FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

US citizens did have their liberties severely restricted. The paper doing that is called the Patriot Act. It gave the Bush administration carte blanche to invade the privacy of any US citizen they deem fit to invade. It is the the reason secret courts were set up, without independent public legal access oversight, to validate those courts are following US constitutional laws.

We certainly have documentation to prove the Bush administation has violated the rights of US citizens. It is the reason Congress finally began to take the Bush administration members to court, for release of those covert court proceedings. That did not happen until after the 2006 elections, when the balance of Democrat and GOP representatives shifted to majority Democrat seats held.

This is what Patick Henry had to say about giving up liberties in the name of security:

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

This is how it worked in Nazi Germany to entice the German people to give up their freedoms in the name of security:

"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." Joseph Goebbels

Only for 9/11/2001, the anti-Semitism was directed at the Semitic Arab people instead of the Semitic Jewish people. I wonder who had most motivation to move forward on that pertaining to 9/11/2001. Was it WASP ideologues? Maybe. Was it Zionist ideologues? Most probably.

Are the words above pertinent to Shanksville, PA? Certainly, because all documented evidence points toward Zionist and WASP ideologue (US military-industrial complex) being the true perpetrators of 9/11/2001. If they had not implemented what they did, there would be no discussion on 9/11/2001 crime, because there would have been no crime to discuss.

reply to post by IvanZana



Seems you choose to do more non thinking than critical thinking in your posts. Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear. YOu have to make your own judgement but have no proof.

You can find the list of bodies that were found on FLight 93 and the pictures if you use google and get past the first 14 pages of rhetoric and bull#.

Here, this is from a few weeks after 9/11...

www.post-gazette.com...

In Stonycreek, Sledzik supervised a team of about 65 DMORT workers from Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland and Delaware. They are expected to complete their work at the site this week. Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller retains authority over the recovery process and will sign all death certificates, Sledzik said, but DMORT workers have been helping Miller with identification processes.

"Local jurisdictions often don't have a mass disaster plan," he said. "We don't come in and take over, but we augment what the local coroner has set up. We provide whatever support is needed by local officials."

Some DMORT members worked alongside FBI agents and state troopers at the site to recover tissue, bone and dental remains.

Dr. Dennis Dirkmaat, a DMORT member and forensic anthropologist from Mercyhurst College in Erie, said the remains were "extremely fragmented" after the crash, in which the airliner hit the ground at hundreds of miles per hour.

Still, Dirkmaat said, DMORT workers were attempting "to document every piece of tissue," no matter how small. By walking or crawling over the crash site and by sifting dirt through mesh screens, DMORT workers hoped to recover tiny samples that, despite their size, could be analyzed and identified.

Once the remains were recovered, they were sent to a temporary morgue four miles away in a Pennsylvania National Guard armory in Friedens. There, more DMORT workers analyzed the remains utilizing equipment shipped from Dallas.

Fingerprint specialists examined tissue and dentists examined teeth, fillings or wire from dental braces that had been collected for comparison with X-rays and other records obtained from relatives of the crash victims. Anthropologists and X-ray technicians have done the same with bones, looking for evidence of healed fractures, past injuries or surgeries.

If remains still couldn't be identified, DMORT workers sent samples to the DNA laboratory in Maryland to be matched with the genetic markers of those who died.

That can be done by obtaining blood samples from relatives or by obtaining DNA from strands of hair left in combs, from saliva on toothbrushes or stamps, even from nearly invisible bits of blood or tissue or a razor blade.

Sledzik said it was too early to know how successful that identification process will be or whether they will be able to identify the hijackers.

"We know that it is very important to the families to be able to make those identifications and we will stick with it until we've exhausted all processes," he said.

"It's heart-rending work, absolutely," he said. "But this [DMORT operation] has a distinct difference to it. Given what's been going on nationally, people here are extremely focused on completing the work here. They feel they can provide a service to these families and to their country and they are here to do that."

If you look, you will also find large pieces of the wreckage spread over a 8 mile trail. The proof is there that a plane crashed, it is a matter of why?
The circular arguement that both you and Lear (who you quoted) present is to me disinfo so people do not look into the shootdown but "how could there be no plane?" This is called deflection. Same thing is dome with the 9/11 WTC 7 folks and the hologram dreamers.

I find it sad that some of you cannot fathom the fact that through poor administrative decisions from 93-01 caused 9/11. Al Qeada declared war on the US, killed our soldiers in embassies and the USS Cole and then hit us on 9/11. Pride interferes with rational judgement every time.





