It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


20 9/11 Questions Remain Unanswered over 8 Years Later

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+34 more 
posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:00 PM
Here are 20 questions regarding what happened on 9/11 that remain unanswered to this day.

Let me stress that personal speculation regarding any of these questions is not going to settle any of them definitely, so they will continue to be unanswered until addressed by proper investigation.

1) What was the order that Dick Cheney had given while he knew that Flight 77 was approaching Washington DC?

The testimony is that an aid kept asking Cheney, "Does the order still stand, sir?" as they were monitoring Flight 77 incoming. And Cheney's response was always 'yes'.

2) Why was the Flight 93 crash site spread out over 8 miles?

The Pennsylvania state police said debris from the crash has shown up about 8 miles away in a residential area where local media quoted some residents as seeing flaming debris from the sky.

But investigators were unwilling to say whether the presence of debris in two separate places evinced an explosion.

Finding the flight data recorder had been the focus of investigators as they widened their search area today following the discoveries of more debris, including what appeared to be human remains, miles from the point of impact at a reclaimed coal mine.

3) Why did witnesses report hearing military jets in the area of the Flight 93 crash?

But press the mayor for details, and he will add something surprising. "I know of two people -- I will not mention names -- that heard a missile," Stuhl said. "They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards. . .This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day." The mayor adds that based on what he knows about that morning, military F-16 fighter jets were "very, very close." 3

Laura Temyer, who lives several miles north of the crash site in Hooversville, was hanging some clothes outside that morning when she heard an airplane pass overhead. That struck her as unusual since she'd just heard on TV that all flights were grounded.

"I heard like a boom and the engine sounded funny," she told the Daily News. "I heard two more booms -- and then I did not hear anything."

What does Temyer think she heard? "I think the plane was shot down," insists Temyer, who said she has twice told her story to the FBI. What's more, she insists that people she knows in state law enforcement have told her the same thing, that the plane was shot down and that decompression sucked objects from the aircraft, explaining why there was a wide debris field. 4 -- cache of original article

Also, according to sources, the last seconds of the cockpit voice recorder are the loud sounds of wind, hinting at a possible hole somewhere in the fuselage. What caused the smoke and explosion? Why the wind sounds? 9 -- cache of original article

UA93 was identified as a hijack at 9.16am. At 9.35am three F-16s were ordered to "protect the White House at all costs" when it turned towards the capital. At 10.06am it crashed at Shanksville, less than 10mins flying time from Washington

4) For what reason are Pentagon surveillance tapes showing the impact of Flight 77 still being withheld?

This one explains itself. What are we going to see that keep the tapes out of public view? Anything? There is still no answer, 8 years later.

5) Why couldn't Osama bin Laden seem to get his story straight about whether or not he had anything to do with 9/11?

Messages issued by bin Laden after September 11, 2001 praised the attacks, and explained their motivation while at first denying any involvement.[58] On September 16, 2001, an Al Jazeera news presenter read a message purportedly signed by Osama bin Laden, in which the following words were stated:

I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation.[59][60][61]

In an interview with Osama bin Laden, published in the Pakistani newspaper Ummat Karachi on September 28, 2001, he stated: "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act."[62] There was reportedly no way to prove the e-mail published in Pakistan came from bin Laden. The Taliban denied he had access to any communications.[63][64]

In late October 2001, Al Jazeera journalist Tayseer Allouni conducted an interview with Osama bin Laden which was videotaped. Al-Jazeera refused to broadcast it[65] and terminated its affiliation agreement with CNN[66] due to CNN's broadcasting of the interview on January 31, 2002.[67] In the interview, bin Laden addressed the September 11 attacks, saying

If inciting people to do that is terrorism, and if killing those who kill our sons is terrorism, then let history be witness that we are terrorists ... We will work to continue this battle, God permitting, until victory or until we meet God before that occurs.[68]

The source is Wikipedia, but only because Wikipedia itself links to a number of different sources for verification.

The video tape where OBL allegedly admits to 9/11 was allegedly discovered by a soldier in the basement of a home in an Afghanistan town after it was bombed by US forces.

6) What allowed WTC7 to accelerate vertically at the rate of free-fall in a vacuum?

