The wing scars were there from flight 93 in 1994!

[darkovic]

A USGS photograph from 1994 showing the flight 93 crash site, with the wing marks in the ground already! In 1994!

http://www.trust-us.ch/cryptome/01-Cryptome-061213/shank-eyeball.htm

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/7836/shanksville1994flight93wu1.jpg

You've all been waiting for something like this, so do something about it. Tell the fucking WORLD! Email every single news outlet on EARTH! And if nothing happens STILL then that is proof of a huge effort to bury it among the establishment media and will be useable to wake people to the reality they face.

I'm doing it now. You should too.

This is the original:

http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=10&Z=17&X=3394&Y=22177&W=2

[shodan]

Hi, this is a great find, I'm going to look into this when I've got more time after work. cheers.

[darkovic]

I emailed the USGS (US Geological Survey) to check the authenticity of the photograph and terraserver. They confim it is genuine.

Their reply:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for contacting USGS.

Ed, the aerial photography on terraserver are genuine. Some are flown at a higher altitude than others and some with higher resolution. Usually some of the urban areas are flown with sharper resolution. The same photography can also be viewed at the site below.

http://nationalmap.gov/

I hope this information is useful. Please feel free to contact the USGS again if you need additional assistance.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I chose not to mention 9/11 or flight 93 or Shanksville or any reason at all for asking the question and they just answered me.

Cheers USGS! :p

[darkovic]

I can't seem to save the email from hotmail. (Anyone know how?) I tried doing save page as but it failed.

Here's a screencap of the email though with my email blacked out:

http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/9416/usgsemailreplydn0.jpg

[psychick]

Hi all,

This is my 1st post on this forum and l chose the 9/11 thread as it is a subject which is of great interest to me. I have researched that day in depth and l can honestly say, hand on heart that a missile hit the Pentagon and that flight 93 probably didn't even exist (or went down over the ocean).

I am also doubtful or passenger planes hitting the WTC's seeing as all the footage points to military planes with no windows and missiles strapped to their undercarriages.

Cool findings!

"Pass the remote control" ;)

[hagbard_celine]

Good find, Darkovic!:)

That would explain a lot. If you wanted to fake a plane crash site, where would you fake it?... Somewhere that already looks like a plane hit the ground of course!:cool::cool:

[hagbard_celine]

Hi all,

This is my 1st post on this forum and l chose the 9/11 thread as it is a subject which is of great interest to me. I have researched that day in depth and l can honestly say, hand on heart that a missile hit the Pentagon and that flight 93 probably didn't even exist (or went down over the ocean).

I am also doubtful or passenger planes hitting the WTC's seeing as all the footage points to military planes with no windows and missiles strapped to their undercarriages.

Cool findings!

"Pass the remote control" ;)

Welcome, Psychick.:)

[dmessick]

All I can say is WOW!

[psychick]

Welcome, Psychick.:)


Thank you Hagbard_celine :)

[killtown]

(Saw there is another thread about this, so I'll repost.)


The '94 scar is not the same, however I do believe represents part of how the 9/11 crater was made. The 9/11 crater sat at the base of a slop where a drainage ditch could have easily formed:

"The apparent point of impact was a dark gash, not more than 30 feet wide, at the base of a gentle slope (http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912somerscenenat4p3.asp) just before a line of trees." - post-gazette.com

And this quote describes the "wing scars" as a drainage ditch:

"Other photos taken at the scene by Miller show a small furrow, like a hand-dug drainage ditch (http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/09/1031115990570.html), running back from the crater. This was the mark left by a wing." - theage.com.au

If a "wing scar shaped" drainage ditch formed back before '94, why not 7 years later before 9/11 a few yards away?

So the 9/11 was a drainage ditch where they just had to drop a bomb in the middle of it and viola'! A "plane crash" crater.

[mynameis]

Flight 93 Crashes into Camp David! (PART-1) - YouTube
Flight 93 Crashes into Camp David! (PART-1) - YouTube

Rumsfeld says Flight 93 was "shot down." - YouTube
Rumsfeld says Flight 93 was "shot down." - YouTube

Fabricated Plane #3 - YouTube
Fabricated Plane #3 - YouTube

[ronisron]

The video is on youtube, and you can link to it from the headlines page. It shows the obvious first, no bodies, no wreckage from 9/11, and ends off with that aerial shot from USGS, taken in '94. VERY effective. It's STILL not enough for some people. I think the best analogy is seeing a stage hypnotist who can only get certain members to respond to suggestion, while others are not affected. Those that are easily hypnotized.... well, they'll cluck like a chicken until they're told to do something else. Good luck to them.

[pilgrim]

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27911

[phaid]

I find it quite amazing that more attention is not given to Flight 93 and the 'crash' site that never was.

