[exit82]

The tail fell off. But was that the initiating event?

Notice there is not one recollection of the eyewitnesses that said there was an explosion near the fuselage at the right wing which started everything. And with all of the video cameras in the area on buildings, at the airport, etc, there is no video evidence of what happened.

The eyewitness reports have gone down the memory hole. If the tail really fell of and we still don't know why, why wasn't every Airbus grounded? They kept right on flying, didn't they?

I believe this was the first shoe bomber. The bomb blew through the hydraulic control cables below the floor of the cabin, severed the ones with the tail, the tail fin started flapping in the breeze without control and snapped off.

The first shoe bomber caught was three weeks later, Richard Reid.

For some reason, our government has been lying about
Flight 587, like TWA 800 and the OC bombing, since day one.
Tails don't just pop off; and planes don't get hit by vortexes when the takeoff pattern and timing is the same day after day after day.

There have been many previous threads on this subject on FR, which are worth reading.

[Bobby777]

I believe this was the first shoe bomber

I hope no tin foil is required but this is my belief too ... since the eyewitnesses reported the fire you mentioned ... it's only necessary to fracture the fuselage of an aircraft and then speed and airflow will do the rest ... perhaps the *bang* they heard was the show bomber going off ... I'd like to see a seating chart, the point of initial breakup, and the name/country of origin of every passenger in that area of the aircraft ... it was too dang close to 9/11 and the next shoe bomber ... coincidences do happen but this seems strange ...

[eno_]

The tail fell off. But was that the initiating event? Another good question. This account ignores the fact that three widely separated parts of the plane came off. The only common cause for that would be air load, and the only way that could happen is if the plane is already out of control.

Google up "unusual attitude." It isn't uncommon for planes to come apart AFTER they cannot be controlled.

And, as you point out, ignoring th eeyewitnesses makes this a pretty blatant propaganda piece.

[Doctor Stochastic]

You left out the Death of Wellstone Incident.

[spald]

your post #14. I'm with you.

[RS]

".....and planes don't get hit by vortexes when the takeoff pattern and timing is the same day after day after day"

Don't fly a lot, do you ?

[jlogajan]

I believe this was the first shoe bomber.

Your speculation and 25 cents will buy you a cup of coffee.