http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2693588?pg=latest&htv=12My Webpage


As well as the pentagon....small hole...no body...and no parts(not 757 twin engines anyway) Remember, we are led to believe that the plane "vaporised" when it hit all that concrete, but yet they identified ALL the bodies....call me crazy but I smell fraud.

They recovered over 600 pounds of human remains from the area of the crash site. If you read ALL of the shanksville coroner's comments instead of just the part where he says "I stopped being coroner after 20 minutes" you'll see that.

I am a 9/11 truther, I believe the government is complicit in the attacks... but i don;t believe we're going to get any closer to the truth by distorting the facts. And during the moussaoui trial, there were photos of victims in the pentagon released, photos i doubt i can link you to due to the kindergarten administration attitude typical of any forum.

The mods have their reasons for not allowing links, but I don't think they would have a problem with you PM'ing the site to Cat.

I am with dmgspycat. This does smell like fraud. 9/11 was planned with the US government knowing it, and were involved with it. The whole attack that day was a fraud. I am not here to start issues that have already been pursued but I will agree that flight 93 most likely did not crash. There is even evidence that another airport in Cleveland identified a plane that landed that day was Flight 93. This whole thing is crooked and hopefully one day people will know the truth, becuase no one is certain.
_Brint_

What that means is that the plane was shot down!

If the plane had crashed with those people onboard, both the bodies and wreckage would have been found radiating from the hole in the ground where the INTACT plane would have hit, and you would find large debris such as engines, fuselage, tail, just like with every other plane wreck that ever occured, except for this one and the Pentagon.

Physics and chemistry laws dictates that the kinetic energy released from a 600 MPH crash of a mass of a passenger plan, is a TINY TINY TINY TINY TINY TINY TINY FRACTION of the energy needed to break EVERY SINGLE atomic bond in the molecules of such strongly atomic bonded metals such as aluminum and titanium that the plane consisted of.

If merely kinetically "smashing" metals like aluminum and titanium can make them vaporize, why does industry use huge expensive electric arc furnances, instead of just dropping huge rocks on the ore from great heights?

The offical flight 93 "hypothesis", just like the ones for the Pentagon and WTC voilate all known rules of chemistry, physics, and mechanics, but given the state of America's science education it is easy why the government can get its citizens to believe such ridiculous ideas!

How can you claim to be a 9-11 "truther" and dismiss REAL news footage that day before the government"officials" could come in and walk all over the story. Did you watch that Video? Doesnt sound like it. Even if we dont talk about the bodies aspect, we still have the small( extremely small) hole in the ground that we are led to believe was caused by a huge 757 traveling at velocity of 450 m.p.h. Physics my friend does not lie. Physics is distorted by people who want to change something for their own ends.


Of course there were bodies in the pentagon those were the real employees affected by whatever hit the Pentagon. My point is if you look at the Pentagon right after the crash, there is not one piece of plane, no motors weighing 5 tons apiece no bodies outside the pentagon. There was only a small 20 hole in the Pentagon that we are led to believe was made by a 757 aircraft. Plus that hole could not have been made by fueslage...thats the planes weakest point. If anything, there would be 2 holes, one on either side of the fuselage that penetrated the concrete walls, but thats not what happened is it. As a matter of fact...there was one single 20 foot hole that went through all 5 layers of concrete to the Pentagons courtyard. Wow I mean that is some tough Boeing fuselage eh...lol, yeah prolly "steel tipped". The facts are in the pictures before the Pentagon wall collapses. Don't let people make up your mind for you, do your own sleuthing.

AMEN!

These links may be helpful. I compiled them a while ago, so some may be broken, but most should work.

At Shanksville, which was by far the smallest of the three crash scenes, over 1,100 people from 74 agencies and organizations were on the scene.

