9/11 POLL : Do You Believe a Boeing 757 Crashed in Shanksville?

reply to post by weedwhacker

to suggest a UAV or cruise missile just shows a reach by the 'conspiracy' people,

These were her own words, and conclusion.

I thought you watched the video.

Is there any cont on poll, as of yet? I can tell at a glance that it's under control.

No.

reply to post by Point of No Return


THAT is my point!! (sheesh)...

...because she said it (and was she coached?? Who knows, not that it matters, but I really, really doubt she'd have any clue about 'cruise missiles' or 'UAVs' all by herself!!) She doesn't seem that well informed.

It just looks a lot like she has become the "Poster Child" for the 'truth movement'...and they cling to it (her) regardless of all other evidence.

Thought that is pretty obvious.....

reply to post by Point of No Return


Oh yeah, this is the woman, when her van is under attack she quick ducks and of course, like anyone else, turns off the radio!!!

C'mon, this video is the biggest piece of garbage. The shows her a picture of an A10 and then says "this ISN"T the plane you saw, is it?" Nothing leading about that.

Face it, you've presented nothing but a continous string of denial.

reply to post by Point of No Return


THIS is too disturbing, and chills me to hear it....but there is little wonder it was deleted from most ATC recordings made public (it WAS included on the written transcripts, but in black and white it doesn't carry the emotional weight...in context):

I don't believe a plane crashed in Shanksville. I know a plane crashed in Shanksville. United flight 93 to be more specific.

Because it did. And there is enough evidence for me to know this.

This nonsense no-planer crap never ceases to amaze me. A couple of photos and comments taken out of context, and that's supposed to be proof?

Funny. Really.

reply to post by weedwhacker

...because she said it (and was she coached?? Who knows, not that it matters,

Not that it matters, but we can say the OS eyewitness were “coached.”

I really, really doubt she'd have any clue about 'cruise missiles' or 'UAVs' all by herself!!)

I doubt any of the OS witness have a clue as well, yeah they couldn’t tell an airplane from a UAV or a cruise missile unless you paid them, right?

She doesn't seem that well informed.

We can say the OS witnesses are not well informed, how does that work for you?

It just looks a lot like she has become the "Poster Child" for the 'truth movement'...and they cling to it (her) regardless of all other evidence.

Thought that is pretty obvious.....

A Poster Child for the Truth movement, I love it! So, ridiculing this woman and denying her statements is actual proof that OS believers disregard everyones' statements that doesn’t stand up to the OS lies. Yeah that’s getting to the truth, lets all start denying everything, and make up insulting excuses that thier statements couldn’t be true, it’s easier that way, don’t yeah think?

I don't believe a plane crashed in Shanksville. I know a plane crashed in Shanksville. United flight 93 to be more specific.

Because it did. And there is enough evidence for me to know this.

Yes, the evidence is the government’s word. What more does anyone else need?
We know our government doesn’t tell lies they are saints, we can trust our government because, we know that our government could never be corrupt, so if they tell me a plane crashed I will believe them, if they showed me some photos taken from anywhere of this alleged crash site, I will believe my government. I will never question my government because question my government shows I am being unpatriotic

I am a servant to my government. My government is not the servants to the American people.

Never questioning my government actions, shows my loyalty to my government.

If people really believe what I just wrote and are Americans, living in America, Perhaps they do not know what it is to be a “true patriot.” Do people really believe we are not to question our government when evidences prove they are lying and hiding the real evidence to 911? I don’t know what country some of you live in, but I am an American and my government works for me the “voters” not the special interest groups, not the oil companies, not the Federal Reserve and not Wall street.
If I feel my government is lying to me, I want to know why? I have every right to question my government. I live in this country America, not Russia, China, or North Korea.

For some of you OS believers in case you didn’t know it, our government does not really work for the American people any longer and that is a proven fact. Greed has taken its toll, its all down hill from here anyway. Why I say this, because the American people are not seeing accountability in our government, military, and corporations for their corruptions.

So continue on supporting the OS, soon you wont have the freedom to even voice your opinions if thing continue on the same path that we are currently on. I believe this is something that we all can agree on.

reply to post by hooper

Face it, you've presented nothing but a continous string of denial.

Whatever, first you guys say there is no evidence for the no plane theory, then I post video evidence of an eye-witness and you start attcking the witness.

I think I've shown that the statements made by the mayor were not taken out of context, and that he changed his story later on.

This is all evidence, you are the one that's denying it.

C'mon, this video is the biggest piece of garbage. The shows her a picture of an A10 and then says "this ISN"T the plane you saw, is it?" Nothing leading about that.

Ehm, the American Free press claimed she identified the plane as an A10 warthog, that is why the question was asked. She clearly confirms they misrepresented her, just goes to show that "official" sources, you know, the ones you use, are spreading disinfo.

