It was fun while it lasted...
 

It looks like Universal Pictures decided to take down their "Flight 93" forum. In all honesty, I'm shocked they didn't do it sooner. The boards were quickly overrun with visitors DESTROYING the government's account of 9/11. -From a commercial standpoint, that can't help you "sell" a movie based solely on the government's version of events.

 

Poll after poll at the site showed 80% of respondents believed there is a cover up surrounding 9/11.  And if you saw the posts, you'd understand why. Anyone coming in with a "blank slate" undoubtedly left with mounds of excellent information they never heard in the mainstream media. I suspect many also left with a higher appreciation for those out there fighting for the truth.  

 

Those challenging the official account were mostly polite and articulate. -They laid out well-reasoned arguments and produced references to back their assertions. The defenders of the "Official account" on the other hand were habitually rude and inarticulate. They laid out poorly reasoned arguments and relied on pejoratives to back their assertions.

 

For instance, a post about the importance of the Northwoods Document was made. One of the boards "Official theory" defender's considered this a sufficient response:

 

"It never happened; people got fired, next-"

 

I replied:

 

"The relevance of the Northwoods Document is: It irrefutably establishes our government WOULD openly conspire to not only provoke and allow an attack (to further an already established military agenda) ...they'd actually manufacture the entire event.

 

Perhaps equally important: If the plan hadn't been made public, the same type of people who blindly accept whatever the government says would be calling the Northwoods Document an "urban legend" spun by kooks, loons, and moonbats.

 

-Worse, if it had been enacted, the government groupies would have bought the official account hook, line, and sinker."

 

Then, to show just how "Tinfoil Hat Crazy" the Northwoods plan was, I posted a few paragraphs of it. 

 

"It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama, or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.

 

      a. An aircraft at Eglin Air Force Base would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time, the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.

 

      b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin Air Force Base where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will being transmitting on the international distress frequency a "May Day" message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident." 

 

Given those two responses to choose from, would you think the Northwoods Document was something you should verify the existence of, or something to be written off as irrelevant?

 

Throughout the forum, equally lopsided arguments were made on every topic. WTC 7, PNAC, The Collapse of the Towers, NORAD, etc. -granted, there were a couple fair minded people trying to think of legitimate ways to defend the official account, but most avoided answering any of the hard questions, relying on insults and diversions to scare people away from thinking for themselves. -from what I could tell, it didn't work...not even close. 

 

J. Plummer 5.3.06

 

UPDATE: A visitor sent me the link below...I haven't seen the movie, but if you have (and want to post your thoughts) have at it! (At the time I added this link, there were only 59 posts.) 7:40 am on 5.5.06

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00005JOZI/103-4329500-2408650?v=glance&n=130

 

Back to Home Page
Back to Letters and Commentary Page