It seems that people are far happier arguing about the details of the WTC collapse and to a lesser extent what hit the Pentagon, when Flight 93 seems to be the real 'smoking gun' of 911.

To promote the official version, we've had two feature films 'Flight 93' and 'United 93' to bolster the unlikely heroic 'fight back' passenger story and the Beamer, Bingham, Glick phone call myths - the WTC has never had similar direct fictional coverage of the alleged happenings on board the planes.

So why has Holly Wood devoted much time to erecting a smokescreen about 93? Almost certainly the human interest 'fightback' scenario, so easy to get the emotions going in uneducated 911 BS believers and to promote some loathsome flag-waving response, a new 'Alamo'. Once you've seen 'United 93' on the widescreen, you can file it away and never have to think about it seriously again or how you might have been fooled.

I'd like to see the BBC do a 'Conspiracy Files' special on Flight 93 now, but I suspect that they'll go nowhere near it, too dangerous, too tenuous to defend now with all the contrary evidence that keeps emerging.

Good luck to those researchers who haven't given up on this - keep plugging away, folks.

[goldman]

Good stuff.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Flight93Crash.jpg
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/7836/shanksville1994flight93wu1.jpg

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/8904/crater01xq9.gif

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/1033/ua93crashingmk2.gif

[goldman]

But, why does ANSWERS.com say:

Aerial photo taken 27 April, 2004 of the area of the crash of United Airlines Flight 93 in Shanksville, PA (USGS)

http://www.answers.com/topic/usgs-shanksville-jpg-1

Scroll way down:

http://www.answers.com/topic/september-11-attacks

What's up with that?

[seercirra]

A USGS photograph from 1994 showing the flight 93 crash site, with the wing marks in the ground already! In 1994!

http://www.trust-us.ch/cryptome/01-Cryptome-061213/shank-eyeball.htm

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/7836/shanksville1994flight93wu1.jpg

You've all been waiting for something like this, so do something about it. Tell the fucking WORLD! Email every single news outlet on EARTH! And if nothing happens STILL then that is proof of a huge effort to bury it among the establishment media and will be useable to wake people to the reality they face.

I'm doing it now. You should too.

This is the original:

http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=10&Z=17&X=3394&Y=22177&W=2

good evidence but totally unneccessary.
all the evidence that you need is in the fact that flight 93 was found in peices over something like 8 squared miles.
that doesnt happen when something crash lands.
it does happen when something is blown up in mid air though.

[tjohn]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Flight93Crash.jpg
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/7836/shanksville1994flight93wu1.jpg

Sorry, it's a red herring, the marks in those pictures do not match up at all. However, where on earth is there evidence of a plane crash without parts being strewn all over the 'crash' site?

Did the earth swallow up the entire plane somehow?

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/1033/ua93crashingmk2.gif

Seeing as there's no wreckage on the surface, perhaps they should go digging for a completely buried airliner! No of course they won't be doing that and they must think that we are all stupid!

[tracker]

A USGS photograph from 1994 showing the flight 93 crash site, with the wing marks in the ground already! In 1994!

http://www.trust-us.ch/cryptome/01-Cryptome-061213/shank-eyeball.htm

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/7836/shanksville1994flight93wu1.jpg

You've all been waiting for something like this, so do something about it. Tell the fucking WORLD! Email every single news outlet on EARTH! And if nothing happens STILL then that is proof of a huge effort to bury it among the establishment media and will be useable to wake people to the reality they face.

I'm doing it now. You should too.

This is the original:

http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=10&Z=17&X=3394&Y=22177&W=2

whats this stuff then

[tjohn]

whats this stuff thenIf you are referring to the mark on that B&W satellite picture, I don't know caused it (possibly was caused by spring water) but it does not match the mark in the top picture which is dry and has a somewhat triangle shape.

[darkovic]

If you are referring to the mark on that B&W satellite picture, I don't know caused it (possibly was caused by spring water) but it does not match the mark in the top picture which is dry and has a somewhat triangle shape.

It was 7 years of erosion later though...

[merlincove]

earlier today i watched loose change, and there is a little on there about flight 93 - altho in my own opinion there is not enough.

They say that flight 93 was landed in cleveland and evac'd within half an hour - the calls from the people on the plane are very suspect, and that there was no feasable wreckage in shanksville - and the coroner said there were no bodies.

the smoking gun indeed.

[killtown]

and the coroner said there were no bodies
And not only that, but not even a drop of blood (http://killtown.911review.org/flight93/articles.html#091102-The-day-that-changed-America).

[darkovic]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=o3LJXoXpAHE

You can see it in this RATHER interesting video...