The relevant information in the video above starts at 2:00, and again at 5:45.

Note: A basic understanding of physics is assumed, ie knowing the technical definitions of "speed," "acceleration," how those things are conventionally measured, etc. Seriously, these things need to understood beforehand. I personally am an electronics engineering student and not only have had basic physics recently but have had to demonstrate my competency in it over and over on weekly tests and laboratory reports where we measure and verify these laws directly. NIST admits that at least 2.5 seconds of the drop was exactly at the rate of gravity, not even including air resistance.

Dr. Shyam Sunder replies:

"Could you repeat the question?"

[the question is repeated by the moderator, leaving out the word, "competent" as well as the last sentence]

" of all is the loading function that applies to the every body...every...uh...on...all bodies this particular...on this planet not ground analysis shows a difference in time between a free fall time, a free fall time would be an object that has no...uh... structural components below it. And if you look at the analysis of the video it shows that the time it takes for the...17...uh...for the roof line of the video to collapse down the 17 floors that you can actually see in the video below which you can't see anything in the video is about...uh... 3.9 seconds. What the analysis shows...and...uh...the structural analysis shows, the collapse analysis shows that same time that it took for the structural model to come down from the roof line all the way for those 17 floors to disappear 5.4 seconds. It's...uh..., about one point...uh...five seconds or roughly 40% more time for that free fall to happen. And that is not at all unusual because there was structural resistance that was provided in this particular case. And you had a sequence of structural failures that had to take place and everything was not instantaneous."

Note that:
--He acknowledges that freefall can only occur if there is no structure under the falling section of the building.
--He acknowledges that their structural modeling predicts a fall slower than freefall.
--He acknowledges that there was structural resistance in this particular case.
--He acknowledges that there was a sequence of failures that had to take place and that this process was not instantaneous.

Thus, he acknowledges that their model is at variance with the observable fact that freefall actually occurred. Their response is to hold to their model, deny that freefall occurred, and put up a smokescreen of irrelevant measurements that obscure the reality.

7) What was the Israeli intelligence connection to 9/11 that remains classified?

Google Video Link

This is from a Fox News series that was aired immediately after 9/11.

"Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It is classified information."


"According to a U.S. intelligence agency, the government of country A (Israel) conducts the most aggressive espionage operation against the U.S. of any U.S. ally."

"The Israelis are motivated by strong survival instincts which dictate every facet or their political and economic policies... It aggressively collects military and industrial technology and the U.S. is high priority target."

"Israel possesses the resources and technical capability to achieve its collection objectives."

Note that evidence is classified. Which suggests, yes, there is evidence tying Israeli intelligence to 9/11 in some way.

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:04 PM
reply to post by bsbray11

Or more accurately, why are the answers still ignored?

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:12 PM
8) How was an explosive fireball supposed to have traveled down about 1000 feet of drywall elevator shafts to cause major explosions in the basement and lobby, and where is evidence to support this rumor?

The evidence of explosions and destruction in the basements and lobby of WTC1 is well-documented. Anyone interested may simply ask and I will provide plenty of sources for this information. One common rumor is that these explosions were caused by either (a) descending elevator cars, or (b) a descending fireball, apparently with enormous destructive power. Note that the fireballs at the impact levels were deflagrations, much slower than true explosions to begin with. Only two elevators ran all the way from the impact floors to the lobby/basements. One of those cars was the main freight elevator, whose operator, Arturo Griffin, survived with a broken leg after his elevator's brakes caught. The only other elevator extending this distance was car 6. Also of note is NYPD officer William Walsh's testimony that it was the lower-level servicing elevators, including basement-servicing elevators in the lobby, that were blown out of their hinges upon his arrival to the lobby of WTC1, not upper-level servicing elevators.

[Lt. Walsh:] What I observed as I was going through these doors and I got into the lobby of the World Trade Center was that the lobby of the Trade Center didn't appear as though it had any lights.

All of the glass on the first floor that abuts West Street was blown out. The glass in the revolving doors was blown out. All of the glass in the lobby was blown out.

The wall panels on the wall are made of marble. It's about two or three inches thick.
They're about ten feet high by ten feet wide. A lot of those were hanging off the wall.

[B.C. Congiusta:] Wait a second.