Once again, your comment is way off, because you misrepresent the video evidence.

And so your streak of invalid posts continues, no end in sight.








[edit on 2-6-2010 by Point of No Return]

reply to post by weedwhacker

...because she said it (and was she coached?? Who knows, not that it matters, but I really, really doubt she'd have any clue about 'cruise missiles' or 'UAVs' all by herself!!) She doesn't seem that well informed.

Why would she be coached?

You guys just can't seem to grasp that if the conspiracy is true, the OS witnesses are the ones that are possibly "coached" or pressured or paid, what does anyone have to gain by pressuring people into testifying against the OS?

What does this woman has to gain by putting herself out there? Nothing.

What does the gov. have to gain by keeping the truth a secret? Everything.

but I really, really doubt she'd have any clue about 'cruise missiles' or 'UAVs' all by herself!!) She doesn't seem that well informed.

This woman obviously did her research after her experience. She also said she and her husband, went back and took measurements on the place the craft passed her, and they found it was much too small to be anything else but an UAV or missile type craft.

You don't seem to be well informed, actually.

reply to post by impressme

If I feel my government is lying to me, I want to know why?

The problem is, you feel that your government and all its employees (your fellow citizens) are ALWAYS lying to you. That is not rational. That is not healthy. You assume everything you hear that may or may not originate from the government is a lie until fully rebutted. This is a formula for disaster.

reply to post by impressme


Uhh, we have alot more than just the "government's word" that fliight 93 crashed in Shanksville. Radar data, telephone calls, eyewitness accounts, wreckage from the site recovered and used as evidence, rescuer reports, reports from the public at different locations of seeing the plane, as well as picking up plane debris.

If you can't accept that, then, well, that's your problem, not mine. I am not so paranoid that I reject every single piece of evidence on the grounds that it comes from "mainstream" sources.

Mouthing off tired diatribes used by every conspiracy theorist and anti-government enthusiast does not a case make. Nor does making mountains out of molehills and "proof" out of evidence out of context.

But, it's your delusion, you are welcome to it if you wish. It's still a free country, last time I checked.

Yes it did crash there.

A friend of mine has grandparents who live nearby. The grandfather served in World War Two in the US Air Force and so saw a lot of plane crashes in his life. He states that the crash site in no way ressembles the crash site of any plane either shot up or crashing whole that he had seen.

An interesting point that I note is that the South Tower fell seconds after a NYFD firefighter reached the impact zone and reported that the fire could be easily contained, even though he should not normally have been able to reach that high up in that time frame.. Likewise, Flight 93 fillght recorder records some form of major impact seconds after the passengers overran the cockpit.

In the history of aviation, there is no incidence of passengers and crew overrunning hijackers until Flight 93.

>>>No-one considers the possibility that the 9/11 plotters plan went wrong, that no-one was expecting the passengers and crew to overrun the cockpit.

WHat I suspect as having happened is this:-
- FLight 93 was set up to be substituted.
- Before it could be substituted, the passengers did actually overrun the cockpit.
- The South Tower was prematurely blown up to to fell it becuase the Firemen had reached the seat of the blaze.
- Likewise, Flight 93 was blown to pieces BECAUSE the passengers had unexpectedly overrun the cockpit by a missile attack.
- Flight 93 was in absolute fragments when it hit the ground in Shanksville.

Hello everyone! I am a regular contributor to 911blogger.com and a few other sites but this is my first post here.

Is the community here familiar with the work of Domenick DiMaggio? He took the time to find, contact, interview and analyze numerous eyewitness accounts in Shanksville and there are a lot of testimonies that contradict the official account.

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 2-6-2010 by Adam Syed]

[edit on 2-6-2010 by Adam Syed]

reply to post by hooper

The problem is, you feel that your government and all its employees (your fellow citizens) are ALWAYS lying to you.

That is untrue, that is your interpretation of the Truth movement. The fact is you do not know how I think, or what I believe in.
Your comment about me are illogical.

That is not rational

I agree, however, I never made any such silly claim as you just did.

That is not healthy.

I agree, but it is you that made this fraudulent claim, correct?

You assume everything you hear that may or may not originate from the government is a lie until fully rebutted. This is a formula for disaster.

You do not know what I “[color=gold]assume” and your statement is untrue. You appeal to me on an emotional level which tells me you are lacking knowledge on this topic.

[edit on 2-6-2010 by impressme]

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Uhh, we have alot more than just the "government's word" that fliight 93 crashed in Shanksville. Radar data, telephone calls, eyewitness accounts, wreckage from the site recovered and used as evidence, rescuer reports, reports from the public at different locations of seeing the plane, as well as picking up plane debris.