On 9/11 alone, these included:

• 8 Police Departments
• 7 EMS Services
• 8 Fire Departments
• 10 Emergency Management Agencies
• NTSB
• ATF
• FBI
• CISM
• Red Cross
• United Airlines

Some information from, and about, agencies that were on the scene.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73
http://tinyurl.com/efj56
http://tinyurl.com/f83mb
http://tinyurl.com/k3jhx
http://tinyurl.com/jx3u7

ETA: I notice that NONE of the above 5 links are working. The internet is great, but sometimes it's a pain in the tuchas. These all worked two months ago. I reference the first link several times here. It's supposed to be to an EPA pdf report with lots of photos that most people haven't seen. I'll be glad to email it to you if you wish. I had sent our good friend Killtown that link and he's got several of the photos (and many others of the flight 93 scene) here: http://killtown.911review.org/flight93/gallery.html

Then there's the fact that most of the plane was recovered, examined for signs of explosives by the FBI, and turned over to United Airlines (except for the black boxes, which went to the NTSB).
http://tinyurl.com/hmbjm
http://tinyurl.com/z7ume

Remains from every victim were recovered and positively identified.
http://tinyurl.com/4hpaq

Have further questions about victim ID? Why not ask Paul Sledzik, who led the Flight 93 Disaster Mortuary Team, or Dr. Dennis C. Dirkmaat, who was Miller's chief scientific advisor?
http://tinyurl.com/mzkp6

The personal effects of most victims were recovered and returned to the families.
http://tinyurl.com/erazm

The phone calls made from the plane:
http://tinyurl.com/j4zjv
http://tinyurl.com/h4u44

Photo of Airfone from flight 93 crash scene
http://tinyurl.com/qnd8l

The Air Traffic Control recordings and accounts.
http://tinyurl.com/ncwf9
http://tinyurl.com/qg3ht

The Cockpit Voice Recorder recording transcript: http://tinyurl.com/rxe8a
Photo of CVR: http://tinyurl.com/lulmt

The Flight Data Recorder recording.
http://tinyurl.com/myayp
Photo of FDR: http://tinyurl.com/osa7m

The NORAD recordings.
http://tinyurl.com/rc2dn

The numerous witnesses on the ground (these are just a few accounts.)

"There was a great explosion and you could see the flames. It was a massive, massive explosion. Flames and then smoke and then a massive, massive mushroom cloud."
http://tinyurl.com/m347n

Then Peterson said he saw a fireball, heard an explosion and saw a mushroom cloud of smoke rise into the sky.

Peterson rushed to the scene on an all-terrain vehicle and when he arrived he saw bits and pieces of an airliner spread over a large area of an abandoned strip-mine in Stonycreek Township.

"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning," Peterson said. Strewn about were pieces of clothing hanging from trees and parts of the Boeing 757, but nothing bigger than a couple of feet long, he said. Many of the items were burning.
http://tinyurl.com/fa75e

"I just watched with my mouth open as this yellow mushroom cloud rose up just like an atomic bomb over the hill where I like to go hunting," said 72- year-old John Walsh. [Say, maybe it was an A-Bomb!]

Barefoot and in his bathrobe, he drove up the dirt road to rescue anyone he could find. There would be nothing he could do.

Debris, including photographs and other papers that survived the fireball, was strewn over a wide area. Residents have spent days collecting it.
http://tinyurl.com/oapxx

"When the plane hit, it sounded like something just fell on the roof. Everybody sort of panicked," she said. "I went to the window and saw all this smoke coming up and I just pointed and screamed."
http://tinyurl.com/rl5qc

Charles Sturtz, 53, who lives just over the hillside from the crash site, said a fireball 200 feet high shot up over the hill. He got to the crash scene even before the firefighters.
http://tinyurl.com/rl5qc

Bob Blair was completing a routine drive to Shade Creek just after 10 a.m. Tuesday, when he saw a huge silver plane fly past him just above the treetops and crash into the woods along Lambertsville Road.
Blair, of Stoystown, a driver with Jim Barron Trucking of Somerset, was traveling in a coal truck along with Doug Miller of Somerset, when they saw the plane spiraling to the ground and then explode on the outskirts of Lambertsville.

“I saw the plane flying upside down overhead and crash into the nearby trees. My buddy, Doug, and I grabbed our fire extinguishers and ran to the scene,” said Blair.
http://tinyurl.com/guct4

The 300 volunteers who collected debris and remains in the final sweep three weeks after the crash.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73

Photos of the crash scene, debris, and personal effects.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73
http://tinyurl.com/p7zzn
http://tinyurl.com/h7ghq
http://911myths.com/html/flight_93_photos.html
http://tinyurl.com/qd4oo
http://tinyurl.com/r5m8t
http://tinyurl.com/m2tnf
http://tinyurl.com/nfy5f
Slideshow of site and debris: http://tinyurl.com/hfqan

Hijacker identification from the crash scene:
http://tinyurl.com/ppknu
http://tinyurl.com/qt3an
http://tinyurl.com/om544
http://tinyurl.com/logjb
http://tinyurl.com/n9zkl
http://tinyurl.com/mrw64

Val McClatchey's photo (certified as authentic by the FBI's examination of her camera's memory card.)
http://tinyurl.com/r577d

The Falcon 20 crew's report.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...rjetnat5p5.asp

The C-130 crew's report
http://tinyurl.com/mg4xh

40 Lives, One Destiny.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...ainstoryp7.asp

*****

Some contact information for flight 93 crash scene responders.

