My bro, a retired pilot, says that the crash in N.Y. after 9-11 was

[callous taoboy]

caused by a shoe bomb. It was the crash upon takeoff out of N.Y. that had been blamed on pilot error. The tail section had been sheared off. The official report said that the pilot was in too sharp of an ascent and the rudders in the tail vibrated too much and caused the tail end to shear off. My brother says that, within the pilot community, a shoe-bomb was the likely cause of the crash and that the powers that be decided that the airline industry would have been irreparably damaged (especially since this was shortly after 9-11) had this been revealed to the general population.

[Bluebear]

1. The utter coincidence of time and place is not lost on me

I would not discount that scenario as tinfoil in the least.

[soothsayer]

2. no doubt

[thedevilinthedetails]

3. No, the FAA report is right.

I *trust* our leaders. :P

[Mistress Quickly]

4. What's the one that crashed in Long Island Sound

right after takeoff? Around the time of the Atlanta Olympics. TWA 800? The one where witnesses said they saw things streaking towards the plane, then a big explosion? I think that was not the fuel lines, but either a missle from us or a missle from someone else.

[northzax]

5. interesting

a question for your brother: since the plane crashed less than 3 minutes after takeoff, while still climbing (obviously) the person has to light the fuse immediately after takeoff. Why risk having it happen at a low enough altitude that people would live? Reid tried to set his off at 30+thousand feet. The timing just seems really weird to think it's a shoe bomb, since the severing of the tail was behind the passenger compartment, the bomb must have gone off in the rear of the compartment, moving backward. So behind the back wall of the lavatory.

every tried to get up and go to the john while the plane is heading down the runway? they frown on it.

I'm not saying it wasn't a bomb (ok, yes I am) but I am definately sayign the laws of aircraft construction and explosives rule out it being a shoe bomb carried by a passenger.

[Rapier2]

6. note

Two weeks ago the rudder fell clean off, in midflight evidently, another Airubus plane out of Cuba to Canada. I can't link this sec. They managed to go back and land safetly in Cuba.

I don't see why an airframe failure, the cause given, was supposed to be more reassuring to the public and good for the industry than a shoe bomb. A shoe bomb can be stopped. If planes are flawed, and there is more than one pilot I have heard of who thinks those airbus planes are, then what could possibly be worse for the industry.

The whole coverup thing on this and the flight 800 make no sense in that there is nobody to cover up for. No purpose.

There was another theory around that the thrust reverser on one side acutated and put the plane in a flat spin. According to the theory it was terrorist sabatoge. That theory holds up better than the shoe bomb it seems to me on a physical basis but then again, why cover it up.

[northzax]

8. cause the gubmint is behind it, see?

they shot down TWA800, PA103, that valuejet plane over the everglades, and now this one. it's always the gubmint.

somehow the FAA has been infiltrated to the lowest levels by wingnuts. and Airbus just went along with it. "oh, sure, we'll take the blame, we French are so happy to take the blame for this administration."

[JohnyCanuck]

9. It's the buzzsaw effect..

Into the Buzzsaw: Leading
Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press
edited by Kristina Borjesson
Forward by Gore Vidal
Prometheus Books

<SNIP>

Given this backdrop, Buzzsaw stands a timely and quite unnerving book. The impetus for the book arose when Borjesson, who is an Emmy and Murrow Award winning investigative reporter had her own brush with censorship in 1996 when she found herself in the middle of an investigation of the TWA flight 800 crash off the coast of Long Island.

Assigned to cover the story for CBS, Borjesson quickly stumbled upon a series of red flags that should have tipped off any curious reporter. The fact that the military wouldn't allow the NYPD dive team access to the area for almost three days after the crash, and when they did, only allowed them to search certain areas for remains. Or the so-called "30-knot clip" -- a blip on recorded images of radar screens that shows a large surface vessel moving at a high rate of speed away from the area right after the plane erupted in a ball of flames and crashed. In addition, numerous credible witnesses from the Long Island shore who went un-interviewed (or dismissed when interviewed) claim to have seen something rise from the surface of the ocean and explode just before they saw the plane come apart and plunge into the water.