[edit on 27-12-2007 by esdad71]

reply to post by johnlear


John, you mention in this post a "Direct Energy Weapon spacecraft that destroyed the World Trade Center."
I am wondering what you mean by this. I have a story about how I saw a fifty yard wide circle of grass go up in smoke, for no apparet reason. This was in Port Charlotte, Florida, just as the Sparten was being tested by an all military, secret Space Shutte mission. I went back to the spot and took pictures. Just wondering if this sounds like what you are talking about,or if you are interested in what I am talking about.

Please provide documentation of the furthest from a ground plane crash any debris has been found for any ground crashed commercial jetliner, not mid-air explosion of any commercial aircraft. There must be comparison of apples to apples, not apples to oranges or bananas, so to speak. Thank you in advance for providing any documentation you locate.

Plane parts are not rubber balls bouncing on the ground 1 or 2 or even 8 miles from the scene of any ground aircraft crash, much less the ground aircraft crash of a commercial jetliner.

Some of the illogical reports I have read took them out to the already impossible distance of 4 miles. Now it is being doubled, when it was not possible to reach even 4 miles?

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by IvanZana

 

You can find the list of bodies that were found on FLight 93 and the pictures if you use google and get past the first 14 pages of rhetoric and bull#.

There are pictures of bodies and remains from alleged Flight 93 on the Internet? Would you please substantiate to that effect? Your source did not provide any as you indicated would happen.

By telling people to engage in relying on hearsay (news articles, reports, eyewitness testimony, etc), rather than proved with physical evidence valid documentation, you are telling people to do what you previously told them not to do when you stated words to this effect - "Believe only half of what you see and nothing of what you hear."

If people can see physical proof, they are not relying on hearsay and nothing more. There is a significant difference in relying on what one is told is physical evidence people can see vs actual proved documented physical evidence people can see, coupled with written and photographic documentation. That means laboratory testing and validation by many scientists when necessary, including independent scientists for validation purposes.

We already have documented cases when only one scientist tested in labs, and innocent people ended up in prison for long periods of time. No reputable lab allows only one scientist to test anything, and leave it stand as is. Not even coroners versed in testing are normally allowed that liberty when evidence has to be presented in a court of law.

For instance, if I do not know any better, and someone shows me a plane part with lime-green primer, and I do not know Boeing has records no lime-green primer was used on a plane touted to be a 1991 Boeing 757, I probably would be inclined to accept at face value that part belonged to a 1991 Boeing 757.

However, if I know that no lime-green primer was used on any 1991 manufactured Boeing 757 per Boeing's own documented records, I will not be inclined to accept a particular piece of plane belonged on any alleged 1991 Boeing 757 per Boeing's own documented records. It would be self-evident that was a lie using planted parts from wrong year model. That was what happened at the Pentagon complete with photograpic image of lie screaming planted part.

To see the substantiation, one would have to buy, or check out from a libraray, Peter Tiradera's book. Copyright laws prohibit me from using photos belonging to anyone else, without the photographer's express written permission. The photo belongs to Dennis Ryan, military personnel, and Peter Tiradera had to receive Mr. Ryan's permission to use the photo in his book.

The same standards of forensic investigation, applying to the Pentagon, must be applied to all alleged planes touted by the "official" reports related to 9/11/2001. That would, of course, include Shanksville aircraft crash. What - proved by forensic evidence at Shanksville, PA - do people have at this point in time? Any? If so, please provide it. It cannot simply be metal touted as some plane part once attached to any Boeing 757, much less a specifically named Boeing 757. That is not proof of anything, except some what may be a metal plane part may have become detached from some plane or other.

Why do the debunkers come here to a conspiracy site?

What are they afraid of?

People learning the truth?

Sadly theres nothing you need to learn about flight 93, the pictures says it all.

There is nothing that can be shown that proves a boeing 757 crashed here
Why do these scared debunkers avoid this pic?

A: Because it shows that where the photographer is standing is the dent said to have been left by the wing yet it show no fire, dry old weatherd ground with no wing, no parts, no fuel, did i say no fire or parts or wings?



[edit on 27-12-2007 by IvanZana]

No, I am stating the sift through the nonsense. there is alot of it. Take some initiative and investigate and do not rely on the posts of others. It is very easy to find a story about remains that washed ashore in a lake after the crash but no one knows about it becuase it is not on the pro-right/pro-left sites since it fits no agenda. The truth is not as exciting as fiction and conspiracy theory.

body part on 9/11

Here are photos that show dead bodies from the Pentagon and WTC site. There were planes....The MOussaui trial ending allowed for more documentation to be released. You jsut have to look for it.

reply to post by IvanZana


That is a mighty short wing span indentation for a Boeing 757. If the wings were broken, and someone can show me valid proof of wings close to (500 yards - 8 miles away) that mighty short wing span indentation, I might be inclined to think maybe some plane did crash at that location. What plane can it forensically be proved to be?

