Tying things up, MIHOP

[Mark Felt]

(Disclaimer: I do not believe the following is anything more than a brain fart. Read at your own risk.)

One of the problems with the Controlled Demolition theory (and let's not beat around the bush; there are quite a few) is Flight 93. Why, if everything was planned and prepared in advance, was the target of F93 not wired up ready to be destroyed? I did a little bit of thinking about this while I was on the train this morning, and came to the obvious conclusion: F93 was supposed to hit the Pentagon.

If we take the CD theory as correct(in before "I see the problem in your logic"), then there's no other explanation that comes nearly as close to explaining what happened with the facts as given. Flight 93 was shot down because the monitoring devices in the cockpit(You really think the hijacker's handlers would trust them to do this on their own?) picked up chatter indicating that they were going to hit a different target. The pentagon was hit with a missile after the guys on the ground heard the chatter, but before they shot down 93, probably for disinfo[the order of destruction, not whether or not they'd bring the flight down], or just because everything went to hell.

I don't claim to be a conspiracy theorist by any measure(except as theoretical exercise, I do some writing on the side), but I've been wondering if this was ever brought up as a possible from CTers? And I apologise for the disrespect inherent to the people on 93, this was just something I needed to get out of my head.

 

[jhunter1163]

I'm sure this has been advanced somewhere. Hell, Morgan Reynolds thought that the Onion's "single-plane theory" deserved a look.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

A lot of top secret files were kept out in the Penn. fields Crashing a plane was a perfect cover for destroying those files that incriminated the "perps" without anyone knowing. Plus it was the scorched field that tipped the balance and got us to go to war with Iraq. Without the damage to the field we would still be having second thoughts of going to Iraq.

 

[TJM]

Don't forget the whole key to the operation; The government produce hologram of an intact, inverted and non-missile stricken flight 93 falling from the sky so the locals would be fooled.

Or was it a drone 757 freighter filled with pieces and remains from flight 93 that crashed? I can't remember which. I need another beer.

 

[Brainster]

A lot of Truthers insist that Flight 93's intended target was WTC-7, although I think Osama's driver said it was the Capitol Dome.

 

[Mark Felt]

A lot of Truthers insist that Flight 93's intended target was WTC-7, although I think Osama's driver said it was the Capitol Dome.

Well, damn. There goes my sure thing. I forgot about WTC-7.

Don't forget the whole key to the operation; The government produce hologram of an intact, inverted and non-missile stricken flight 93 falling from the sky so the locals would be fooled.

Or was it a drone 757 freighter filled with pieces and remains from flight 93 that crashed? I can't remember which. I need another beer.

Carp, I forgot about the eye-witnesses.

Okay, how about this: The cockpit was wired with explosives.

A lot of top secret files were kept out in the Penn. fields Crashing a plane was a perfect cover for destroying those files that incriminated the "perps" without anyone knowing.

Why not, say, put these documents through a machine that... shreds, is that the word? Might we call it a shredder? I think we might. An incinerator, even. Causing a plane to crash into a specific ditch to destroy some documents, that's just overcomplicating things, don't you think?

Plus it was the scorched field that tipped the balance and got us to go to war with Iraq. Without the damage to the field we would still be having second thoughts of going to Iraq.

I think you're underestimating the emotional influence of the WTC.

I'm sure this has been advanced somewhere. Hell, Morgan Reynolds thought that the Onion's "single-plane theory" deserved a look.

I wish I could be surprised by this, I really do.

 

[T.A.M.]

I have read from several truthers that Flight 93 was intended to crash in the middle of nowhere purposely. The entire effort from that perspective was to provide false heroics, in the form of the passengers downing the plane, to inspire the american people for what was to come after...war. Sort of a "ray of hope" for joe blow, I guess, that "We can get'em".

Silly, but I have heard it bantered about by them.

TAM

 

[Spud1k]

I have read from several truthers that Flight 93 was intended to crash in the middle of nowhere purposely. The entire effort from that perspective was to provide false heroics, in the form of the passengers downing the plane, to inspire the american people for what was to come after...war. Sort of a "ray of hope" for joe blow, I guess, that "We can get'em".

Silly, but I have heard it bantered about by them.

TAM

TBH, that's the least insane theory for flight 93 I've heard in a long time but considering the competition, that's not saying much, especially given that it would still require use of the super dooper voice morph o matic.

I'm surprised that someone hasn't come up with the theory that it was done specifically so they could make a movie out of it, sort of Hollywood's repayment for helping to fake all of those WTC plane crash footages at short notice...

