Flight 93 Never Crashed In The Empty Field Outside Shanksville

[eots]

So the only thing keeping you from believing that Flight 93 crashed in the way described in the accident report and the 9/11 Commission Report is that there was a DC9 that went down in the Everglades that was similar in terms of speed and the engines were photographed and in the case of Flight 93 they were not?


No. The continued forthcoming of many reported "witnesses" and otherwise respectable people making claims otherwise. I feel that it is not right to disregard them and deem them as all "crazy" or liars. The list is massive.

Additionally, it is the added stories of findings of cockpits and bodies intact...the absolute contradictions to the stories and the comprehension of the utter contradictions of seeing what the media/gov showed that day compared to what people are claiming now.

sorry, the list is MINOR
and then the deviations are typical for eye witnesses

Every event that has had eyewitnesses show us that there are always different accounts. One of the videos that eots posted had a physiologist talking about that saying that different people remember the same event in different ways because we all process things based on what we are familiar with. That might be one reason there different accounts.
There has been reports since the events of the debris field from flt 93 and the number of identified bodies they found.
I would hope pictures of those bodies are NOT posted on the Internet to satisfy the curiosity or perversions of anyone. The reports of the bodies being found however; have existed since the day it happened.
I gave you a link that will take you through at least 3 different news agencies and in the process to photos of the remains of the plane, including what was left of the cockpit. i think it is unreasonable to expect to find "the intact cockpit".
I only call people crazy or liars when they prove that that is what they are.

the psychologist spoke of how people memories ae tainted over time from hearing additional information from the media and other wittinesses as their own this is very evident in the pentagon where people report that they did not see the actual impact,,then four years after give detail descriptions of seeing the impact and seeing the wings fold back and follow the plane into the hole

 

[Systain]

The numbers are growing

proof please.

I don't see exact polls later than a few years ago but I do see reports like this:
The Media Response to the Growing Influence of the 9/11 Truth Movement

Furthermore, I attest that the list at Pilots for 9/11 Truth has changed often:
core group @ pilotsfor911truth.org

Additionally, I definitely also assume...I won't lie. However, I base this on that fact that since 2006 there hasn't really been any [additional] smoking gun for either side that has the power to sway sides...my opinion. I think we're all at a "heard it all before" stance for both ends of the spectrum.

Hopefully, a more recent poll(s) will soon be taken so we may gauge.

 

[Systain]

MSRMaps

 

[Fizz]

The numbers are growing

proof please.

I don't see exact polls later than a few years ago but I do see reports like this:
The Media Response to the Growing Influence of the 9/11 Truth Movement

Furthermore, I attest that the list at Pilots for 9/11 Truth has changed often:
core group @ pilotsfor911truth.org

Additionally, I definitely also assume...I won't lie. However, I base this on that fact that since 2006 there hasn't really been any [additional] smoking gun for either side that has the power to sway sides...my opinion. I think we're all at a "heard it all before" stance for both ends of the spectrum.

Hopefully, a more recent poll(s) will soon be taken so we may gauge.

what do you mean "no smoking gun" for either side??

DNA from the passengers, crew and hijackers of all four flights were found at the scenes of their crashes. if that isnt a smoking gun then i dont know what is.

 

[Systain]

proof please.

I don't see exact polls later than a few years ago but I do see reports like this:
The Media Response to the Growing Influence of the 9/11 Truth Movement

Furthermore, I attest that the list at Pilots for 9/11 Truth has changed often:
core group @ pilotsfor911truth.org

Additionally, I definitely also assume...I won't lie. However, I base this on that fact that since 2006 there hasn't really been any [additional] smoking gun for either side that has the power to sway sides...my opinion. I think we're all at a "heard it all before" stance for both ends of the spectrum.

Hopefully, a more recent poll(s) will soon be taken so we may gauge.

what do you mean "no smoking gun" for either side??

DNA from the passengers, crew and hijackers of all four flights were found at the scenes of their crashes. if that isnt a smoking gun then i dont know what is.

was any of that found or determined since 2006 that would otherwise sway the polls?
that's all I mean

 

[Systain]

Although, I can't help to wonder what your responses would be regarding this???
MSRMaps

 

[Fizz]

notice how in your picture the trench generally runs in the same direction as the dirt road at the bottom.

here you can see where the old trench was because the grass is still scarred. the new hole definately isnt the same as the old trench and the mark is about a 90 degree angle to the dirt road at the top.

 

[Systain]

Concerning mathematics; what is the probability of Flight 93 hitting in the same area of where a charred trench used to exist. How many open fields have such charred trenches and what geographical anomaly caused it to even occur in 1994? This is "needle in a haystack" probability. I think anyone would be hard pressed to disagree.