The final straw came one evening when Borjesson and fellow investigator Kelly O'Meara left some crucial evidence pointing to a government cover-up in the trunk of Borjesson's car. What happened next is the stuff of pulp spy-thriller fare: "The next morning, we went to the car, and O'Meara opened the trunk. Everything was there, except for the TWA 800 documents and O'Meara's computer. The trunk lock itself looked untouched and worked perfectly. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, these things do happen in the United States of America. I would never have believed it if I hadn't experienced it myself."(p132)

There is almost too much evidence Borjesson produces in favor of a government cover-up for the theory to be ignored, including a whistleblower being taken to court by the government for sneaking seat samples out of the recovery area which contained chemical traces consistent with rocket fuel residue, in direct refutation to the government's claim that the residue was simply industrial strength glue. But Borjesson was not alone. Contributing essayist and thirty-five year journalism veteran David E. Hendrix also tried to track down the facts of what really happened off the coast of Long Island that night, with no more success. In his essay he arrives at the same conclusion Borjesson, O'Meara and a few others who did their homework: In the face of so much evidence showing that it is likely that the U.S. Navy accidentally shot down TWA 800, why didn't more journalists chase down the many leads that supported this contention? Simple: editors were looking for a quick turnaround on the story. They simply parroted the government's version of the story and left it at that. As J. Robert Port says in his essay: "Some of our biggest, most trusted news organizations simply lack the courage, the will or the leadership to consistently do the work necessary to expose the truth about the most controversial subjects in our world…"(p207)

http://www.freewilliamsburg.com/september_2002/buzzsaw.html

[sam sarrha]

7. when you have 5 military people say they saw a "Flare" = shoulder launch

mistle... i saw one woman who was a navy pilot describe the Flare and its different colored exhaust thru the stages.. she described how she did the geometry by observing the angle of accent from where she stood looking over her TV antenna. she was never on TV again, and about an hour later Clinton declared an executive order gagging all information that might be relevant to a terrorist attack.

just check all the stuff at http://www.flight800.org/

[spooked911]

12. this post is about flight 587 not flight 800

[gulfcoastliberal]

10. Here's the pic of the Canadian airbus tail

Article:

http://www.avweb.com/newswire/11_12a/briefs/189391-1.html

On Edit: This damage isn't the same as losing the entire tail assembly.

[spooked911]

11. This isn't flight 800-- this post is about flight 587.

Interesting, but would a shoe-bomb really do this?

There have been musings that flight 587 was a case where someone tried to take over the plane by remote-control but it didn't work properly. Tis idea fits with why the pilot was having such trouble getting control of the plane.

In any case, the timing sure was suspicious.

Also. it is incredible there have been no major US airline crashes since then.

[spooked911]

13. By the way, could you ask your bro what he thinks about whether

the terrorists on 9/11 were actually flying the planes? I'd really like to hear his response.

[paulthompson]

14. Curious story about that crash

September 6, 2001: New York Student Forecasts Destruction of WTC

Antoinette DiLorenzo, teaching English to a class of Pakistani immigrants, asks a student gazing out the window, “What are you looking at?” The student points towards the WTC, and says, “Do you see those two buildings? They won’t be standing there next week.” At the time, nothing is thought of it, but on September 13, the FBI will interview all the people in the classroom and confirm the event. The FBI later places the boy’s family under surveillance but apparently is unable to find a connection to the 9/11 plot. An MSNBC reporter later sets out to disprove this “urban myth,” but to his surprise, finds all the details of the story are confirmed. The fact that the family members are recent immigrants from Pakistan might mean the information came from Pakistan. (MSNBC, 10/12/01) Supposedly, on November 9, 2001, the same student predicts there will be a plane crash on November 12. On that day, American Airlines Flight 587 will crash on takeoff from New York, killing 260 people. Investigators will later determine that the crash is accidental. One official at the school later says many Arab-American students have come forward with their own stories about having prior knowledge before 9/11: “Kids are telling us that the attacks didn’t surprise them. This was a nicely protected little secret that circulated in the community around here.” (INSIGHT, 9/10/02)

[spooked911]

15. Now THAT is something. Wow.

I was never quite sure what to think about flight 587, but this story strongly implies it was a terrorist event.

Fascinating.