[danoli3]

Flight 93:

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

http://www.danoli3.com/911/shanksville.png

http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/7508/1605/320/129286/shanks-aerial-usinfo2.png
Notice no fire in this photo:
http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/7508/1605/320/675928/shanks-aerial-wtae.png


So much more info @ http://killtown.blogspot.com/search/label/Shanksville

[vladikaioan]

I have been interested in 9/11 for several years now and I find this particular information some of the most interesting information I have seen in a while. I agree with others here: what better place to fake a plane crash than where you have ready-made "wing scars.

Also the video admitting the missile is quite interesting. No matter what these guys do to hide the truth, it will always come out.

[jaggysnake]

earlier today i watched loose change, and there is a little on there about flight 93 - altho in my own opinion there is not enough.

They say that flight 93 was landed in cleveland and evac'd within half an hour - the calls from the people on the plane are very suspect, and that there was no feasable wreckage in shanksville - and the coroner said there were no bodies.

the smoking gun indeed.

watch this and see if it changes your mind about the coroner

WHAT 'WALLY MILLER' REALLY SAID - YouTube


that interview changed my mind on how reliable loose change is

[bsmurph83]

great posts from darkovic and killset and others also. the 'coincidences' continue to mount, eh?

can i just ask; the FBI photo of the 'crash' site that is there with the 1994 photo of the site - how long after the 'crash' was that FBI shot taken? 1 day? 1 week?

Just interested. Keep the good posts coming. I only drop by the 911 thread occasionally and when I do there's always some absolute gems waiting...

smurph

[rodin]

good evidence but totally unneccessary.
all the evidence that you need is in the fact that flight 93 was found in peices over something like 8 squared miles.
that doesnt happen when something crash lands.
it does happen when something is blown up in mid air though.

Ah - but Houston we have a problem.

The evidence of wing-scar ditches being readily formed so close to the 93 wing marks, in addition to a lack of debris at the site, points to a faked crash site - but not one prepared hastily to cover the shooting down of an airplane. A premediated hoax.

What did they do - remote fly the plane close to the crash site then shoot it down?

Q's

How sure are we that debris was scatted over 8 miles as opposed to evidence being planted?

Who owned the land of the crash site?

What is the family/career/religious background of the 'heroes' of 93?

[rodin]

earlier today i watched loose change, and there is a little on there about flight 93 - altho in my own opinion there is not enough.

They say that flight 93 was landed in cleveland and evac'd within half an hour - the calls from the people on the plane are very suspect, and that there was no feasable wreckage in shanksville - and the coroner said there were no bodies.

the smoking gun indeed.

Jason Bermas, Alex Jones, gatekeepers for sure

http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=413

[manxboz]

This info has fascinated me since i found out a few weeks back. Why don't more people know about it i have no idea.

[bigcadaver]

Hello....first post on the site. Great discussions here for sure!!

Not sure how this picture makes much sense with what we have been speculating for years...that flight 93 was shot down. Are we saying here that flight 93 was purposely shot down over this area to "use" the pre-existing "wing scars" to fake the crash? Isn't there evidence that Norad was not involved and stood down for most of the morning....but as the morning unfolded, they did in fact scramble fighters to intercept flight 93. If they did shoot it down conveniently over this pre-existing "wing scared sight" then either they were in on it or it was an amazing coincidence.

Thoughts?

[bsmurph83]

hi cadaver. looks like the whole thing is a mess, ey? the short of it is that this is just another piece of the official story with massive holes in it.

too big of a coincidence that a plane that either didn't exist to start with, or was somewhat mysteriously shot down, happened to crash land in this exact spot where these faux wing marks are...

it looks like the outline a cartoon character leaves when they run through a wall... it's damning no matter what spin ya put on it... too many coincidences. stinky. very stinky.

EDIT: MY TOP LINE doesn't read quite right. it should say something like "...another piece of evidence that shows the official story (fairytale) has massive holes in it..." or... something like that. it's late. i'm tired. :D

[bigcadaver]

Yeah, I guess you're right. This isn't really evidence that allows us to know more about what actually happened. Its just more evidence to throw on top of the mountain that says the official story is crap.

[dynamicwiseman]

Jason Bermas, Alex Jones, gatekeepers for sure

http://www.realzionistnews.com/?p=413

Interesting information, it is true the Zionist are the only group that could pull something like 9/11 and blame it on Muslims. Heck they could detonate a nuclear bomb in the middle of London and blame Iran for it, and the whole world would invade Iran.

Sometimes i think the Zionist believe that gentile humans are just children, hence all decision have to be made for them for their own "good" and why they are illuminated.

[dude111]

This info has fascinated me since i found out a few weeks back. Why don't more people know about it i have no idea.Because ppl are living IN DENIAL!! (They are robots and cant be easily reasoned with/make up thier own minds about something)

[nihil]

Sometimes i think the Zionist believe that gentile humans are just children, hence all decision have to be made for them for their own "good" and why they are illuminated.


zionist thinking :eek: :p

[liltroofer]

I don't think the plane existed.

