Quote:But that is my point. The damage of the recorder proves nothing, especially about a struggle. But the flight recoders information itself, absolutely. So why wasn't it part of the public report of the incident? Either they did not recover the box, which I have tried to show is very unlikely, or they did and did not include it in the report. By saying there was a struggle, and some phone calls made 30,000 feet up from cell towers, but not supplying the evidence is itself facetious.

The recording from the flight recorder was played to the families of the United 93 crew and passengers. I don't see why it needs to be played to anyone else. They testified that the passengers revolted, and the interviews they provided afterwards were the basis for making two films about the events. The report stated that various phone calls were made from the plane, confirming a hijacking, and confirming that a passenger revolt had taken place. This has all been made public, and it is your unwillingness to accept these transcripts and testimonies that is the only problem here.

We don't release data about crimes in courts to the media, and there is no reason to do the same here. If you were personally affected by 9/11 (i.e. lost a family member in it) then you have every right to obtain the data relating to that family member. However, to ask for data that has absolutely nothing to do with you, and violates the privacy of others, is not only illegal but unethical.

(December 17, 2009 at 2:31 pm)Saerules Wrote:

Minimalist Wrote:This proved harder than I though. For the sake of discussion, let's say "non-military attack" == "attack on civilians by anyone".

Rwandan Genocide? Holocaust?

Rwanda = 100 days of genocide and hundreds of thousands dead
Holocaust = years of systematic collection and extermination and millions dead
9/11 = a few hours and 3000 civilians dead

Also keep in mind that America is a superpower and New York is one of the biggest cities in the world. Not something you can say about the European jews or Rwandan Tutsis.

Quote:Those would apply under that definition :S I've gotten all confused over just what 'military' is... and on wether the plane hijackers on 11/09/2001 are 'military' or not. :S I think military just means 'armed forces'... so would they apply because they were armed with planes?

It's pretty ambiguous, yeah. I just find it hard to call a handful un-uniformed religious extremists forcefully taking over a civilian transport aircraft and flying into one of the world's largest buildings (full of civilians) a military attack. Even with flaky definitions, it doesn't seem right.

True @ your first point.

Also, so far as terrorist attacks go: you are right about the 2001 attacks on the world trade center and pentagon being unmatched (at least as 'terrorist' attacks). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#Se...11_attacks

I don't know about it not feeling right... I just can't see how it is (or isn't) 'military' :S

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#War_on_Terrorism is what I'm mostly disappointed with. :S

(December 17, 2009 at 8:24 am)Pippy Wrote: Both well written.

The first seemed to be more concerned with dust samples, and the second with support columns.

You lean towards the "no evidence of thermite" side then?

Yes, no thermite - it seems that the composition of the Iron left over is (1) of a slightly but significantly different composition to that of the waste iron in a thermite reaction and (2) The amount of waste iron found in the wreckage even if it was from a thermite reaction is more akin to the amount used to burn through an Hemi engine block than what would be required to bring down a building with more than 38x the steel mass per floor than the Hemi.

In other words, even if it was thermite the trace evidence is entirely out of proportion with the amount required.

Interesting Void, thank you.

Adrian, you alwyas have an excuse. The recordings have not been made public record, but they have come out and told us there was a scuffle, that the plane was crashed into the ground. Personally, I don't like taking the intelligence communities word on things, considering hoe often they lie and manipulate information.

I am not allowed to hear the recorder, becasue I did not have anyone die in my family? That is silliness, we have heard other flight recorders, why not this one? Does the fact that I am affected by Patriot Act make me a victim? If I went to Afgantistan would I be a victim? We are all (but those of us over here moreso) victims of 9/11 in a sense.

But hey, the investigation can be a poor as it wants, and how dare I ask for more information. How dare I! Get back in line, put your head down.

I'd imagine audio information contained in the black box would be extremely sensitive information to the families involved and for that reason one might grant justifiable reason for not releasing it publicly. Not that this ever seems to have prevented the same thing happening elsewhere. Withholding information always creates paranoia.

That it does.

Are we talking about the families of the pilots? Or those of the terrorists? Wait, silly question...

(December 14, 2009 at 10:41 am)theVOID Wrote: Frickin heck pippy - i had no idea you were a "truther"

I don't suppose you're a fan of David Icke?

No, c'mon, that's not fair... play fair.

That guy actually make sense!

EvF

(December 18, 2009 at 8:21 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote:

(December 14, 2009 at 10:41 am)theVOID Wrote: Frickin heck pippy - i had no idea you were a "truther"

I don't suppose you're a fan of David Icke?

No, c'mon, that's not fair... play fair.

That guy actually make sense!

EvF

I don't know if my sarcasm detector is broken, or if your sarcasm output device is fucked - but that's not funny

Of course David Icke makes sense, silly

He is wise beyond his years...