[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
9/11 See other 9/11 Articles Title: Flight 93; (Skydrifter's Site) 9-11 and the IMPOSSIBLE Flight 93 “When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains – however improbable – must be the truth!" - Doyle Part Two of An Online Journal of 9-11 An Obvious Ordnance Blast (Flight 93) Ordnance Blast (Iraq) Another purported 9-11 airliner crash site, lacking viable evidence of the acclaimed event. This time, there was no immediate arrival of emergency crews. What people eventually arrived were the “official claimants,” and volunteers who scratched their head at all the mysterious small pieces of aircraft wreckage, versus tangible proof of an actual aircraft. The ‘proof’ was a 75-foot gouge in the landscape; at a man-made site. This time, there were no witnesses. Again, no tail, no wings; once again, no damage consistent with a B-757 “crash.” Even the local grass was undamaged – and un-burned! Once again the geometry of the scene certified the ‘official’ account as a blatant lie. As with the Pentagon, the few aircraft parts discovered are highly suspect. This time, there were no dramatic on-site "witness" accounts. What witnesses there were asked serious and intelligent questions. Aircraft were seen in the area – but the FBI initially denied the possibility. The trustworthy witnesses once again described the only physical evidence in terms of incredibly few parts. From a Washington Post article: Miller was among the very first to arrive after 10:06 on the magnificently sunny morning of September 11. He was stunned at how small the smoking crater looked, he says, "like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it." That is not a description of an aircraft crash site. Yet, what was sold to the world by the mass media of the supposed land of the free? The first clue that something is wrong with the Flight 93 story is the same as the Pentagon and the purported demise of Flight 77; the predominant smoke color in the photo (immediately above) is clearly NOT that coming from burning jet fuel. Again, that was also true in all the photographs of the purported Pentagon strike. In all pictures of the Pentagon fire, the ONLY prominent "thick black smoke" emanates from the generator unit, within the construction area fence, not from anything associated with the supposed aircraft. An aircraft full of fuel, crashing at 300 Knots, will NOT experience a delay in the full burning of its fuel; not at the Pentagon and not in Pennsylvania! Beyond the Pentagon “hit,” there is plenty of "curious business" behind the supposed crash of Flight 93. Try to imagine the odds of a second crash site with no tail, no wings, minimum “parts” and a missing tattle-tale black column of burning jet fuel. A second trans-continental flight with hardly any passengers and no cargo. Far too much for “coincidence;" IMPOSSIBLE! Amazingly, few have questioned this crash as another phoney! The associated flight 93 photographs show a relatively shallow containment crater, with the convenience of an access road. The photos depict a partially burned tree line, inconsistent with approximately 6,000 gallons of jet fuel. The burn pattern is wrong; it’s symmetrical, not elongated. There isn't enough burn area to account for the aircraft fuel. The suggestion of what little damage there is would have the world believe that the aircraft came down perfectly vertically - like a bore-sighted lawn dart. The lift of the wings at the purported speed would have effected a minimum lateral velocity of 50 knots. Yet there is zero suggestion of horizontal movement of the supposed aircraft. Look at the pictures above; at all the unburned grass and the green trees so close to the alleged impact point. The site more closely approaches a garbage land-fill! That's not the impact point of an airliner carrying approximately 6,000 gallons of Jet-A fuel! The 'crater' is approximately 70 feet in diameter. There is no evidence of any flying parts tearing down trees, as they scatter from any forward speed or explosion. No wings, No tail. No engines. No aircraft! A B-757 would not have just 'morphed' into the ground, leaving no prominent trace of parts. Not at ANY velocity! Again, the “smoke” photograph of the “crash” (below) is that of ordnance, not jet fuel. There is no evidence of “scorched earth” from the burning jet fuel, there is no suggestion of wings hitting this site, either. Clearly, the blast came from the ground, the “aircraft” was NOT shot down. Nor, did the aircraft come apart in the air, coming down in pieces; due to structural breakup or a bomb. Seismic data clearly demonstrates that, as well. If the aircraft had been shot down, there would have been a huge area of scattered burning debris; with associated witnesses, including satellite imagery. Also, the wings, cockpit and tail section would have survived in the format of "big" pieces. Such an in-flight breakup would have left a distinct “trail” of parts, according to the final flight track of the aircraft. The “distribution” of the few aircraft parts and debris is inconsistent with a crash site. Some parts were found miles away – in the wrong directions. The impact site and tree line fire suggest the direction of the alleged “aircraft” travel; still the distant parts and debris are in the wrong location – typically too far away, as well; aircraft crash debris doesn’t ‘bounce.’ But, clearly an ordnance explosion might distribute those small parts and debris. Yet, there is a lingering matter of the C-130 in the area, having flown up from the Pentagon "event." In theory, those same small pieces of aircraft could have been "salted," as was seen at the Pentagon. The same batch of small aircraft wreckage pieces - missing part numbers and serial numbers. It must be noted also that the "pieces" of an entire 757 were extracted in hand-buckets. Yet, we're supposed to believe that a cockpit voice recorder (CVR) - located in the "missing" tail section of the aircraft - survived in sufficient condition to yield "evidence." Interestingly, the only presented "evidence" dissuaded families from questioning the "Flight 93 Story." The family 'closure' was even manufactured. A variety of Internet sites are presenting reliable witness accounts, which attest to precious few suggestions of a crash site, versus a staged crash site - lacking imagination. These accounts are particularly worthy of serious consideration, as they are backed up by physical evidence. The Flight 93 flight recorders were supposedly recovered from 25 feet under ground. No sign of the tail section which should have housed the recorders, however. Twenty-five feet? An avid high-powered rifle shooter can't imagine getting a bullet that deep; so how did those square boxes get that deep - and then survive to yield data?? It doesn't make a trace of sense. No, let's call that IMPOSSIBLE! AND, the question is.... The automatic response to all this goes to the fate of the actual aircraft & occupants – the real mystery, in all this. Raw guestimation is the only response available, for the moment. The planes and occupants are gone; in some fashion. Did the aircraft actually take off? Who can be certain? If they did, where did they go? What of the people/bodies? One must speculate that both the Flight 77 and 93 aircraft did take off. Possibly they flew some portion of their flight plan. Then at some point, they turned off their transponders & possibly flew to a closed Air Force Base or private airport, to be hidden in a hangar – probably during the “…land now!” chaos. The physical requirement would be a 5,000 foot runway; and a hanger with a 130 foot door. A Canadian airfield shouldn't be ruled out. Afterward – who knows? Are there approximately 110 people with a new identity, face and country of residence? Unfortunately, there are no prominent clues. While "rumors" suggest that the two aircraft may have slipped into the Cleveland airport, the needed level of secrecy and security tends to discount (not exclude) that as a possibility. Thus, pragmatic speculation almost exclusively rules that scenario. It's not inconceivable that the passengers on all four hijacked aircraft, including the Pentagon & Pennsylvania flights, were asphyxiated via cabin de-pressurization, using the standard cockpit controls. It would be a simple matter to disable the passenger emergency depressurization controls, by pulling the appropriate circuit breakers. Thereafter, the cockpit emergency oxygen would be sufficient for the survival of the hijacker(s). It's quite possible for the pilots to have gained the cockpit jump-seat, even in flight; that's common. If a pilot sent up a quality "airline" or "FAA" ID card with the flight attendant, with a request to "visit the flight deck;" as a courtesy reflex, the captain says, "... sure." Dead passengers & crew would certainly save any "people-handling." If any team could knowingly kill thousands in the World Trade Center, a few more wouldn't likely disturb such psychotic rationalization. As with the rest of 9-11, the purported personal cell phone calls don't hold water, due to the cruise altitude, the shielding of the aircraft skin and the cell-tower 'switching' technology of the day. Remember that none of the hijackers’ names are yet known to be on the associated passenger manifests; approximately seven of the purported "names" are reported to be still alive (no 'official' questions being asked). The aircraft have probably been disposed of, in some manner. Currently, only speculation is available, as to such details.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Kamala, SKYDRIFTER (#0)
The ‘proof’ was a 75-foot gouge in the landscape; at a man-made site. This time, there were no witnesses. Again, no tail, no wings; once again, no damage consistent with a B-757 “crash.” Even the local grass was undamaged – and un-burned! Once again the geometry of the scene certified the ‘official’ account as a blatant lie. As with the Pentagon, the few aircraft parts discovered are highly suspect. This time, there were no dramatic on-site "witness" accounts. What witnesses there were asked serious and intelligent questions. Aircraft were seen in the area – but the FBI initially denied the possibility. The trustworthy witnesses once again described the only physical evidence in terms of incredibly few parts. “When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains – however improbable – must be the truth!" - Doyle
Good to read again and think about.
Thanks, the entirety of the 'official' account of 9-11 stinks to high Heaven. Amazingly, it sold!
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||