Thank God we're not Russia

An additional data point: to date, no terrorist organization has
claimed responsibility for the crashes. It would be extremely unusual
for a terrorist group to have managed to bring about this very
difficult feat of downing two airliners nearly simultaneously, and not
claim to have done so. After all, publicity is extremely important to
their existance. People must know about them for them to cause
terror.

I thought this, too, but NPR did a piece yesterday in which they stated that
"most terrorist acts in Russia have occurred with no one claiming
responsibility."

This seems bizarre to me, as it makes a relatively pointless act COMPLETELY
pointless -- but whoever said terrorists were very bright?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:

An additional data point: to date, no terrorist organization has
claimed responsibility for the crashes. It would be extremely unusual
for a terrorist group to have managed to bring about this very
difficult feat of downing two airliners nearly simultaneously, and not
claim to have done so. After all, publicity is extremely important to
their existance. People must know about them for them to cause
terror.


I thought this, too, but NPR did a piece yesterday in which they stated that
"most terrorist acts in Russia have occurred with no one claiming
responsibility."

This seems bizarre to me, as it makes a relatively pointless act COMPLETELY
pointless -- but whoever said terrorists were very bright?
NPR is heavy on opinion and light on facts.

"gatt" wrote in message

...there's no point in believing the Russian jets crashed at
all... the notion that the
airplanes crashed is all hypothetical and speculative.

...two flocks of birds?....swamp gas. Meteorites! Yeah, that's it.
Can't
speculate though
until the Russian government -- the same folks that brought you the Kursk
submarine fiasco, which might just a rumor too as far as we should be
concerned since we only heard about it on the media -- says otherwise.

Better wait until the investigation results to confirm that it
wasn't migratory birds.

You guys are right. I'm sorry. Yaaaaaay Russia! The paragon of freedom
of
information and public disclosure. Yaaaaaaaaaay Russia!

Don't quit your day job.

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:39:47 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

I thought this, too, but NPR did a piece yesterday in which they stated that
"most terrorist acts in Russia have occurred with no one claiming
responsibility."

This seems bizarre to me, as it makes a relatively pointless act COMPLETELY
pointless -- but whoever said terrorists were very bright?

Well that was yesterday's news. Apparently a Chechnian group has now
claimed responsibility according to a blurb I heard this morning.

Corky Scott

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"Ace Pilot" wrote in message
where the reporter reports the facts instead of jumping to conclusions
and
actually gives
investigators the time needed to investigate all the possibilities.

The facts are witnesses reported explosions and the Russian officials say
there's no evidence of explosions.

And, again, I say: Thank God we're not in Russia. Let me amend this: Go
live there if you want, and have a ball. Thank God I'M not in Russia.

Over a hundred people saw a missile go up and hit TWA800.

Take from that as you will.

Paul

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"Rich Lemert" wrote in message
link.net...

Perhaps you can clue us in as to how you "know" that they exploded,

Well, Rich, they've got witnesses on television networks worldwide
describing the explosions. The point of contention here is that the
officials had not yet found "evidence" of terrorism or explosion. Well,
when witnesses all over the place are describing explosions independently
of
each other, that's called evidence.

Either that, or the value of multiple human eye witnesses in Russia (and
this forum, apparently) means nothing.

Or in the US.
http://twa800.com/images/times-8-15-00.gif
http://twa800.com/index.htm#Eyewitness.
http://flight800.org/twa_sub.htm

I don't want to start up all the what did/didn't happen to TWA800
stuff again, but if you're talking about eyewitnesses and being believed
and proof, the situation is a lot of eyewitnesses said "We saw a missile",
and the authorities said "There's no evidence". That's all I'm saying, not
whether either were right or wrong. It's not just in Russia that this
happens.

You get it yet? I didn't say anything about proof or what people "know."
The point is about evidence.
-c

Latest news is that evidence of explosives has been found:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3612150.stm

Paul

"John Gaquin" wrote in message

You guys are right. I'm sorry. Yaaaaaay Russia! The paragon of freedom
of information and public disclosure. Yaaaaaaaaaay Russia!

Don't quit your day job.

Not sure what my day job has to do anything, but, tell me which one,
Comrade? Writing? Computers and newtorking? Performing music or building
battle robots for television and video games? What are you presuming my day
job to be, anyhow?

Oh, and look: The Russian officials finally figured out that that there
were explosions and terrorism. Golly, Wally, who'da thunk? The experts
finally figured out what the media knew immediately.

-c

"Corky Scott" wrote in message
No one is claiming there were no crashes, they're just saying wait a bit
for the evidence that the crashes were due to explosions.

They are? Where? Quote, please.

As to the WTC, again k'mon. You know as well as everyone else that
the eye witness reports were backed up by extraordinary video footage
of the airplanes smacking into the buildings and exploding in a huge
fireball.

Yeah, but other than the few million witnesses, what did the NTSB really
have for proof that it was terrorism? Sounds like a ludicrous question,
huh? Kinda like arguing that there's no evidence that the two Russian jets
that crashed didn't explode, given, you know, all the witnesses saying they
exploded.

Forgive me for not being a Russian bureaucrat. I'm just not good at that
sort of thing.

-c

"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
news:ch1u25

I don't want to start up all the what did/didn't happen to TWA800
stuff again, but if you're talking about eyewitnesses and being believed
and proof, the situation is a lot of eyewitnesses said "We saw a missile",
and the authorities said "There's no evidence". That's all I'm saying, not
whether either were right or wrong. It's not just in Russia that this
happens.

This is valid and fair; but I don't recall the FAA/NTSB coming out and
saying there was no evidence of an explosion when people everywhere were
saying they saw an explosion. The issue is not whether they said for sure,
or that there was proof, but whether there was evidence.

The point is about evidence.

Latest news is that evidence of explosives has been found:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3612150.stm

Yep. Confirming what those incredible eyewitnesses said; the planes
exploded. Again I say I thank God we're not Russia and if my point isn't
clear, let me add that I thank God even more than I wasn't, say, a Russian
sailor lying at the bottom of the ocean in the Kursk when the Russian
government was too secretive and proud to allow for immediate help.

But, then again, like John Gaquin said, I probably shouldn't quit my day
job.

-c

"Ace Pilot" wrote in message

Aren't you a journalist, gatt?
Where's my rec.aviation.piloting paycheck?
So, you can't apply your knowledge of journalism unless you get paid
for it??? Wow. I truly hope the same rules don't apply to your
recreational flying..

Tell you what, "Ace" (really?), you don't tell me how to do my "job" and I
won't tell you how to do yours. (I work in computers, write novels, play
music and build robots for television shows. Why you folks ASSume that I'm
a professional journalism speaks of somebody else's ignorance, not mine.)

But my knowledge and experience in journalism says that when witnesses all
report something virtually identical and the government officials wrap the
whole thing in red tape and then stonewall, the truth is going to lie
somewhere closer to the witnesses than it is to the bureaucrats. "Nothing
to see here. Move along." Remember the Kursk.

There was nothing in the news article indicating what FSB officials had
found out at that point, or were even aware of, other than two aircraft had
crashed. Are you suggesting
that FSB officials should just take media reports at face value without
independent confirmation?

Are you putting words in my mouth, "Ace"? Do you do this to ATC too? ("I
surely hope the same rules don't apply to your recreational flying") All
I said is, when witnesses report explosions...write this down or sound it
out...there is EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIONS.
Not proof, not fact, not conclusive data. EVIDENCE. The point is that
there was evidence, the bureaucrats ignored it and then, gee, Comrade...they
found evidence of explosions and of terrorism. WOW! I mean, that's some
real Sherlock work, isn't it?

=c