Is that all you got? While you're at it, you STILL have not answered two very simple questions. What evidence will you accept and do you believe anyone who claims Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville is a liar. Simple questions. Why can't you answer them? Are they REALLY that hard? Or are you REALLY that insecure about your answers?
The thread is only a handful of pages; you didn't even try to look it up yourself before posting and logging off. That's plain rude. http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/232465-simple-request-flight-93-a-3.html#post1060865080 http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/232465-simple-request-flight-93-a-3.html#post1060865435 http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/232465-simple-request-flight-93-a-4.html#post1060868041 http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/232465-simple-request-flight-93-a-4.html#post1060868161 http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/232465-simple-request-flight-93-a-4.html#post1060868183 http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/232465-simple-request-flight-93-a-4.html#post1060868259 http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/232465-simple-request-flight-93-a-5.html#post1060868315 http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/232465-simple-request-flight-93-a-5.html#post1060868350 Now everyone can see how easy it is to look things up yourself, especially when the thread has so few posts.
I'm not sure that a link to misleading photos on Killtown's website is going to prove anything except that this so called 'controversy' was invented by a handful of internet trolls around "Killtown" who have a disturbing habit of making stuff up. I hope Op clears up what he meant by 'controversy' soon.
This blog? Hadn't realized it was down any time; it's only a month old. Maybe blogger servers were down, but it's up now.
Maybe I'm confusing it with another blog on the same subject that seemed pretty inactive (although it's still "up"). the other site Edit: seems to be a different version of the same site. Nevahmind.
