Was Flight93 Supposed To Hit Bldg7?

a reply to: neutronflux

So then innocent until proven guilty...whoever the DNA belonged to and/or whoever the federal government claims it belonged to.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Were they convicted? Is it false they conspired to hijack? I understand what you are saying, but I think they are beyond prosecution....

I do not believe the "heroic" story.
Not one bit I do.
I believe it was propaganda
For me and you
I do not believe it to be true. …
You see, a lot of things are wrong for me
Maybe if I explain you will see
The Mysteries of flight 93…
The earth was scared their long ago
Before it received that big ole blow…
The scene itself sure is strange
With very little debris from a plane…
7000 pounds of human remains should have been found
Yet there was only 700 all over the ground..
They say it hit at 600 miles per hour
But most remains were turned into fine powder..
I have seen a lot of crashes of planes on the ground
And this is defiantly the strangest around..
It is said the cockpit broke up before it hit
Almost totally designated as it is reported
Someone care to explain this #
Before I get deported…




a reply to: MissSmartypants

originally posted by: Dizak
I do not believe the "heroic" story.
Not one bit I do.
I believe it was propaganda
For me and you
I do not believe it to be true. …
You see, a lot of things are wrong for me
Maybe if I explain you will see
The Mysteries of flight 93…
The earth was scared their long ago
Before it received that big ole blow…
The scene itself sure is strange
With very little debris from a plane…
7000 pounds of human remains should have been found
Yet there was only 700 all over the ground..
They say it hit at 600 miles per hour
But most remains were turned into fine powder..
I have seen a lot of crashes of planes on the ground
And this is defiantly the strangest around..
It is said the cockpit broke up before it hit
Almost totally designated as it is reported
Someone care to explain this #
Before I get deported…




a reply to: MissSmartypants

Dr. Seuss? Could that be you?
And did Horton never hear that Hoo?
Just one more thing that isn't true...

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: MissSmartypants

They didn't need the plane to actually hit the building. They only needed it to be in the vicinity for it to serve as an explanation for the buildings demolition.

That was a joke right?

I was trying to point out the lack if thinking further so that such claims can make some sense.

Now you even use even more irrational thinking to try and explain something and yet the first thing you post is this

First off to "anyone"(wink wink) reading this... while I am a poor misguided conspiracy theorist I am not nor have I ever been a Truther. I am rather a what if'er.

Sorry, you have expressed the same method of thinking that truthers do.

They absorb anything that claims conspiracy no matter how ludicrous it is and parrot it over and over without actually thinking how and what would be involved for certain things to be facts.


Seriously, a plane only has to be in the vicinity so the government can say a plane hit the building when in fact they demolished it?

The hologram plane theory has more logic than this.

At no point did I state whether I believe or do not believe that 9/11was an inside job. I was merely musing on hypotheticals. After all, just imagine... what if there were no hypothetical situations? Hypothetically speaking, of course.
I often craft my threads to be abstract art of a sort in order to be able to observe what you observers choose to believe you are observing.

a reply to: Dizak

originally posted by: MissSmartypants

originally posted by: FlyingFox
Well, if the whole thing was planned, then 93 maybe was scripted. The Let's Roll™ scenario might have been a psyop from the beginning, not ad-libed.

It makes sense in light of the advent of Jessica Lynch-type school plays.

You seem to be trying to agree with me so I'll just leave it at that and not point out the flaws in your post.
Your welcome.

"One witness account claimed that the Special Operations Forces had foreknowledge that the Iraqi military had fled a day before they raided the hospital, and that the entire event was staged, even going so far as to use blanks to create the appearance that they were firing.[8]"

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: firerescue


note this part:

a reply to: MissSmartypants

One - Flight 93 was on a SE heading toward DC following hijacking near Cleveland. Hijackers had dialed in the VOR
navigation beacon at Reagan National , Kinda strange if want to hit WTC 7 then going in wrong direction

So the aircraft was heading to DC.... its' target, the Washington Monument and whatever was left to engulf the WH itself


note that there was live chatter ongoing about either The White Palace....or....the White Phallus...which might have been chatter 'code' for either the WH or the 555ft tall Washington Monument

originally posted by: FlyingFox

originally posted by: MissSmartypants

originally posted by: FlyingFox
Well, if the whole thing was planned, then 93 maybe was scripted. The Let's Roll™ scenario might have been a psyop from the beginning, not ad-libed.

It makes sense in light of the advent of Jessica Lynch-type school plays.

You seem to be trying to agree with me so I'll just leave it at that and not point out the flaws in your post.
Your welcome.

"One witness account claimed that the Special Operations Forces had foreknowledge that the Iraqi military had fled a day before they raided the hospital, and that the entire event was staged, even going so far as to use blanks to create the appearance that they were firing.[8]"

en.wikipedia.org...