Yeah, here’s your Radar data and your plane wreckage.

[color=gold]United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash - According To ATC/Radar
04/28/09 (PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Recently it has been brought to our attention that Air Traffic Control (ATC) transcripts reveal [color=gold]United 93 as being airborne after it's alleged crash. Similar scenarios have been offered with regard to American 77 and American 11 showing an aircraft target continuing past its alleged crash point in the case of American 11, or past the turn-around point in the case of American 77. However, both these issues can be easily explained by "Coast Mode" radar tracking. This is not the case with United 93.
Full Article Here

pilotsfor911truth.org...

[color=gold]F.B.I. Counsel: No Attempt Made By F.B.I. To Formally Identify 9/11 Plane Wreckage

Federal Defendant has determined that there are no responsive records. The identities of the airplanes hijacked in the September 11 attacks was never in question, and, therefore, there were no records generated "revealing the process by which wreckage recovered by defendant, from aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, was positively identified by defendant . . . as belonging to said aircraft . . .

pilotsfor911truth.org...



Here are two credible sources that provide evidence proving your opinions are wrong, just like the OS that you defend so dearly.

So far, you have offered only your opinions. You have not provided even one link to a credible source backing up your opinions.

Just because some do not subscribe to your beliefs, it does not make them paranoid or delusional.

If you can't accept that, then, well, that's your problem, not mine. I am not so paranoid that I reject every single piece of evidence on the grounds that it comes from "mainstream" sources.

Well it’s a fact, that our televisions are used as propaganda tools for our government and military that includes or media, or are you going to deny that to?

Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand

In turn, members of this group have echoed administration talking points, sometimes even when they suspected the information was false or inflated. Some analysts acknowledge they suppressed doubts because they feared jeopardizing their access.
A few expressed regret for participating in what they regarded as an effort to dupe the American public with propaganda dressed as independent military analysis.
“It was them saying, ‘We need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you,’ ” Robert S. Bevelacqua, a retired Green Beret and former Fox News analyst, said.
Kenneth Allard, a former NBC military analyst who has taught information warfare at the National Defense University, said the campaign amounted to a sophisticated information operation. “This was a coherent, active policy,” he said.
As conditions in Iraq deteriorated, Mr. Allard recalled, he saw a yawning gap between what analysts were told in private briefings and what subsequent inquiries and books later revealed.

www.nytimes.com...

Mouthing off tired diatribes used by every conspiracy theorist and anti-government enthusiast does not a case make. Nor does making mountains out of molehills and "proof" out of evidence out of context.

Diatribes?

It sounds to me like you need a dictionary. Your post fits the above description perfectly, only from the OS believers’ side. Your sarcastic remarks only work against you and lessen whatever weight your opinions might carry.

reply to post by impressme


Pilots for 9/11 truth? THAT'S your "credible source"? With no independant/non-conspiracy related cooborations, or physical evidece? Srsly?

That transponder conversation is proof....of what? The only thing I see in that whole thing was that there was a time discrepency between the offical crash time of 10:03 and 10:06. Which is a commonly argued point, because there is evidence that it crashed later.

There were also reports of another aircraft in the area, presumably some private small plane.

Just like the claims of "no plane at the Pentagon" fall apart with even a superficial glance, the no-plane at Shanksville does equally so. I shall take eyewitness reports and individual testimonies, physical evidence and common sense over "goof sites" of questionable credibility.

And to avoid looking like an ass further down the road, I would suggest you avoid tossing about definitive labels, such as "official story believer". I don't believe the OS fully. But neither do I attend the kool-aid parties popular amongst the whole "truth movement". I believe flight 93 crashed in Shanksville. I also believe there is a possibility it was shot down, perhaps by the Air Force.

Diatribe. That is exactly what your last post was. All emotional sarcastic bluster, with no hard analysis or facts to back it up. Just knee-jerking because someone does not sip from the same punchbowl you do.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Part of it did. But the Shanksville site was the most difficult debris site to control/conceal due to it's proximity to local residents homes, local roads and the fire department down the road from it. The media was led to think that it was the prime crash site. But those of us who know...know it was not the primary site. You people need to wake up from this no plane BS and begin to do some deeper searching if your gonna learn anything.

[edit on 6/3/2010 by mikelee]

reply to post by impressme

That is untrue, that is your interpretation of the Truth movement. The fact is you do not know how I think, or what I believe in.
Your comment about me are illogical.

Actually, after you have made close to 5000 posts on this forum, either I do have a pretty good idea how you think, or you are purposely misleading. I don't think there is much doubt that you uniformly dismiss all information, data, testimony, reports, or reference if you construe the source or even the primary conduit to be any part or representative of any branch or level of government in the United States of America.