Woody Box's New Article
I read over Woody Box's new article How To Steal An Airliner *AND* Fake A Hijacking, and basically my response is "eh".
My biggest problem with his story is "what's the point?". Why would they hijack a plane without passengers, swap it with a drone and then land the plane at DC National? Does this make any sense? Not to mention that Mr. Box, although his stuff is fun to read, never tries to pull it all together and explain everything that happened with flight 11, though he demeans people who promote the remote control piloting theory. Most frustratingly, Mr. Box never tries to explain what happened to the OTHER flight 11-- the one with all the passengers. That seems to be a glaring hole in his story.
Mr. Box seems to be an honest researcher and does a lot of work, but what the heck do his stories mean?
Frankly, I would prefer an open theory with some holes, to something like this, which dwells on too many trivialities.
My biggest problem with his story is "what's the point?". Why would they hijack a plane without passengers, swap it with a drone and then land the plane at DC National? Does this make any sense? Not to mention that Mr. Box, although his stuff is fun to read, never tries to pull it all together and explain everything that happened with flight 11, though he demeans people who promote the remote control piloting theory. Most frustratingly, Mr. Box never tries to explain what happened to the OTHER flight 11-- the one with all the passengers. That seems to be a glaring hole in his story.
Mr. Box seems to be an honest researcher and does a lot of work, but what the heck do his stories mean?
Frankly, I would prefer an open theory with some holes, to something like this, which dwells on too many trivialities.
posted by spooked at 1:14 PM
1 Comments:
Yet another "Woody Box" article that makes strong claims and definitive conclusions without having first shown verifiable evidence.
The "twin flight" claims about Flight11 may one day be proven true, but the "box" articles are woefully short on provable facts, and any court would consider it inadmissable hearsay.
Any theory that magnifies the number of people who had to be involved on 9/11 is probably not true.
Post a Comment
<< Home