Shanksville Volunteer Fire Co
Shanksville, PA 15560
(814) 267-4737
Terry Schaffer, Fire Chief
Rick King, Assistant Chief

Somerset County Coroner's Office
555 Tayman Avenue, Somerset, PA 15501
(814) 445-6900
Wallace Miller, Coroner

Somerset County Emergency Services
100 East Union Street, Somerset, PA 15501
(814) 445-1515

WESTMORELAND COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
12 Court House Square
Greensburg, PA 15601
724-600-7300

Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency
Harrisburg, PA 17101
(717) 651-2001

Paul Sledzik, Curator Disaster Mortuary Team Main
Armed Forces Institute of Pathology National Museum of Health and Medicine
(He led flight 93 DMORT investigation)
202-782-2204 sledzik@email.afip.osd.mil

Disaster Mortuary Team Main office: 1-800-USA-NDMS, ext. 205
DMORT Region 3 office (includes Pennsylvania) 410-676-4600

Dr. Dennis C. Dirkmaat
Director, Applied Forensic Sciences Department
Mercyhurst College
501 E. 38th St.
Erie, PA 16546
dirkmaat@mercyhurst.edu
(814) 824-2105

I wonder, dmgspycat, just how much training in crash investigation that the local reporter actually had. Hmmmmm, let me guess for a moment. How about NONE??

Sorry, but even as a marine casualty investigator, I know that explosions can leave debris completely clear of the actual site and leave all the bigger pieces a long way off. I think Colbert Nation has a good post... one I am going to copy and plagarize (with credit to Mr. Colbert!!) to use against the "OMFG, there's a vast conspiracy about this" folks. How many thousands of people were involved in the alleged planning, execution and cover-up?? It would have to be thousands of Joe Average citizens.

With several dozen experts, we couldn't keep the Manhattan project a secret.

With two people involved, both with TOP SECRET clearances, we couldn't keep Whitehouse oral gratification secret.

Gimme a break.

How big around do you think a 757 body is?

I posted this on the Pentagon thread:

What is a typical plane crash? One that occurs in the take-off or landing phase of the flight is at low speed and usually results in an almost intact aircraft or large and recognisable pieces of wreckage. One that occurs at cruise speed, as here, usually results in almost total destruction of the aircraft, reducing it to pieces at most a couple of feet across. This is because the kinetic energy of an aircraft is some ten times greater in the latter case, so much more energy is available for breaking up the airframe.

No-one is suggesting that it all "vaporised", but it would have been very fragmented and a proportion of those pieces would have been completely consumed in the post-impact fire. You don't need a very large body part to do a DNA test, a normal test uses a saliva smear. Flight 93 was also a cruise-speed impact. Most of the aircraft would have ended up as small pieces of debris, and a lot of that would have been buried in the crater.

Don't forget the Hijacker bandanna's whenever you bring up this rubbish again. Pretty strong evidence there eh. Just the type of evidence an Idiot would expect another Idiot to accept.

Who are you speaking to, and what bandanas are you talking about? They weren't discussed in any of the above threads.

Didn't you know that a UFO beamed the entire crew and passengers from the flight just before it crashed.

I always ask the Conspiracy believer, why do you think United Airlines,
Insurance Companies, the families of the passengers and crew are not raising hell all over it if it is a conpiracy. United Airlines for one, it's their plane!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that sasquatch on the left?

Actualy, I think is Larry Silverstein.

I was thinking it's "Kramer".

Great, I have my own little internet stalker.

Keep ducking the issue and Ill figure you have given up. Stalking you? Yeah right, as if I have to search out your Mickey-Mouse posts you leave everyday. Pffffff

How big around do you think a 757 body is?

it was probably shot down

I for one, thank you Colbert...for hopefully ending this silliness before it get's legs....

I wonder if he think's it's 12' 4"....?
...p.s., what is a "small 20 hole"?