I also have many questions surrounding every story I hear or picture I see about an alleged "passenger" ...

[dude111]

Hey we all understand how you feel believe me!!

The whole thing just does not come anywhere near what they told us!!

[camreeno]

Interesting photograph but why is the scar on the ground in the 1994 picture noticeably further away from where the plain was claimed to have crashed in 2001? I might be looking at this wrong but just curious.

[morethanatheory]

A USGS photograph from 1994 showing the flight 93 crash site, with the wing marks in the ground already! In 1994!

http://www.trust-us.ch/cryptome/01-Cryptome-061213/shank-eyeball.htm

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/7836/shanksville1994flight93wu1.jpg

You've all been waiting for something like this, so do something about it. Tell the fucking WORLD! Email every single news outlet on EARTH! And if nothing happens STILL then that is proof of a huge effort to bury it among the establishment media and will be useable to wake people to the reality they face.

I'm doing it now. You should too.

This is the original:

http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=10&Z=17&X=3394&Y=22177&W=2



-I sent this email to 1123 people. (The majority of them probably deleted it on sight due to the way explorative thinking is ridiculed on the tv, in the paper, even in music.)

-Only 19 asked me what it was.

- 13 people open mindedly, allowed me to explain.

-Just 4 of them believed me, the rest laughed it off or thought it was fake.

YAY. The four who believed me claimed they were already believers of the conspiracy that 9/11 is :)

I hate the place I live, everyone here is in total denial. Creating a perfect reality. Regardless.. Nice find. I wont give up lol.

Peace&Love

[dude111]

There are always gonna be idiots who are blinded by the mainstream lies SO THEY WONT EVEN LOOK AT ANYTHING THAT GOES AGAINST WHAT THE GOVT TELLS THEM!!

Its quite sad they are so willing to blindly accept something that had such a great impact on our country.. (Really shows that they dont love this country enough to stand up for what they believe in (Either that or it shows how controlled they really are and dont have a mind of thier own to think with))


The original link is down (http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=10&Z=17&X=3394&Y=22177&W=2) Well its not loading for me @ the moment but seeing as the image is all over the place,it really doesnt matter... (EVERYONE KNOWS IT CAME FROM THERE))

[rodin]

http://i664.photobucket.com/albums/vv9/ContrarianThinker/flight93crashsite2.png?t=1282325618

more accurate comparison

Wing scars were not in same place

edit

my guess is ground there is unstable and wing scar crack opened up after 1994 - maybe helped along by perps.

[riseandshine]

This hole does not appear to coincide with the hole supposedly made by the plane. I saw this, and put up a page studying this idea, as well as many other aspects of Flight 93; although more remain to be studied. I superimposed a red outline of the supposed crater over the 1994 Landsat photo. They do not coincide at all. One of the problems, is that a number of news reports put the crater at 15-25 ft. wide, but the 757 should have been ca. 120 ft. wide; yet some eyewitnesses have the plane plowing straight down into the ground. The 1994 features are far too big to match the supposed impact crater. The crater cannot account for the crash of the plane; and what's worse, it looks like a bad diagram of a too small plane drawn on the ground. Later, it had more rubbish put over it. A number of eyewitnesses describe damage to the plane before it hit; and a number of military jets were sighted in the area. While I am not sure just what happened there, I am sure that crucial information has been blacked out from the national press; and it does appear that the plane was shot down. You can see my study as it now stands at:

http://BehindTheCurtain.zzl.org/Flight93.php

Please let me know if I a missing anything of consequence, or what you think of my site.

[dude111]

Welcome ashore,looks pretty good :)

[chazzo125]

thread title 9/11 the Truth posted 9/19/10

Nothing new. Just a summary of what REALLY happened that day.

All from reputable sources. One or two new 'takes' at the evidence!

[danrush]

Laughter.....oh please. Show the actual USGS site with the photo or it's another hoax.

[ultima1]

Laughter.....oh please. Show the actual USGS site with the photo or it's another hoax.

How about you showing something instead of just comming in and posting something with no meaning or fact.

[drakul]

(Saw there is another thread about this, so I'll repost.)

The '94 scar is not the same, however I do believe represents part of how the 9/11 crater was made. The 9/11 crater sat at the base of a slop where a drainage ditch could have easily formed:


And this quote describes the "wing scars" as a drainage ditch:

If a "wing scar shaped" drainage ditch formed back before '94, why not 7 years later before 9/11 a few yards away?

So the 9/11 was a drainage ditch where they just had to drop a bomb in the middle of it and viola'! A "plane crash" crater.

