Media anomaly about major Shanksville claim still unresolved

[Killtown]

It's been a year since I've brought this up about the alleged Flight 93 crash and I still haven't heard a rational or logical explanation as to why there was no immediate mention in the media when one of the most incredible alleged discoveries happened about the alleged crash, that most of the 757 was allegedly buried underground.

[NinjaPuppy]

It's been a year since I've brought this up about the alleged Flight 93 crash and I still haven't heard a rational or logical explanation as to why there was no immediate mention in the media when one of the most incredible alleged discoveries happened about the alleged crash, that most of the 757 was allegedly buried underground.

I guess the Media considers it old news (so to speak). Now if the 'Numa Numa' guy put out a new video, the Media would be all over that.

[Killtown]

I guess the Media considers it old news (so to speak).

Hi NP,

I think you misunderstood. They media eventually reported that most of the plane was allegedly buried (almost a year later!), but when the FBI supposedly discovered during their week-long excavation that most of the plane wreckage was down in the ground, there was no immediate mention in the media about this alleged realization which is unbelievable that the media wouldn't mention such a newsworthy "fact" right away.

[Craig Browning]

I don't understand why it would be viewed as "unbelievable" given that you are looking at a large metal object moving at several hundred miles an hour crashing into relatively soft soil. Besides that, the nation was far more concerned with other things at the time... bigger, far more pertinent things that a big plane being embedded in the soil... a rather mute point if you ask me.

But I must ask why you think you must misuse the term "Alleged" or "Allegedly" so much, it certainly doesn't make you come off as being intelligent but rather, antagonistic and "cocky"; not good traits to project when one is seeking genuine conversation around a given theory. But I'm betting you're one of those rare birds that has little to no sense of respect or honor towards the thousands of people that died that day in the name of "god"... which is the greater crime in my book.

I know of very few people that weren't directly affected by events on that day. I had friends who worked in those towers as well as clients that were supposed to be there for appointments that morning. I've likewise done Readings for people that were supposed to be on the flight you are discussing, but didn't get on because of feelings they were having.

I think it's a far bigger shame that you would attempt to stir this pot for the sake of personal ego... or so it would seem... than giving respect and homage to the people that perished on that day and more so, the men who are known to have taken deliberate action on the very aircraft you're speaking of; genuine heroes that fought to preserve lives as well as elements of our government by way of their action.

Not to be overly crass, but your perspective reveals to me the type of person who needs 6 weeks of boot camp and some time in the field just so you can get some perspective and appreciation for what is important in life and why so much of the world does envy the U.S. It's the sort of thing you can't get by being here, you must go "there"... into the world and see how the greater majority of humanity exists. Then you can see why a big plane buried into the ground as you are raving about, simply isn't that important a thing.

[Killtown]

I don't understand why it would be viewed as "unbelievable" given that you are looking at a large metal object moving at several hundred miles an hour crashing into relatively soft soil.

Can't you skeptics read? I said: "which is unbelievable that the media wouldn't mention such a newsworthy "fact" right away"

Besides that, the nation was far more concerned with other things at the time... bigger, far more pertinent things that a big plane being embedded in the soil... a rather mute point if you ask me.

So you are saying the FBI told the media right away about this unprecedented finding during their excavation, especially when everyone had wondered what happened to most of the plane and the passengers, but the media had "for more pertinent things" to report about instead of reporting that the FBI supposedly just discovered during their dig that most of the plane actually wasn't obliterated after all, but it was hidden out of view underground and that most of the passenger remains would be assumed to be down in the hole too?!! I love skeptics in denial! Yeah, the media has far more "pertinent" things to cover than that amazing and unprecedented find, like flowers being laid near the scene.

[ProfWag]

Perhaps the FBI didn't report it to the media because they were busy with other things, such as the problem listed below: (which, by the way, I don't believe was reported to the media either)
"Sometimes the need to coordinate with EMA was not clear. For example,
one morning at about 10 a.m. a call came in from the decontamination area to
report that no one had emptied the Port-a-Johns the night before. Director
Lohr checked and determined, both from the company servicing the Port-a-
Johns and from a supervisor on the night shift, that the Port-a-Johns had, in
fact, been emptied the night before. The problem was that the FBI had
increased the number of personnel at the recovery site by over 100, which
severely taxed the capacity of portable toilets placed at the decontamination
site. In order to meet the increased demand, EMA immediately negotiated
increasing the number of Port-a-Johns."
http://www.colorado.edu/hazards/publica ... _grant.pdf

I would still like to know why you are asking us rather than asking the media.
Here's the e-mail/address/phone number to the Associated Press: info@ap.org

AP Headquarters
450 W. 33rd St.
New York, NY 10001

Main Number
+1-212-621-1500

[Killtown]

Perhaps the FBI didn't report it to the media because they were busy with other things, such as the problem listed below: (which, by the way, I don't believe was reported to the media either)
"Sometimes the need to coordinate with EMA was not clear. For example,
one morning at about 10 a.m. a call came in from the decontamination area to
report that no one had emptied the Port-a-Johns the night before."