FBI: We've recovered about 95% of Flight 93, the plane that crashed in Shanksville!

Joe Public: Wow, that's amazing! Great work!

FBI: Well, thank you very much.

Joe Public: Can we see it?

FBI: Er....say what?

Joe Public: Could we see the 95% recovered plane?

FBI: NO! Well, I mean, uh.....Why? It's just a bunch of smashed up parts and stuff. Really boring, y'know? Nothin' much to see.

Joe Public: Well, I'm still really interested in seeing it....

FBI: Listen here, boy. What's your problem?!? I already told ya there's just a big pile of junk in there. It's a big waste of time. Now move along.

Perhaps if, instead of Joe Public, you had Boeing Engineer, the conversation would be different.

Not a bad point. Swanny.

And perhaps, the medical examiner could show you the hundreds of pounds mashed human remains that were recovered, and identified by dental records, where applicable, and DNA analysis (for the most part)...(God Almighty... )


That might make these poeple go away for good....

As a conspiracy theory there is much that needs to be addressed here. There is no doubt that very few photographs of the crash scene (Flight 93) are in the public domain, also that access to the recovered wreckage has not been allowed, except for Air Accident Investigators. There was definitely a second unmarked aircraft in the immediate vicinity if most eyewitness reports are to be considered, what was it doing there, and why was it unmarked?? That alone is in breach of FAA regulations (unless it is militaryand a waiver has been issued. Following up with Colbert Nations links only tends to lend support to the lack of information with respect to the possible causes of the crash. Could it have been intercepted and shot down to prevent it reaching it's target?

Flight 77 (the Pentagon) however is extremely odd.... and even more baffling. Why have the Video tapes of this aircraft crashing into the Pentagon not been released (they were removed by the FBI from a Hotel and a Garage nearby), also the Pentagon itself is bristling with recording devices but yet have not released any footage. We have to rely on news footage for all of the images. There is abolutely no evidence from the impact site that there was an aircraft involved, at least not the size of the 757. No damage (OK, very slight) either side of the point of impact, but 5 tons of engine and wing pylons with a velocity of 450 mph would have gone through the outer wall of the Pentagon like a knife through butter. If the aircraft was actually flying much slower, then you would expect to see a large amount of the heavier structures (Landing gear etc) still remaining. The Fire Chief said that there was absolutely nothing of an aircraft remaing in the building, and certainly there was almost nothing in front of the building that suggests aircraft wreckage.

So, the question will remain open and valid I think until the authorities, and particularly the Pentagon release some actual footageof the crash that they most assuredly MUST have.

one of the things that make me question the report on Flight 93 is that it was first reported to have gone down at Camp David.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQ1u9_bdnf0

edit: oh yeah, here's part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKHXBWvjUnY

Have you ever looked in retrospect at initial news coverage of a catastrophic event from the past and noticed that with the flow of information being reported by all sources during the initial confusion, that complete inaccuracies are presented?


This is what you're looking at...news networks filling airtime reporting on every bit of information, substantiated or not, that comes across the desk. This youtube video is an assemblage of such innacuracies and confusion, and nothing more...it is typical.
The flight was inaccurately reported to have gone down at Camp David by a completely unsubstantiated source. The "youtube" production of course paints it as if it was somehow factual information, which is a signature of "youtube" nonsense.


I find it curious that Dan Rather is the one reporting this unsubstantiated stuff in his melodramatic fashion. He did the very same thing during the JFK asassination's initial coverage from Dallas, Texas in November of 1963. At least in this case, he asks for a source...and what's he get?

"an FBI Official in Washington who says that he has been informed by the FAA that a United Airlines flight...has crashed intio the vicinity of, or at Camp David."


C'mon. This is substantiation? Who was this Official? Ah, you never know. Of course, if he even existed, he was wrong...


The flight wasn't reported to have gone down at Camp David. The report was of a source who had said that another source said it may have gone down in the vicinity of or at Camp David.

Get the distinction here?

It wasn't too far away, of course, but the bottom of the screen was already painting accurate information while these schmucks were talking about this erroneous report. Take note.

Why do you question the report on flight 93 when all you're listening to is erroneous spur of the moment media coverage of an event that hardly anyone could understand or believe at the time?


...and the interjection about the Camp David accords...oooh, that's the modern media going at full tilt there.