[Walsh:] What else I observed in the lobby was that -- there's basically two areas of elevators. There's elevators off to the left-hand side which are really the express elevators. That would be the elevators that's facing north. Then on the right-hand side there's also elevators that are express elevators, and that would be facing south. In the center of these two elevator shafts would be elevators that go to the lower floors. They were blown off the hinges. That's where the service elevator was also.

[B.C. Congiusta:] Were these elevators that went to the upper floors? They weren't side lobby elevators?

[Walsh:] No, no, I'd say that they went through floors 30 and below.

[B.C. Congiusta:] And they were blown off?

[Walsh:] They were blown off the hinges, and you could see the shafts. The elevators on the extreme north side and the other express elevator on the extreme south side, they looked intact to me from what I could see, the doors anyway.

9) Why did basement levels fill with smoke, and why did underground PATH subway cars also fill with smoke, and why were witnesses confused into thinking explosions were coming from under the towers?

The very first testimony in the following video, from a major news media reporter, is of the underground subway station filling with smoke, including the cars:

The following testimonies are also relating to explosions coming from the subway. One witness says she "literally thought the subway had exploded."

The following diagram illustrates where the PATH subway ran:

10) By what processes did a mass of concrete, steel, paper, and other debris come together in a single chunk known as the "meteorite"?

Little can be said about this anomalous piece of debris except that it would obviously require immense heat and pressure to form at the very least. Any further chemical analysis, or any study whatsoever on this piece of debris has not been carried out, which could shed further light on the destruction of the WTC Towers.

11) Why did police say that a van with a plane "diving into New York City and exploding" exploded over their radio transmissions?

Two men got out of the truck and ran away from it, according to an officer over radio, and the van subsequently exploded.

The following video features the police radio communication:

[edit on 23-10-2009 by bsbray11]

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:27 PM
I wish the game were called 21 Questions (or even a bigger number). You could include a question wondering how President Bush managed to see the impact on the North Tower on television a day before the rest of the world saw it.

Note: This is no mere slip of the banana peel the ex-president used for a tongue. This is a whole anecdote.

Memo to bsbray11: Apologies. I jumped the gun with my post. If this shows up as one of your 20, I'll delete it. I thought . . . forget it. I wasn't thinking.

[edit on 23-10-2009 by ipsedixit]

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:29 PM
12) What is the compound found in WTC dust that exhibits energetic combustion properties?

Berkeley, CA, April 3, 2009 -- A new study by independent scientists and researchers suggests the cause behind the catastrophic destruction of World Trade Center Towers on September 11th can be seen in the dust itself: active thermitic material, a highly engineered explosive.

The study, published today in The Open Chemical Physics Journal, describes a finding of "red/gray bi-layered chips" in samples of dust taken from vicinity of the World Trade Center following its destruction. Using tools such as a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and x-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS) to analyze the material, the study authors concluded that, "the red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic."

The conclusions of this recent study are disputed, but the material itself remains to be positively identified.

13) What was the source of the eutectic compound and sulfur in the extreme corrosion analyzed by FEMA?

A chemical analysis of extreme corrosion on several pieces of debris found in appendix C of the FEMA report reveals that a eutectic reaction, aided by sulfidation, penetrated grain boundaries of the steel, lowering it's melting point considerably and melting it. The source of the eutectic compound, and as well as the sulfur, remains unknown, though it IS known that eutectic compounds must meet specific ratios and be of certain particle sizes to initiate at all.

14) What was the source of the molten metal seen pouring out of WTC2 shortly before it collapsed?

Previously the metal had been incorrectly identified as molten aluminum, which is actually silvery in open air. The metal appears to either be a form of steel, iron, or possibly other metals such as lead which emit light similarly upon heating to such temperatures as to melt it. The material features an uncanny resemblance to eutectic reactions.

[edit on 23-10-2009 by bsbray11]

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:37 PM
15) On what 'state secrets' grounds was Sibel Edmonds' FBI whistleblower case barred from court by John Ashcroft?