My apologies for my smarmy comment earlier. My MissSmartypantsness gets the better of me sometimes.
You make an excellent point and illustrate just how easy it can be to fake an event...especially when we must rely on the fakers for the details. Thankfully there are the Jessica Lynches of the world who speak out and tell the truth. Thank you for your informative and elucidating contribution to this thread.
And please accept my heartfelt gratitude for your service.(inferred from your avatar)

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: CreationBro

In a standard trial, if 9/11 were the case at hand, I am nearly 100% certain that in a randomly selected group of autonomous jurors, at least one would claim what you have stated: there is reasonable doubt regarding the "official" story and conclusions.

But, um. The "official story" wasn't the crime. The crime was the airplanes that got crashed into stuff. The evidence against those accused seems pretty strong.

Bah, semantics.

You know what I meant Phage.

Question:

Do you think those accused of the crimes that took place on 9/11, were indeed capable of using planes to drop 3 high rises and damage the Pentagon, in the exact ways that we observed, physics regarded, flight telemetry, and other evidences of the attack details and details of the attackers themselves?

What I also find bizarre is the fact that the supposed attackers were from, where again? Yet the U.S. full scale invaded Iraq.

*scratches head


Id almost be open to believing that the accused attackers were on those planes as patsies, with the planes being remotely operated. That, and that some super psychic future seeing spook told TPTB that 911 and Iraq had to happen, "or bad stuff happens."

Kidding about that, but to me, and many others, the whole thing stinks like absolute #.

originally posted by: CreationBro

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: CreationBro

In a standard trial, if 9/11 were the case at hand, I am nearly 100% certain that in a randomly selected group of autonomous jurors, at least one would claim what you have stated: there is reasonable doubt regarding the "official" story and conclusions.

But, um. The "official story" wasn't the crime. The crime was the airplanes that got crashed into stuff. The evidence against those accused seems pretty strong.

Bah, semantics.

You know what I meant Phage.

Question:

Do you think those accused of the crimes that took place on 9/11, were indeed capable of using planes to drop 3 high rises and damage the Pentagon, in the exact ways that we observed, physics regarded, flight telemetry, and other evidences of the attack details and details of the attackers themselves?

What I also find bizarre is the fact that the supposed attackers were from, where again? Yet the U.S. full scale invaded Iraq.

*scratches head


Id almost be open to believing that the accused attackers were on those planes as patsies, with the planes being remotely operated. That, and that some super psychic future seeing spook told TPTB that 911 and Iraq had to happen, "or bad stuff happens."

Kidding about that, but to me, and many others, the whole thing stinks like absolute #.

And I'd be willing to bet that neither you nor those many others ever decided that Charlie Sheen should be the one to represent you. But somebody did.

a reply to: MissSmartypants

I represent myself and reserve the right to consistently and accurately deny all false representation.

No excuses.

Call me crazy, but id imagine you may feel similarly, as do many others.

Sheen doesnt represent the questioning of 9/11. We all do.

a reply to: MissSmartypants

At no point did I state whether I believe or do not believe that 9/11was an inside job.

Nor did I say you did.

I just pointed out an characteristic I see in truthers.

I was merely musing on hypotheticals.

Yes, This is what truthers do, speculate assume and use hypothetical situations to fit their version of events.

What I said was that such a hypothetical situation to explain flight 93 is even more ridiculous than the idea of holographic planes.

Its OK to think hypothetically but when that thought is simply one layered and no real deep thought about the hypothetical is put in, readers will point it out.

This is what I think about the claim that flight 93 was headed for Building 7, People talk about the skill level a pilot must have to crash into Pentagon, imagine if a plane struck building 7 in amongst all the other taller buildings.

Now that would have been opened many peoples eyes because something like that occur is highly unlikely compered to planes hitting towers that tower above most other buildings in the area.

I think you just came up with 'the plane just needed to be in the vicinity' just to reply without actually thinking about it.

1st plane hit, was lucky to get captured from 2 angles.

After that. obviously all cameras were focused on the trade centers.

How could a third plane fly past and building 7 collapse and the government claim the plane crashed into building 7 and caused the collapse when the whole world was watching?

a reply to: InhaleExhale

How could a third plane fly past and building 7 collapse and the government claim the plane crashed into building 7 and caused the collapse when the whole world was watching?

What you keep forgetting is that real facts have no place in a conspiracy theory.
Conspiracies are made up of speculation layered on top of innuendo.
All of their theories fail when they have to factor in real facts.
That's why when they are confronted they either ignore or change the topic.

Have you noticed none of these threads stay narrowly focused on the OPs title?
No matter what the topic starts out as, someone always chimes in "What about building 7?".

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: InhaleExhale

How could a third plane fly past and building 7 collapse and the government claim the plane crashed into building 7 and caused the collapse when the whole world was watching?

someone always chimes in "What about building 7?".

This is because 7 was the head/brain of the 9/11 operation, and that head had to be severed.

The OEM was a crime scene.

September 10th FEMA officials, in conjunction with NYC authorities arrived in the city and set up a new command post near the World Trade Center for an extensive simulated terrorist attack operation to be carried out on September 12.

The new command center was about three times bigger than the OEM in WTC 7.