Good job. :)

[killtown]

Laughter.....oh please. Show the actual USGS site with the photo or it's another hoax.
Wow, you think the photo in the OP is a hoax? Why is that? The drainage ditch there coincidentally looks too much like the 9/11 "wing scars" for your taste either?!

[earthicastar]

Just opened her throat.. and in walked the goat :eek:

[danrush]

I am also doubtful or passenger planes hitting the WTC's seeing as all the footage points to military planes with no windows and missiles strapped to their undercarriages.

I suppose the families of those who were murdered will love you.

[danrush]

Not sure how this picture makes much sense with what we have been speculating for years...that flight 93 was shot down.

Here's a question...can we see a progressive view of photos from the dated USGS to September 11th?

Answer that Truthers.

[danrush]

So the 9/11 was a drainage ditch where they just had to drop a bomb in the middle of it and viola'! A "plane crash" crater.

The theories get wilder and wilder.

[killtown]

The theories get wilder and wilder.
Says the guy who thinks the '94 aerial photo is a hoax.

[danrush]

Says the guy who thinks the '94 aerial photo is a hoax.

I didn't say hoax, existance confirmed by the e-mail, I said I want to see progressive photos from 94 to september 11th 2001.

Well?

[killtown]

25-09-2010, 02:46 PM

I didn't say hoax, existance confirmed by the e-mail, I said I want to see progressive photos from 94 to september 11th 2001.
No?
23-09-2010, 12:03 AM

Laughter.....oh please. Show the actual USGS site with the photo or it's another hoax.

[ultima1]

I suppose the families of those who were murdered will love you.

Yes the familes that also question the official story.

[merlincove]

I suppose the families of those who were murdered will love you.

i don't think anyone is questioning whether airline passengers as well as innocent civilians in the WTC died / were murdered on this terrible day. And no one is suggesting that families did not lose loved ones, but what people seem to be questioning is how those people were murdered - and if pax airliners were not used i think that asking what happened to the passengers is an important question to be raised, and one with terrifying consequences.

Perhaps the families who lost loved ones would like to know the truth too - if their loved ones were somehow diverted by airline or military officials and the commercial flights were replaced with military craft, then the question of what actually happened to the passengers is actually much more terrifying than them being on a hijacked plane.

If military craft were used at the WTC sites then what happened to the passengers of flights 11 and 175?

I really don't know if those planes were military aircraft or not, but to consider they were is to consider that the people who were on the passenger lists were killed by homeland officials – people the passengers would have trusted to keep them safe.

You can also ask the same questions in regards to flight 77 and 93, as if the pentagon attack did not involve flight77 as the site damage would indicate, then where did flight 77 end up - and what of it's passengers?

Likewise with flight 93 - the coroner reported no bodies, it is suggested that there is no plane evident at the crash site, so again, what happened to those passengers?

Is it likely that Cleveland was host to two diverted planes, one of which has been suggested was flight 93 bearing 200 passengers - a total of all passengers of all four planes used in the attacks?

I don't know, but that concept tdoes answer the given conundrum of what happened to the passengers if military aircraft were used in the attacks.

But there remains question marks in that theory also.

[tabea_blumenschein]

Likewise with flight 93 - the coroner reported no bodies, it is suggested that there is no plane evident at the crash site, so again, what happened to those passengers?


Merlincove, please forgive me for saying this, but it just gets to be so goddamn aggravating dealing with this stuff over and over. There are hundreds of factual errors that keep being made here and most of them I don't even bother trying to correct. But let's try this one anyway ..


As coroner, responsible for returning human remains, Miller has been forced to share with the families information that is unimaginable. As he clinically recounts to them, holding back very few details, the 33 passengers, seven crew and four hijackers together weighed roughly 7,000 pounds. They were essentially cremated together upon impact. Hundreds of searchers who climbed the hemlocks and combed the woods for weeks were able to find about 1,500 mostly scorched samples of human tissue totaling less than 600 pounds, or about 8 percent of the total.


http://www.archive.org/details/interview-miller

Merlincove, please respond. Do you agree that the part of your post I quoted turns out to be false? Do you now stand corrected? Yes or no?

[killtown]

Merlincove, please forgive me for saying this, but it just gets to be so goddamn aggravating dealing with this stuff over and over.
It sure is, since what MC said was correct. Miller said there were no bodies found. MC didn't say Miller said there were no body parts recovered. Big difference.

However, Miller did say he never saw a drop of blood, not one drop. Just so you know.

[ultima1]

There are hundreds of factual errors that keep being made here and most of them I don't even bother trying to correct. But let's try this one anyway ..

Are you talking about the even more hundreds of factual errors of the official story?

To start, where are the photos with proper sources showing all the parts of flight 93 that were supposed to have been found?


Where were the parts taken, and if ther were enough parts why haven't they did a reconstruction as part fo the criminal investigation.