 

[defaultdotxbe]

A lot of Truthers insist that Flight 93's intended target was WTC-7

which is of course a very unlikely target for a terrorist attack

its funny how the truthers will envision scenarios that assume the vast majority of the people will unquestioningly accept whatever the government tells them, then in the next breath claim the vast majority of people dont believe a word of the official story


ETA: another f93 theory ive heard was that the plane was loaded up with all the passengers from 77, 11 and 175 and crashed to "dispose" of them

 

[Caustic Logic]

Well, damn. There goes my sure thing. I forgot about WTC-7.

Truther type forgetting about WTC7? For shame... BTW I doubt they would want to hit an auxilliary building half the height (nestled in among the other builings) and less than 1/100th the symbolic value of anything.

So maybe you're right - the problem is it was Flight 77, not a missile, that hit the Pentagon. So did they alter course at the end, and fly a different plane in there to let 93 hit the field? Why was 77 in the air? Was it slated for the field at fiirst?

No answer necessary in defense of a brain fart...

I have read from several truthers that Flight 93 was intended to crash in the middle of nowhere purposely. The entire effort from that perspective was to provide false heroics, in the form of the passengers downing the plane, to inspire the american people for what was to come after...war. Sort of a "ray of hope" for joe blow, I guess, that "We can get'em".

Silly, but I have heard it bantered about by them.

TAM

When I was thinking it was shot down (I need to revisit the evidence for this), or RC crashed or whatever, that was my idea of the mythology intended. It was spun as a myth in fact (eg - "let's roll" was never actually said). I use "myth" here in the sense of simplified/spun-up/etc to illustrate a cultural value or idea, not as totally untrue. Psychologically it worked really well - the silver lining on the 9/11 storm cloud. Americans don't really buckle and didn't NEED this, but it helps. War was already declared for us, recall us being told, in that small cabin. Who could argue with them? Let's all roll!

Anyway... I might be off-topic. I'll need to revisit what the topic here is.

 

[Caustic Logic]

ETA: another f93 theory ive heard was that the plane was loaded up with all the passengers from 77, 11 and 175 and crashed to "dispose" of them

You know, it's odd, the math almost works. All flights were underfilled, and I think all four flights minus 13 or so could have fit on 93. I did the math once, forget if I included all hijackers... this was before I knew much of the available evidence of course.

 

[Spud1k]

You know, it's odd, the math almost works. All flights were underfilled, and I think all four flights minus 13 or so could have fit on 93. I did the math once, forget if I included all hijackers... this was before I knew much of the available evidence of course.

Well there you go then. Seeing as the hijackers are all still alive and well, it all adds up.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Well there you go then. Seeing as the hijackers are all still alive and well, it all adds up.

Yeah, I hear one of them moved in right next door to you, in Carl's old place after Carl was eaten by the diapered spider. You and meatwad better go investigate. Haha! Media references are not my strong suit, I'm just impressed I knew one at all... Shake: "Hani-hani-hanijoor? Cripes man, is that your name or are you stuttering? Welcome to the neighborhood, dunbass!!" Frylock's eyebrow goes up... "there's something familiar about that guy..."

Def off topic now. Maybe 93 was intended for McDonald's HQ? That's symbolic...

 

[Spud1k]

Yeah, I hear one of them moved in right next door to you, in Carl's old place after Carl was eaten by the diapered spider. You and meatwad better go investigate. Haha! Media references are not my strong suit, I'm just impressed I knew one at all... Shake: "Hani-hani-hanijoor? Cripes man, is that your name or are you stuttering? Welcome to the neighborhood, dunbass!!" Frylock's eyebrow goes up... "there's something familiar about that guy..."

I didn't know about that; my limited exposure to ATHF was from when I was working in the US one time. My choice of avatar is mainly lamenting the fact that the show never took off on this side of the Atlantic.

 

[Reality Believer]

If the CT'ers would bother to read the book "Firefight", they would know that at least two separate times they abandon the firefighting at the Pentagon on spurious reports of an incoming aircraft as a follow on attack. One was flight 93, and the other was a fighter jet, if I remember correctly.

Those reports could fuel a nice conspiracy angle.

 

[PhantomWolf]

one could ask similar questions like, why did the so called preps that created holographic and computer generated planes for the WTC not make them for the Pentagon?

 

[Spud1k]

one could ask similar questions like, why did the so called preps that created holographic and computer generated planes for the WTC not make them for the Pentagon?

Because the hologram generators were in building seven. That's why they had to knock it down....

[/twoof]