[edit on 27-12-2007 by OrionStars]

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by IvanZana

 

That is a mighty short wing span indentation for a Boeing 757. If the wings were broken, and someone can show me valid proof of wings close to (500 yards - 8 miles away) that mighty short wing span indentation, I might be inclined to think maybe some plane did crash at that location. What plane can it forensically be proved to be?

[edit on 27-12-2007 by OrionStars]

(500 yards to 8 miles) should read (not 500 yards to 8 miles) instead. Edit feature is not allowing me to actually edit. This is the second recent post this has happened, but certainly not the only post it has happened in any discussion.

Originally posted by IvanZana
Why do the debunkers come here to a conspiracy site?

Well if all you ever did was convince people who don't think for themselves, that would make you like your idea of the government that you so seem to despise. We like to actually look at all the evidence, not just one picture. And other theories need evidence too. If no plane crashed at shanksville, where the hell did it go, and how many people would need to be 'in on it' to make that happen?

People learning the truth?

Yes the truth, with indisputable scientific/engineering proof, not a picture with a caption which says indisputable.

Sadly theres nothing you need to learn about flight 93, the pictures says it all.

What, we don't need to learn what actually happened to it, only what you say didn't happen to it?

A: Because it shows that where the photographer is standing is the dent said to have been left by the wing yet it show no fire, dry old weatherd ground with no wing, no parts, no fuel, did i say no fire or parts or wings?

Well, you can see parts, small ones, but parts nonetheless. Fuel, if it did not immediately burn the ground or immediate area, would be absorbed by the ground or evaporate. And what do you want? Whole wings or something? If there were whole wings that would definitely debunk the official story.

reply to post by esdad71


I, for one, have spent over 6+ years involved in forensic investigation. What has been your exact method of investigation into the events of 9/11/2001?

reply to post by esdad71


Remains washing ashore from a lake do not a positive DNA or dental ID make. Understanding DNA testing and dental record ID helps to understand exactly why that is.

Further understanding what lake water and carnivorous water critters do to any mammalian bodies staying in lake water, helps to understand how difficult positive ID can be in remains washed up on shore by lake water.

reply to post by esdad71


A question I did not ask in my last post. Exactly how did any bodies end up in any lake at what was supposed to be a specific ground site at alleged Shanksville, PA, stated to be be the crash site of alleged 9/11 Flight 93? I have yet to see any lake anywhere near what is alleged to be an aircraft crash. I saw a building close by but no lake.

reply to post by esdad71


I know there were bodies and remains definitely found in NYC. Those people worked in the buildings and had firemen entering as well. No one doubts there were people working in twins towers on 9/11.

However, if what are being asserted to be body parts in some of those photos, unrelated to NYC, the evidence would never hold up in court. There is no way any positive ID will be made from those - dental or DNA.
When soft tissue burns or decomposes, there is no DNA ID to be made.

I certainly would like to see the chromosome count on the one photo which looks to be muscle mass. I believe it was the first one.

reply to post by OrionStars



I don't think watching CSI counts for 6 years of forensics experience there bud. (sarcasm)

Fact is that there is information on the web, in books and microfilm that show that a plane crashed. Here is one simple question....


What caused the burnt area if not a plane? Lets look at this forensically. Step back and say, OK, if it was not a plane, what was it? I Have yet to read any claims as to what did it? What created the crater if not a plane???

[edit on 27-12-2007 by esdad71]

Originally posted by esdad71

What caused the burnt area if not a plane? Lets look at this forensically. Step back and say, OK, if it was not a plane, what was it? I Have yet to read any claims as to what did it? What created the crater if not a plane???

The burned spot in the crater was created by this simulated airplane crash explosion. The smoke should have been blacker if it had been jet fuel:

What does the above picture "prove?"

Originally posted by Nickdfresh

what does the above picture "prove?"

That it was explosives simulating a jet creash. If it were a jet crash the smoke would be black.

Thanks for the post.

reply to post by esdad71


I have never watched CSI. That take a lot of steam out of your sarcasm, doesn't it?

If all you need is hearsay and non-validated data, fine.

I need far more than that, particularly on a crime with the magnitude of 9/11.

Just checking. I was just wondering what "extraordinary claim" you're making that lacks 'extraordinary evidence...

Right-oh!

So, if the gov't was going to simulate the downing of an airliner, after blowing up two skyscrapers and crashing supposedly remote control airliners in them. They then went cheap, and decided to drop 2000lbs. bombs to "simulate" a crash scene?

Really? Makes perfect sense. I guess the on scene fire/search and rescue and locals that found body parts and debris where all in on this...

Which makes the number of people involved in this plot at how many?

This of course after black-clad commandos slaughtered all of the real passengers in Cleveland (based on a retracted media report made in the confusion of the day)...

How plausible!

[edit on 27/12/07 by Nickdfresh]