[merlincove]

http://www.archive.org/details/interview-miller


As coroner, responsible for returning human remains, Miller has been forced to share with the families information that is unimaginable. As he clinically recounts to them, holding back very few details, the 33 passengers, seven crew and four hijackers together weighed roughly 7,000 pounds. They were essentially cremated together upon impact. Hundreds of searchers who climbed the hemlocks and combed the woods for weeks were able to find about 1,500 mostly scorched samples of human tissue totaling less than 600 pounds, or about 8 percent of the total.

Merlincove, please respond. Do you agree that the part of your post I quoted turns out to be false? Do you now stand corrected? Yes or no?

Are bodies normaly 'cremated on impact' in plane crashes?

Were any bodies found at the crash site of flight 93?

Simple question + simple answer.

Did Miller say that he found no traces of blood at the crash scene?

Again, a simple question with a simple answer.

If i am corrected then i am corrected, i'm just trying to find answers, i'm not pushing one side or the other but i do believe, quite simply that

911 was an inside job, and we were all sold a lie.

We were lied to, and i for one believe it is time to stop the lies, open them up for investigation and deliver the answers to what occured on 911 - for the sake of those who were lost to the actions of evil men and for their families, but moreover so that one day those responsable for those horrific crimes against humanity, truth, love and justice, can be flushed out from their hiding places and held accountable for their actions.

I'm not sure the later will ever come to fruition, but maybe the former can be, and those families can then perhaps start to lay to rest to the questions and nightmares that no doubt haunt them still.

[tabea_blumenschein]

Are bodies normaly 'cremated on impact' in plane crashes?

Were any bodies found at the crash site of flight 93?

Simple question + simple answer.

Yes, nearly 600 pounds of body parts were found. See bolded part of the quote in my previous post.

Did Miller say that he found no traces of blood at the crash scene?

Again, a simple question with a simple answer.

Yes, he said that, and then he explained why:

...Miller was familiar with scenes of sudden and violent death, although none quite like this. Walking in his gumboots, the only recognisable body part he saw was a piece of spinal cord, with five vertebrae attached. 'I've seen a lot of highway fatalities where there's fragmentation,' Miller said. 'The interesting thing about this particular case is that I haven't, to this day, 11 months later, seen any single drop of blood. Not a drop. The only thing I can deduce is that the crash was over in half a second. There was a fireball 15-20 metres high, so all of that material just got vaporised.'"

Source. (http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/09/1031115990570.html)

I emphasize that there is no doubt that the bodies of the passengers, as well as the plane, were at the Shanksville crash site. They were all positively identified via DNA. Mr. Miller was merely pointing out an anomaly when he mentioned the absence of blood; he wasn't trying to call into question whether Flight 93 actually crashed there.

If i am corrected then i am corrected, i'm just trying to find answers, i'm not pushing one side or the other but i do believe, quite simply that 911 was an inside job, and we were all sold a lie.

We were lied to, and i for one believe it is time to stop the lies, open them up for investigation and deliver the answers to what occured on 911 - for the sake of those who were lost to the actions of evil men and for their families, but moreover so that one day those responsable for those horrific crimes against humanity, truth, love and justice, can be flushed out from their hiding places and held accountable for their actions.

I'm not sure the later will ever come to fruition, but maybe the former can be, and those families can then perhaps start to lay to rest to the questions and nightmares that no doubt haunt them still.

If you really mean that, then good for you. Keep investigating. Keep asking questions. Don't blindly put trust in the leaders of the truth movement: examine their claims and see if they really stand up to scrutiny, and are factual. Be very careful not to let your own personal biases cloud your judgement. Don't believe something is true simply because you want it to be true.

Finally, find out what the "official story" really says. It's been my experience that skeptics can usually explain the 9/11 conspiracy theories accurately, but truthers can't explain the so-called "official story" without making hash out of it.

Be honest. Do you think you could explain the "official story" behind the 9/11 attacks to me to my satisfaction? Or do you think I'd have to stop you a bunch of times and correct your mistakes?

Good look trying to find your answers. I do mean that sincerely. :)

[killtown]

Yes, nearly 600 pounds of body parts were found.

Mr. Miller was merely pointing out an anomaly when he mentioned the absence of blood
So 44 passengers where turned into hamburger meat, which only 600 pds total was left, but not one drop of blood was left behind? How does that happened?!? :confused:

Don't blindly put trust in the leaders of the truth movement
But blindly trusting in govt officials is OK?

Finally, find out what the "official story" really says
I have at Shanksville. Just waiting for you skeptics to respond (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=5) whether you agree, or disagree with the official crash details there.

[ultima1]

he
Finally, find out what the "official story" really says. It's been my experience that skeptics can usually explain the 9/11 conspiracy theories accurately, but truthers can't explain the so-called "official story" without making hash out of it.

