Some interesting posts related to the subject...

First there was the big question: If lots of witnesses saw a flash 'moving toward' the plane, how come you don't hear anything about that now? Next the question: Come to think of it, how come we don't hear from the witnesses at all? Then the revelations that a lot of major gag-orders had been issued... Then the story from one of the witnesses themselves. After it's all said and done, the FBI et al. went on TV and did a beautiful media job. They made it sound as if they had discovered it was a mechanical failure. If you listened, they actually said that they don't know what happened and did this, in the words of one official, "Because we need to have some closure on the incident." Since when does political psychology supercede truth? Since when do "official statements" get made to "wrap things up" based on no information? Seemed like a real effort to get it out of the spotlight, if you ask me. (By coincidence, that letter to the editor is from my old home town.)

Of course, remote viewing got dragged into this. Courtney Brown immediately announced that his Viewers had seen it was probably terrorist-related. Ed Dames immediately announced that it was a mechanical failure. After the fact, a lot of people wondered if Ed -- who makes such glorious claims to being so "in" with high government officials -- perhaps was encouraged to predict this, knowing there was no other outcome the government would admit to? Remote viewer Paul Smith had his drawings from his RV sessions used by Dames on national television to explain how it was a mechanical failure. Smith admits that he specifically was frontloaded (to 'find the cause of the mechanical failure' - a major no-no in remote viewing which can make all your results questionable), and also admits that he did NOT find that result, and made that clear. We'll never know, I guess.