And actually, there was LOTS of plane wreckage identified, photographed, & released from the Pentagon. I've saw it several times & can provide images if one doesn't want to take the time to see the truth for themselves. It's not like a big secret or anything. The pictures have been in the public domain since hours after the crash.

Truth....that's the one thing that you'll never find if you constantly choose conspiracy over fact.

Here is what I know about Flight 93: -

• Eyewitness reports confirm there were military aircraft in the immediate vicinity of Flight 93. Some of these witnesses report the plane on fire in the air and hearing the sound of a missile.

• Edward Felt’s call from Flight 93 indicated an explosion and smoke coming from the plane. An FBI gag order was placed on the dispatch supervisor who took this call.

• A second debris site, separate from the main body of the plane, was found approximately 6 miles away. This would suggest the plane broke up in flight.

• Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, during a speech in Iraq in 2004 referred to the people who “shotdown the plane over Pennsylvania”.

It appears clear cut what happened.

And what does United Airlines have to say with your SOLID EVIDENCE and conclusion?

How? Would the FBI let the Boeing engineer see the reconstructed plane?

The public has been shown other reconstructed aircraft, such as TWA Flight 800. Why aren't we allowed to see Flt. 93's reconstruction??

I'm not talking about human remains, for Pete's sake! That's a deplorable thing to even suggest, for real or just for spite.


I hear a lot of official story supporters always saying that real, valid evidence is the most important thing. And I certainly agree.

So why are they satisfied with the unsubstantiated claim about Flt.93's debris being 95% recovered?

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml (For full site here)

Hey look guys! I found an airplane part by the pentagon!

1. I have not seen any verification of military planes in the area, only a small white twin engine corporate jet that the Air Traffic Controller asked to locate FLT 93 after it disappeared from radar, all a matter of public record if you take the time to look.

2. Yes it does fuel speculation by conspiracy theorist like yourself, in reality it proves or disproves nothing.

3. The second debris field is less than 2 miles from the Crash Site as the Crow flies, by road 6.48 miles. Minor debris papers and misc personal articles, no plane parts.

4. Would you rather it hit the White House or Pentagon? I would shoot it down! It was however, not shot down no military planes in the area.

It appears you will believe what you want to believe regardless of any facts.

I have not honestly spoken with the president of United Airlines so do not know what he has to say. Have you spoken with him, Aroces? What did he say? What I do know is that he would not risk raising any sort of case disputing a terrorist attack. With United Airlines receiving an insurance payout on the lost airliners, why would he put everything on the line with nothing to gain and all to lose?

The same goes for any insurance company before you come out with that one. They are going to have to pay out for damage and loss whatever the circumstances were found to be, so why ever would they cause a whole lot of unnecessary and pointless trouble for themselves by formally disputing the official account?

Well done Doctor Who, you just fell for Operation Northwoods pretext 9 paragraph c :-

“c. At precisely the same time that the aircraft was presumably shot down a submarine or small surface craft would disburse F-101 parts, parachute, etc, at approximately 15 to 20 miles off the Cuban coast and depart. The pilots returning to Homestead would have a true story as far as they knew. Search ships and aircraft could be dispatched and parts of aircraft found.”

Yes I know the official story but it is not supported by numerous eyewitnesses who are adamant they saw military aircraft. Or how about this, reported in various media: -

The Nashua controllers have learned through discussions with other controllers that an F-16 fighter stayed in hot pursuit of another hijacked commercial airliner until it crashed in Pennsylvania, the employee said.

Although controllers don't have complete details of the Air Force's chase of the Boeing 757, they have learned the F-16 made 360-degree turns to remain close to the commercial jet, the employee said.

"He must've seen the whole thing," the employee said of the F-16 pilot's view of United Flight 93's crash near Pittsburgh.



I would say the phone call from a passenger on the plane, detailing an explosion and smoke, is extremely strong evidence there was an explosion and smoke on the plane! I would be interested to know how you believe this proves ‘nothing’.



Yes there was confusion over the exact distance the secondary debris field was from the main crash site, thus my use of the word “approximately”. This does not change the fact that there was a second separate debris field. And this was not a continuous trail, linking the first and second debris fields; they were entirely apart from each other. I see no way to explain this other than the airliner fuselage being breached in flight, with light materials sucked out of the opening as it occurred.