Well isn't the official story based on the 9/11 commission report?

Its not the truthers making hash of it, its just the way the official story comes off since there are so much evidence and the FBI crime scene reports missing.


Be honest. Do you think you could explain the "official story" behind the 9/11 attacks to me to my satisfaction? Or do you think I'd have to stop you a bunch of times and correct your mistakes?


What about all the mistakes in the official story?

[merlincove]

Merlincove, please forgive me for saying this, but it just gets to be so goddamn aggravating dealing with this stuff over and over. There are hundreds of factual errors that keep being made here and most of them I don't even bother trying to correct. But let's try this one anyway ..

As coroner, responsible for returning human remains, Miller has been forced to share with the families information that is unimaginable. As he clinically recounts to them, holding back very few details, the 33 passengers, seven crew and four hijackers together weighed roughly 7,000 pounds. They were essentially cremated together upon impact. Hundreds of searchers who climbed the hemlocks and combed the woods for weeks were able to find about 1,500 mostly scorched samples of human tissue totaling less than 600 pounds, or about 8 percent of the total.




http://www.archive.org/details/interview-miller

Merlincove, please respond. Do you agree that the part of your post I quoted turns out to be false? Do you now stand corrected? Yes or no?

was there any evidence of a fire at the crash site that 'incinerated' the passengers? There was a wooded area - was that wooded area set ablaze by the fire that caused the insineration?

[wthree]

Ok, im supprised nobody noticed this...but....

That photograph isnt even the same place!

The photo was confirmed to be real, but it wasnt confirmed to be take in 94, now was it confirmed to be a photo of the same area.

Lets just go some major differences between the two.

First of all, the road is a has a larger curve and extends before moving to the top of the picture for longer.

The 'hillish' lines around the crash site are absent.

As mentioned the 'crash site' is slightly in the wrong place.

There are far more trees in the newer photo, and large amounts of trees dont just grow over a few years.

Simply put: Its not the same area.

[killtown]

Simply put: Its not the same area.
Same field, different spot, both are drainage ditches.

[911 chewy defense]

Same field, different spot, both are drainage ditches.

There isn't a drainage ditch near that dirt road. So you've got caught in a lie or you haven't looked at the photo carefully.

Geographically speaking, where do you live?

[killtown]

There isn't a drainage ditch near that dirt road. So you've got caught in a lie or you haven't looked at the photo carefully.
In the '94 photo, or 9/11 photos?

Geographically speaking, where do you live?
The US.

[911 chewy defense]

In the '94 photo, or 9/11 photos?


The US.

I said:

"There isn't a drainage ditch near that dirt road."

Where in the U.S.? If you can't answer that, then you're covering something up!

[killtown]

I said
The '94 aerial shows a drainage ditch. The 9/11 aerial shows one too. ;)

Where in the U.S.? If you can't answer that, then you're covering something up!
What are you, a stalker?

[911 chewy defense]

The '94 aerial shows a drainage ditch. The 9/11 aerial shows one too. ;)


What are you, a stalker?

Then you're blind or incrediably stupid!

If I were a "stalker", I'd have your IP Address, your location & what type of system you're running. But I'm not a hacker nor a stalker. But I have a friend that can hack systems. Wanna try me?

[killtown]

Then you're blind or incrediably stupid!
Actually, you're blind if you can't see those drainage ditches that are clear to see and funny you call me stupid, but spell incredibly wrong.

But I'm not a hacker nor a stalker. But I have a friend that can hack systems. Wanna try me?
Interesting set of friends you keep.

[911 chewy defense]

Actually, you're blind if you can't see those drainage ditches that are clear to see and funny you call me stupid, but spell incredibly wrong.


Interesting set of friends you keep.

What drainage ditches? From the 1994 pic or the 2001 pic?? Which 1 is it??? So what, sometimes my spelling sux, it's called an error. Do you make errors when you type?

I always have back-up! :D

[killtown]

Has anyone ever seen a plane crash before or after 9/11 that left wing marks in the ground? I sure haven't.

[gurlbit]

A USGS photograph from 1994 showing the flight 93 crash site, with the wing marks in the ground already! In 1994!

http://www.trust-us.ch/cryptome/01-Cryptome-061213/shank-eyeball.htm

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/7836/shanksville1994flight93wu1.jpg

You've all been waiting for something like this, so do something about it. Tell the fucking WORLD! Email every single news outlet on EARTH! And if nothing happens STILL then that is proof of a huge effort to bury it among the establishment media and will be useable to wake people to the reality they face.

I'm doing it now. You should too.