Sibel Edmonds has a story to tell. She went to work as a Turkish and Farsi translator for the FBI five days after 9/11. Part of her job was to translate and transcribe recordings of conversations between suspected Turkish intelligence agents and their American contacts. She was fired from the FBI in April 2002 after she raised concerns that one of the translators in her section was a member of a Turkish organization that was under investigation for bribing senior government officials and members of Congress, drug trafficking, illegal weapons sales, money laundering, and nuclear proliferation. She appealed her termination, but was more alarmed that no effort was being made to address the corruption that she had been monitoring.

A Department of Justice inspector general’s report called Edmonds’s allegations “credible,” “serious,” and “warrant[ing] a thorough and careful review by the FBI.” Ranking Senate Judiciary Committee members Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) have backed her publicly. “60 Minutes” launched an investigation of her claims and found them believable. No one has ever disproved any of Edmonds’s revelations, which she says can be verified by FBI investigative files.

John Ashcroft’s Justice Department confirmed Edmonds’s veracity in a backhanded way by twice invoking the dubious State Secrets Privilege so she could not tell what she knows. The ACLU has called her “the most gagged person in the history of the United States of America.”


16) Why are there such large discrepancies in plane impact times from different government sources?

On 9/11 the seismic stations grouped around New York City recorded seismic events from the WTC site, two of which occurred immediately prior to the aircraft impacts upon the Twin Towers. Because these seismic events preceded the collisions, it is clear they were not associated with the impacts and must therefore be associated with some other occurrence. None of the authorities charged with the responsibility for the investigation of the events of 9/11 have proposed a source for these seismic events, nor have they given a valid reason for the difference in times between the seismic events and the aircraft impacts. Only by consideration of the evidence of basement explosions before the aircraft impacts, as experienced by William Rodriquez and 36 others, can an explanation be found for the fact that the seismic stations recorded seismic events originating from the WTC sites prior to the aircraft impacts. It seems unlikely that Middle Eastern terrorists could have overcome the WTC security and managed this kind of high level technological coordination. The facts presented here, simple and few, raise the possibility of inside help and involvement in 9/11/01, both before and after the attack.

The paper studying the discrepancies in these times notes the following:

Here are the discrepancies in the impact times:

Table 4
AA Flt 11
2001 LDEO 8:46:26 Original seismic
2005 LDEO 8:46:29 Revised per NIST contract
2004 NIST 8:46:30 Artificial
2001 FAA 8:46:35 Rejected by Commission
2004 Commission 8:46:40
2002 NTSB 8:46:40

UA Flt 175
2002 NTSB 9:02:40 Rejected by Commission
2001 LDEO 9:02:54 Original seismic
2005 LDEO 9:02:57 Revised per NIST contract
2004 NIST 9:02:59 Adjusted per TV
2004 Commission 9:03:11
2001 FAA 9:03:14 Rejected by Commission
NIST sponsored revised seismic times added.

17) What was the "global collapse" mechanism of the Twin Towers?

It's well-known that NIST's final report on the Twin Tower collapses only studied an initiation state/mechanism, ie a point and mechanism from which a global collapse could possibly begin. No analysis performed by NIST or any other investigative body has ever settled upon a mechanism or theory as to how the entire building was able to progress in its collapse all the way to the ground.

Prior to the NIST report, a common and popular theory was known as "pancake theory," which explained that each floor's set of trusses came loose together and fell down upon the next floor of trusses, which then broke away and did the same, started a vertical domino-like reaction. However, NIST found technical reasons to disagree with this theory and were forced to discredit it in the course of their report. Since that time, no other theory has been set forth to explain the global collapses, and NIST simply asserted that total collapse to the ground was "inevitable" once a tipping point was reached, without providing a mechanism as to how this would have been possible in such a way as observed.

[edit on 23-10-2009 by bsbray11]

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:54 PM
18) What was the full nature of the military wargames on 9/11?

It is known that a variety of wargames and other federal exercises were underway on the morning of 9/11, including wargames that interfered with FAA/NORAD RADAR and that simulated hijackings, and also in the case of the National Reconnaissance Office near Washington DC, a plane flying into their HQ building. There was also a FEMA bio-terror exercise scheduled for Sept. 12 that had FEMA setting up a command post on the evening of September 10th in Manhattan. However, the full nature and number of these military exercises has never been released to the public.

Various information regarding these wargames and exercises can be found here:

19) Why was the White House initially unwilling to authorize a commission to investigate 9/11?