How does Donald Rumsfeld stating Flight 93 was shotdown, equate to me preferring the airliner hit the White House? You need to respond to what Rumsfeld said - in this case its him saying the plane was shotdown, not me.



I did not really state much about my beliefs; I just gave and linked to 4 facts. If you can oppose what the facts would suggest, with logical and likely explanations, I am open to listening.

It seems nobody wants to comment on the facts I raised surrounding Flight 93.

I will assume we all agree Flight 93 was shotdown.

They get JFKed if they don't co operate in war profits.

Somebody was holding some powerful information over the heads of our government to do something
like this.

ED: Did they have a memorial ceremony at the site. Some people think it was downed somehow.
A law suit wants the voice recorder to be played back, to increase the horror for better payback.
They did not take the insurance money, guess they want more money from the CIA-IllumiNazis.
Yeah, make them pay.

No. I think if it was shot down it would have broken up in flight and large pieces would hit the ground at speeds near terminal velocity with a result of larger pieces of debris on the ground. If it flew into the ground it would hit at a speed far above terminal velocity imparting far more kinetic energy into the collison and resulting in smaller pieces of debris as was observed. The missles used to shoot down aircraft are not powerful enough to completely break apart the airplane of that size into small pieces in flight.

The plane could not fit in the space that the government claims that it flew in.

Ok, well that is one really poor explanation of the secondary debris field. Perhaps if you looked into this, you would know the secondary debris field consisted of only light debris including passenger belongings. You know.. the sort of things that would be sucked out of an airliner if the fuselage was breached in flight.

Can you attempt to answer the other 3 points I raised above regarding Flight 93? I am actually very interested to know how the official story explains these issues.

I believe the plane was shot down...the debris field doesnt look like a crash...

When did I say I was trying to explain the secondary debris field? My explanation fits more with the primary debris field where the larger parts of the plane had been broken up into very small pieces. As for the secondary debris field containing only light debris, couldn't that also have been blown to that location upon impact? Is a missle the only thing that could have breached the aircraft in flight? What about high G maneuvers? I still maintain that if hit by a missle there would have been larger pieces of debris hitting the ground at near terminal velocity instead of the observed numerous small pieces of debris from an intact or nearly intact craft hitting the ground well above terminal velocity due to being driven into the ground by the stil intact engines.

If shot down, why not claim openly that it was shot down? Wouldn't they be able to get some good pr from it? Things such as "saved x number of lives" or the "pilot who beat the terrorists". The propaganda value is enormous. Instead they go with the unsubstantiated rumor that the passengers interfered and make the military look even worse?

What other three points? I haven't really been following the discussion. Perhaps you could bring them up again? Am I really expected to know every point of the official story?

These were my 4 points: -


But please come up with something better than sirfiroth did here.

One, remember that not all eyewitness reports are accurate, therefore your first point cannot be proven. However, I'm not saying it is wrong.

Two, Edward Felt's call cannot prove that a missile had hit the plane. I believe that if a missile did hit the plane, Felt would be dead already. However I do not know why an FBI gag order was placed, but I don't think that fact alone is enough evidence to prove anything at this time.

Three, it is not unheard of for debris to be spread across long distances like that in normal commercial airline crashes. It could suggest the plane broke up in flight but nothing more than a suggestion.

Four, Donald Rumsfeld misspoke in that speech, as later told by officials. I'm sure the Secretary of Defense, if he did have anything to do with a conspiracy, would not let it slip that the plane is shot down.

Were you the engineer that examined the site after it happened. I didn't think so.

Ok, so the official story disregards eyewitness testimony wherever they find it appropriate.



I believe that a heat-seeking missile would destroy the engine of an airliner, causing only some damage to the wing and fuselage, therefore not instantly killing all passengers aboard. I believe the FBI gag order proves they did not want the information contained within Felt’s call spreading. You have not suggested an alternative reason for the cause of an explosion and the smoke Felt described in his call.



Where debris has been spread in other airliner crashes, it has been a continuous field leading outwards from the epicentre of the crash and usually in all directions. In the case of Flight 93, this secondary debris field was entirely separate from the main crash site and only in one direction.



I find it so implausible that Rumsfeld simply misspoke. Even if that is the best excuse the official story has, the thought that “Flight 93 was shotdown” must have been flying through Rumsfeld’s mind at a mighty pace for him to ‘accidentally’ come out and say it.

Thanks anyway, The-Doctor, but I am really hoping frenat can come up with something better.