This is the original:

http://terraserver-usa.com/image.aspx?T=1&S=10&Z=17&X=3394&Y=22177&W=2

Cool Story Bro

[i11u5iv3]

Perhaps pardon my memory, but wasnt there news reporters with cameras at the crash sight with their own footage of the impact and not the same generic arial shot?
There's certainly pictures/(video?) of the lack of debris found. But if so, then why would they recreate the same crash impact from 94'?

[skanny]

Hi all,

This is my 1st post on this forum and l chose the 9/11 thread as it is a subject which is of great interest to me. I have researched that day in depth and l can honestly say, hand on heart that a missile hit the Pentagon and that flight 93 probably didn't even exist (or went down over the ocean).

I am also doubtful or passenger planes hitting the WTC's seeing as all the footage points to military planes with no windows and missiles strapped to their undercarriages.

Cool findings!

"Pass the remote control" ;)

missiles strapped to the undercarriage? .... i must have seen all the vids there is with the planes hitting the towers and never ever seen that ... linkys to the video please.

all i seen is the red / orangey glow from the nose just before it enters the building always thought it was the guidance system since the planes were under remote.

no missiles though.

[bryan]

all i seen is the red / orangey glow from the nose just before it enters the building always thought it was the guidance system since the planes were under remote.

It was most likely a small explosion from inside the building to show the video compositors where and when the nose of the cgi plane had to hit the wall.

[skanny]

It was most likely a small explosion from inside the building to show the video compositors where and when the nose of the cgi plane had to hit the wall.

lmao! ... :D

we have been through this already and none of the photos or other videos of that plane leading up to the south tower show cgi planes as they would if it was a fake plane and the wreckage is all planted. :rolleyes:

so its pointless cos even when proved contrary to the npt belief you cant or wont accept what in fact is.

[wispy]

It was most likely a small explosion from inside the building to show the video compositors where and when the nose of the cgi plane had to hit the wall.

So there's a small explosion to let the CGI operators show where the CGI plane had to hit he building.

And this is just a few moments beofre there's a big explosion which starts the destruction o fthe building.

So why would they need a small explosion when there's a big explosion afterwards?

Couldn't they get the CGI to line up with where the big explosion is?

[302bluefog]

Lmao @ cgi

[ruddd]

Flight 93 was always odd to me, in that it could have come down anywhere. Yet chose to do it right at the end of a nicely paved farm path in the middle of nowhere.

Dig a hole, fill it with a bomb or explosives. Set of a big bang that would get the locals roused up and looking out their window, cordon off the roads and then plant some aircraft debris before anyone gets there.

Oldest trick in the book.

[bobster]

I saw this a couple of years ago and I had the sane trouble then as now. I can't see any 'wing' Mark in the colour photo. Can someone point it out to me. I found it easier seeing something hidden in a magic eye picture someone posted the other week!

[stannrodd]

I saw this a couple of years ago and I had the sane trouble then as now. I can't see any 'wing' Mark in the colour photo. Can someone point it out to me. I found it easier seeing something hidden in a magic eye picture someone posted the other week!


I would like to see that which "bobster" cannot see too .. I have that sane problem too
:)

[bobster]

Hahaha I never noticed that, I meant same but I suppose sane works too:D

[stannrodd]

Agreed .. ;)

[kesm27]

Flight 93 was always odd to me, in that it could have come down anywhere. Yet chose to do it right at the end of a nicely paved farm path in the middle of nowhere.

Dig a hole, fill it with a bomb or explosives. Set of a big bang that would get the locals roused up and looking out their window, cordon off the roads and then plant some aircraft debris before anyone gets there.

Oldest trick in the book.

"Oldest trick in the book"?

I take it "the book" was written after the invention of aircraft, then?

Maybe I'm being pedantic, but it just seems a strange thing to say. Can you provide examples of when this "oldest trick" has been used before?

[killtown]

The '94 scar is not the same, however I do believe represents part of how the 9/11 crater was made. The 9/11 crater sat at the base of a slop where a drainage ditch could have easily formed:

"The apparent point of impact was a dark gash, not more than 30 feet wide, at the base of a gentle slope (/headlines/20010912somerscenenat4p3.asp) just before a line of trees." - post-gazette.com

And this quote describes the "wing scars" as a drainage ditch:

"Other photos taken at the scene by Miller show a small furrow, like a hand-dug drainage ditch (/articles/2002/09/09/1031115990570.html), running back from the crater. This was the mark left by a wing." - theage.com.au

If a "wing scar shaped" drainage ditch formed back before '94, why not 7 years later before 9/11 a few yards away?

So the 9/11 was a drainage ditch where they just had to drop a bomb in the middle of it and viola'! A "plane crash" crater.
Just wanted to add to this that, according to Dominick DiMaggio, who's been to Shanksville many times researching, told me that those "wing scars" where actually man-made by the land owners for drain-off.