1994 or before - incident causes a charred trench in a field
1994 and >/= 9/10/01 - trench grows over
9/11/01 - plane causes new charred trench in the exact same spot

This is close...not 10,000 or 1,000 or 100 feet away but both scenarios meet at this nexus.

 

[eots]

the entire 9/11 story is based on one mathematically improbable event after another..this fact is even mentioned in their own reports

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-QycTzwV7c&feature=related]YouTube - CNN Hijackers passport found in WTC rubble Saturday[/ame]

 

[eots]

A New York Times report[1] of August 19, 2001 suggested that O'Neill had been the subject of an "internal investigation" at the FBI. The report suggested that O'Neill was responsible for losing a briefcase with "highly classified information" in it, containing among other things "a description of every counterespionage and counterterrorism program in New York". The briefcase was recovered shortly after its disappearance. The FBI investigation was reported to have concluded that the suitcase had been snatched by local thieves involved in a series of hotel robberies, and that none of the documents had been removed or even touched.[2]

Several people came to O'Neill's defense, suggesting that he was the subject of a "smear campaign".[3] The Times reported that O'Neill was expected to retire in late August.

[edit] New job at the WTC
O'Neill started his new job at the World Trade Center on August 23, 2001. (Lawrence Wright, The New Yorker, January 14, 2002) He was appointed by Kroll Associates, namely by the managing director Jerome Hauer. In late August, he talked to his friend Chris Isham about the job. Jokingly, Isham said, "At least they're not going to bomb it again," a reference to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. O'Neill replied, "They’ll probably try to finish the job." [4]

O'Neill's remains were recovered from the World Trade Center site on September 22, 2001.

but no black boxes...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._O'Neill

 

[Liability]

the entire 9/11 story is based on one mathematically improbable event after another..this fact is even mentioned in their own reports

Your very existence is so remotely and astronomically improbable as to compel the conclusion that you don't actually exist.

 

[Fizz]

Concerning mathematics; what is the probability of Flight 93 hitting in the same area of where a charred trench used to exist. How many open fields have such charred trenches and what geographical anomaly caused it to even occur in 1994? This is "needle in a haystack" probability. I think anyone would be hard pressed to disagree.

1994 or before - incident causes a charred trench in a field
1994 and >/= 9/10/01 - trench grows over
9/11/01 - plane causes new charred trench in the exact same spot

This is close...not 10,000 or 1,000 or 100 feet away but both scenarios meet at this nexus.

the probability of it hitting the earth somewhere are 100%

the chances of it randomly hitting any given spot on earth are exactly the same of it hitting any other spot on earth.

there was no "incident" before 1994 causing a trench... the entire field was a strip mine at one time.

if you are suggesting that evidence was "planted" and this wasnt a random act (as you seem to be doing) then wouldnt it make more sense to hide the planted evidence in the lake a few hundred feet away? that way they could have done it over a few days instead of doing the impossible and planting all the evidence at the flight 93 crash site in about an hour. also, people gathering the evidence would have been limited to a few divers instead of the hundreds (maybe thousands) that were involved in the crash site at the field.

sorry for thinking logically.

 

[elvis]

the entire 9/11 story is based on one mathematically improbable event after another..this fact is even mentioned in their own reports

Your very existence is so remotely and astronomically improbable as to compel the conclusion that you don't actually exist.

250 million monkeys typing randomly will eventually write a novel, something like that.

 

[Tom Clancy]

If it never crashed.. where is it?

 

[Liability]

If it never crashed.. where is it?

It is still boarding at the terminal.

Or

It landed safely somewhere else and the passengers and crew were whisked away to some secret location, never to be seen again.

Since the scumbag Troofers often like to blame the evil Boooosh, the secret location should be obvious.

 

[eots]

If it never crashed.. where is it?

It is still boarding at the terminal.

Or

It landed safely somewhere else and the passengers and crew were whisked away to some secret location, never to be seen again.

Since the scumbag Troofers often like to blame the evil Boooosh, the secret location should be obvious.

or it was blown up...shot down

 

[Tom Clancy]

If it never crashed.. where is it?

It is still boarding at the terminal.

Or

It landed safely somewhere else and the passengers and crew were whisked away to some secret location, never to be seen again.

Since the scumbag Troofers often like to blame the evil Boooosh, the secret location should be obvious.

or it was blown up...shot down

who shot it down?

 

[DiveCon]

It is still boarding at the terminal.

Or

It landed safely somewhere else and the passengers and crew were whisked away to some secret location, never to be seen again.

Since the scumbag Troofers often like to blame the evil Boooosh, the secret location should be obvious.

or it was blown up...shot down

who shot it down?

must have been the Romulans
they have cloaking technology

 

[eots]

there are wittiness reports of a fighter plane passing over seconds after the crash ..if correct it would be safe to assume it was a U.S fighter..