Are you seriously trying to compare the FBI's alleged discovery that most of a 757 was buried underground, a first in aviation history for a large commercial airliner btw, with a Port-a-John problem at the scene?!? Say, you're that teacher, right?

http://www.colorado.edu/hazards/publications/sp/sp39/sept11book_ch3_grant.pdf

Funny thing about this publication, the NEVER mention that most of the plane had supposedly buried:

"The aircraft slammed into the ground at a high rate of speed,
causing severe fragmentation and scattering pieces of the plane and its
contents that had evidentiary value across an open field, and through a section
of trees and across a lake beyond."

I would still like to know why you are asking us rather than asking the media.

You guys are always asking us truthers for proof. If you don't like how we operate, don't respond.

[ProfWag]

You guys are always asking us truthers for proof.

Yes, because I believe you don't have any.
Look Killtown, I have read some of your blog, I have read your posts, and I have read news stories about you. I still, to this day, have no real clue as to what it is your are claiming.
It appears that your stance is that Flight 93 did not crash in Pennsylvania and that as evidence of this, you say the media did not report when the FBI recovered the plane. Your further belief is that no plane actually crashed since so little of the plane was actually reported found. Is that correct and/or do you have any more evidence?
As of this very second, the evidence that I have seen is OVERWHELMING that Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania on 9/11. If you desire to change my mind (and the mind of most people, I hope), then you are going to have to just come right out and tell us in plain English.

[Killtown]

ProfWag, please don't duck my question to you:

"Are you seriously trying to compare the FBI's alleged discovery that most of a 757 was buried underground, a first in aviation history for a large commercial airliner btw, with a Port-a-John problem at the scene?"

[ProfWag]

ProfWag, please don't duck my question to you:

"Are you seriously trying to compare the FBI's alleged discovery that most of a 757 was buried underground, a first in aviation history for a large commercial airliner btw, with a Port-a-John problem at the scene?"

No. I was actually trying to make fun of your claims, although looking back at it, Flight 93 is no laughing matter. Apologize for that.
Now, how about you answer my question.

[Killtown]

ProfWag, please don't duck my question to you:

"Are you seriously trying to compare the FBI's alleged discovery that most of a 757 was buried underground, a first in aviation history for a large commercial airliner btw, with a Port-a-John problem at the scene?"

No. I was actually trying to make fun of your claims

What do you find funny about my claim that it's inconceivable that there was no immediate mention in the media when one of the most extraordinary things was supposedly discovered by the FBI during their week-long dig?


As to your "overwhelming evidence," let's discuss part of that since it relates to this thread. Looks like the most overwhelming evidence that a UA 757 crashed there was the claim that the overwhelming amount of the 757 was supposedly recovered; 95%. So of that overwhelming amount of the plane allegedly recovered, where was the overwhelming amount of that debris located after the "crash"?

[ProfWag]

What do you find funny about my claim that it's inconceivable that there was no immediate mention in the media when one of the most extraordinary things was supposedly discovered by the FBI during their week-long dig?


As to your "overwhelming evidence," let's discuss part of that since it relates to this thread. Looks like the most overwhelming evidence that a UA 757 crashed there was the claim that the overwhelming amount of the 757 was supposedly recovered; 95%. So of that overwhelming amount of the plane allegedly recovered, where was the overwhelming amount of that debris located after the "crash"?

So you're basing your ridiculous theory on the obvious fact that you don't know how Search & Recovery works? Yes, that's comical, but be glad you haven't had to go through that. It isn't fun.

[Killtown]

So you're basing your ridiculous theory on the obvious fact that you don't know how Search & Recovery works? Yes, that's comical, but be glad you haven't had to go through that. It isn't fun.

Why do you always avoid answering my questions and start ad-hom attacking and trolling instead? Can't handle the truth? Go back and respond to my two questions for you.

[ProfWag]

So you're basing your ridiculous theory on the obvious fact that you don't know how Search & Recovery works? Yes, that's comical, but be glad you haven't had to go through that. It isn't fun.

Why do you always avoid answering my questions and start ad-hom attacking and trolling instead? Can't handle the truth? Go back and respond to my two questions for you.

Do you mean the question answered by the evidence of several people who saw the plane just before the crash, the thousands of people involved in search and recovery, the thousands of pieces of the airplane that were turned over to the airlines or the simple fact that if it didn't crash, then that plane went somewhere else which you can't explain as there is zero evidence for that? That evidence?

Okay, I answered your question. Now stop avoiding the inevitable and answer my question from earlier. Here it is again:
It appears that your stance is that Flight 93 did not crash in Pennsylvania and that as evidence of this, you say the media did not report when the FBI recovered the plane. Your further belief is that no plane actually crashed since so little of the plane was actually reported found. Is that correct and/or do you have any more evidence?

I will answer no more of your questions until you answer mine. A simple answer would be appreciated.

[Killtown]

Do you mean the question answered by the...

No troll, these questions:

What do you find funny about my claim that it's inconceivable that there was no immediate mention in the media when one of the most extraordinary things was supposedly discovered by the FBI during their week-long dig?

As to your "overwhelming evidence," let's discuss part of that since it relates to this thread. Looks like the most overwhelming evidence that a UA 757 crashed there was the claim that the overwhelming amount of the 757 was supposedly recovered; 95%. So of that overwhelming amount of the plane allegedly recovered, where was the overwhelming amount of that debris located after the "crash"?

It appears that your stance is that Flight 93 did not crash in Pennsylvania and that as evidence of this, you say the media did not report when the FBI recovered the plane.

That is part of the overwhelming evidence I see that no plane crashed there, because if the official story doesn't fit, you must convict.