Here is documentation of various examples of White House officials not cooperating with the investigation into 9/11:

20) Why was the structural documentation of the WTC Towers locked up after 9/11, and why has it still not been released except in bits and pieces by NIST?

Another self-explanatory question...

And yes, there are many more questions I could post. I mainly just wanted to remind everyone that these kinds of questions still exist, 8 years later, totally unaddressed and ignored.

Why are they ignored?

That is the question, isn't it? For an event of the magnitude of 9/11, with so much foreign policy revolving around it, as well as domestic security changes, one would think there should no longer be any mystery surrounding the date, but then one would be mistaken.

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:59 PM

Originally posted by ipsedixit
I wish the game were called 21 Questions (or even a bigger number). You could include a question wondering how President Bush managed to see the impact on the North Tower on television a day before the rest of the world saw it.

No, you didn't jump the gun, because I didn't include that one.

I personally have many more questions than I even posted, but I thought 20 was a nice round number...

I would love to see others' questions in addition to these 20. For a lot of them, even though they really are unanswered, I know many people THINK they already know the answers so confidently, that they have no interest in even pursuing for a definitive answer. These kinds of presuming, self-assured people are the biggest obstacle to uncovering objective information that we currently lack. They would just as soon go off of personal feelings or opinions based on what they have already been led to believe. For example, I know what Larry meant when he said they were going to "pull" the building, but you know how his words are picked apart and construed to mean so many different things by so many different people. So I let those issues go, they are not critical. They are just more circumstantial evidence to me.

But these 20, I think, are generally more important and totally unexplainable, at least in any definitive sense, without a real investigation.

[edit on 23-10-2009 by bsbray11]

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 05:05 PM
Whoa.....excellent job putting out the major flaws in the 9/11 commission report. I'm gonna email everyone a link to this and I would recommend everyone else do the same. This does make it easy to see the full extent of the manipulation of data and suppression of evidence.
Do you live in the town of blue ridge or just the mountains? I'm originally from Amherst county myself and I miss the blue ridge so. thanks again, great work!

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 05:34 PM
its kinda outrageous isn't it..


Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 10/23/2009 by semperfortis]

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 05:41 PM
reply to post by Asktheanimals

Thank you. I actually live in Botetourt county in the suburbs surrounding Roanoke, amongst the mountains. There is a "Blue Ridge" residential district here in Botetourt, only about 5 minutes from my house, but there are probably a few areas around here named "Blue Ridge." Anyway it's good to see another (former?) fellow Virginian around, and not even from the DC area!
Amherst is about as beautiful as Virginia gets, or anywhere within these mountains really.

[edit on 23-10-2009 by bsbray11]

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 05:58 PM
I thought this was a well put together list. It's nice to see legitimate questions that do not concern holograms, space lasers, etc...

The majority of these are questions that really shouldn't even have to be asked, and the fact that they do should speak for itself.

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 08:28 PM
Ummm. all these questions have been answered. May times over. Ad nauseum. Years ago.

Yet some people still think that if they ask the same answered questions over and over again, ignoring the actual answers that have been given, they may one day get an answer they like. But I guess the actual answers arent good enough? Why is that?

+2 more 
posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 09:12 PM

Originally posted by GenRadek
Ummm. all these questions have been answered. May times over. Ad nauseum. Years ago.

Yeah, ok. I've been here the whole time and.... nope. Sorry.

In case you didn't notice, I put a little note at the start of the thread saying personal conjecture does not replace actual investigation.

So what did investigations reveal about the exploding van that was mentioned over police radio? Got some page numbers from the Kean Commission report? Remember I am saying investigations, not "What can GenRadek think of to cover his ass on this one?" There is a pretty damned big difference. Namely, what this thread is about.

Btw congratulations on being the first "debunker" to post.

But again, not interested in your conjecture or sob story about "twoofers."

[edit on 23-10-2009 by bsbray11]

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 09:27 PM
reply to post by GenRadek

Ummm. all these questions have been answered. May times over. Ad nauseum. Years ago.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
A typical move by a disinformationist and here is your proof.

Yet some people still think that if they ask the same answered questions over and over again, ignoring the actual answers that have been given, they may one day get an answer they like. But I guess the actual answers arent good enough? Why is that?

Since all these questions have already been answered how about posting them for all to see? I am sure you have all of them right on your desktop just copy and past them in this thread.

Oh, that’s right you cant!

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 09:49 PM

Originally posted by impressme
Since all these questions have already been answered how about posting them for all to see? I am sure you have all of them right on your desktop just copy and past them in this thread.

Haha, that's what I am waiting for, too.

But then, people like GenRadek know that's what we're waiting for.

They know just as well as the rest of us that these questions really do not have any good answer to this day.

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 10:50 PM
In response to GenRadeK's statement, they have been answered. But not in the official manner I believe the TO is referring to.

For instance, I'll answer all the questions I can with with "answers" I have heard on them.

I'm not saying I do/do not support any of the answers, just providing rebuttals that I have heard on them. I can't be sure if any are "official" explanations, or just random opinions.

1. To stand down.

2. Because of the trajectory of the plane along with the force of the impact. Plus winds.

3. They heard either the Lear jet that was in the area, flight 93, noise caused by the crash, or were confused.

4. National security.

5. Of course he's gonna lie. He's a terrorist!

6. I either haven't heard anything in regards to this question or cannot recall it off the top of my head.

7. There was no connection. Anything else falls under #4.

8. See #6

9. See #6

10. Due to the force, impact, and friction of the collapse. Not to mention the heat already present by the fires.

11. See #6. I've honestly never heard that particular report. Although I have heard similar from the task force interviews.

12. See #6

13. See #6

14. Aluminum from the plane, other metals from the plane and towers. Batteries from one of the offices in the area.

15. See #4

16. See #6.

17. I think originally it was the "pancake theory" but I believe they have since shyed away from that opinion. See #6.

18. To the best of my knowledge I think the only games been officially recognized as taking place was TRIPOD involving FEMA. See #6.

19. See #6.

20. I'm not sure what you mean by this question. I have a zip of the WTC blueprints and other plans. Otherwise, see #6.

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 10:56 PM
Excellent thread. Put together in an easy and concise way so as not to be a turn off to read. You did really well with this bsbray11

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 11:04 PM
reply to post by ThaLoccster

Yes, those are the usual excuses, I have heard them before, too. But of course we realize they're a far cry from real closure. Absolutely no different than conspiracy speculation, so why anyone expects those kinds of responses to be taken seriously is beyond me.

Originally posted by ThaLoccster
20. I'm not sure what you mean by this question. I have a zip of the WTC blueprints and other plans. Otherwise, see #6.

I remember when those came out. I was actually a member of the 'Scholars for 9/11 Truth' forum as a student member and there was a lot of fuss about it. "Someone" emailed Steven Jones the files but no one was sure where they really came from, and they appeared to have been architectural drawings. There are also old architectural drawings available from before construction was actually began if I recall. The structural documentation would have had more relevant information on it, equivalent to an SE's schematic of the building. From what I have read, the PA was very tight about the structural documentation throughout the buildings' histories. I know they also spent about 6 months revising and editing the architectural plans handed over by the original architects.

Btw -- does anyone know why some of the BB code works but not all of it? I used the exact same code -- just copied and pasted and changed the inner text. But some of it works and some doesn't. I've had this problem on ATS before and assume it's some kind of glitch.

[edit on 23-10-2009 by bsbray11]

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 11:10 PM

Originally posted by bsbray11
2) Why was the Flight 93 crash site spread out over 8 miles?

If you are suggesting a shootdown and that happened, the plane did not crash in that Shanks field. The plane would have crashed near the end of the 8 mile debris field around New Baltimore and that means the Shanks scene had to have been a pre-planned staged scene which means the shootdown was also pre-planned before 9/11.

3) Why did witnesses report hearing military jets in the area of the Flight 93 crash?

Three high school students said a "fighter" flew over their heads seconds after hearing the explosion at the Shanks field which is constituent with the theory that an aircraft, perhaps the one Lee Purbagh witnessed not flying upside down only about 50 feet over his head, dropped some kind of bomb and shot some kind of missile on top a pre-existing drainage ditch in the field that looked like the "wing scar"-looking ditch in that 1994 aerial photo.

[edit on 23-10-2009 by ATH911]

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in