• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

9/11 Truthers thread

Help Support Ranchers.net:

I've come to a new theory about UA93.

The Guiliani/Thorn theory was that the plane crashed at New Baltimore.

However, there is not enough evidence that the plane crashed at New Baltimore.

My new theory is that there were two planes at Shanksville and a psy-ops somewhat similar to the two-plane psy-ops used at the Pentagon. I think this theory is more or less the consensus of serious UA93 truthers like Killtown, Domenick DiMaggio CIT, John Doe II and Zaphod 36, or at least they'd seriously consider it.

Southeast-bound plane was rigged for doing stunts near the ground and it climbed aloft at the Shanksville field. Northwest-bound plane was a C-130 or a bomber dropping fake crash debris at New Baltimore and Indian Lake. It met the southeast-bound plane at the Shanksville field and possibly stayed around for a while. A missile made the Shanksville field crater. It seems to me it was more likely a cruise missile than a missile fired from a plane.

Is there any other feasible explanation? Not that I know of.
 
Mike Philbin
March 22, 2010

Did you know that a THERMOBARIC BOMB was used in the 1993 WTC basement bomb plot?

Anyway, a typical (thermobaric) weapon consists of a container packed with a fuel substance, in the center of which is a small conventional-explosive "scatter charge". Fuels are chosen on the basis of the exothermicity of their oxidation, ranging from powdered metals such as aluminium or magnesium, or organic materials, possibly with a self-contained partial oxidant. The most recent development involves the use of nanofuels.

In confinement, a series of reflective shock waves are generated, which maintain the fireball and can extend its duration to between 10 and 50 msec as exothermic recombination reactions occur. Further damage can result as the gases cool and pressure drops sharply, leading to a partial vacuum, powerful enough to cause physical damage to people and structures. This effect has given rise to the misnomer "vacuum bomb". Piston-type afterburning is also believed to occur in such structures, as flame-fronts accelerate through it.

The overpressure within the detonation can reach 430 lbf/in² (3 MPa, 30 bar) and the temperature can be 4,500 to 5,400 °F (2,500 to 3,000 °C). Outside the cloud the blast wave travels at over 2 mi/s (3 km/s). [source WIKIPEDIA]

There've been attempts to retrospectively cover their Military Industrial Complex asses with post-911 (2005) patents for nano-aluminium Thermobaric Weapons aka novel explosive, as seen in this video

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

(3 mins in, watch all that pulverised concrete), WHICH THE MILITARY USE TO DEMOLISH ENEMY BUNKERS AND VAPOURISE THE OCCUPANTS WITHIN but this really has been covered already in a 1987 patent #4,873,928 where the phrase "nuclear-sized explosions without the radiation" actually originates from.

Let's go back to Dr Stephen Jones's comment that nanothermite charges were used on 9-11 as evidenced by the vast amount of unreacted nano-thermite in the WTC dust. Well, yeah, nano-thermite charges would be an excellent way to CHOP THROUGH support girders for the demolition of WTC 1 and 2 but... you'd still need to blow all the floors out of the way or it would just sink into its basement and/or partially topple over. And then you've got a crime scene to pull to pieces. What clearly happened on the day is floor-by-floor the resistance from the lower floors was REMOVED. And there were still TONNES of aluminium nano-powder found in spectral analysis of WTC dust ... it needn't have all been nano-thermite aluminium.

So, what's the difference between explosives and thermobaric weapons? Well, it's the combination of all the above elements; the novel explosive (fluoridated?) aluminium nanofuel, oxygen-rich environment (WTC aircon system), pulverised concrete, imploding building and very high temperatures. All these parameters are catered for by a THERMOBARIC WEAPON. You don't need traditional single point explosives. You don't need petrol/wet combustibles. Deliver the microfine, dry aluminium nanopowder to a volume of architecture via the aircon, which also supplies the oxygen for the reaction.

Set off the timed charges in a top-down sequence that correlates with the impact point of the 'highjacked flights' on each WTC building.

Blame some Afghanis in a cave.

John Deutch was the Director of the CIA and, before that, an Undersecretary of Defense also published two papers while he was a physicist at MIT on ... wait for it ... fuel air - thermobaric weapons. [source WIKIPEDIA]

http://mikephilbin.blogspot.com/2010/03/thermobaric-weapons-wtc-on-9-11.html


Physics just doesn't account for all the energy required to collapse the building while turning each story into dust while falling, plus the upward momentum and outward momentum of the debris, making it look like a fountain. I believe that a newly developed thermobaric explosive developed by the DoD prior to 9/11 (and put into offical use in a weapon on 21 Dec 2001) was used by having insensitive polymer bonded explosives planted in the core section of each floor. They would have been very small packages of the explosive and easily placed during the work on the towers over the months previous to 9/11. Since this material is "insensitive" it was very safe to use and would not explode by shock, normal fire, or other normal influences.

The explosives in the WTC towers were controlled from a control center in WTC-7. Then, after that was sucessful, the control center (WTC-7) had to be destroyed to destroy the evidence. As far as WTC 7 goes, more conventional explosives were used for it's demolition.

I believed they used thermobaric weapons that were loaded into the elevators and were exploded inside of the elevator shafts, to blow the building apart from the inside - out.

It would certainly cut down on the need to 'wire' the entire building. Even though I do believe cutter charges were used to control the sequence and timing, to get the building to fall down the way they wanted it to.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t19619.html
 
Zaphod 36
May 24 2008
There are strong indications that the mushroom cloud on Val McClatcheys photo was caused by a thermobaric bomb.
Eric Peterson of Lambertsville has witnessed a very interesting thing:
"There was one initial explosion and a split second after there was a big explosion. Then there was mushroom cloud - it was completely black."
Here are experts who describes how a thermobaric bomb is working:
Navy Lieutenant Commander Matthew Klee:
"It works as a combination of a shock wave and a fuel explosion. The first explosion spreads flammable aerosols through the underground complex. Then, the second ignites the fuel."
Lucian Dorneanu, Science Editor:
The most interesting thing about this bomb is the fact that it actually produces two blasts, the first being the dispersion of a cloud of liquid or powder explosive using a small detonating charge, and then the main explosion, when a second charge ignites the cloud, producing the actual deflagration.
Dom has experienced another interesting thing:
I've spoken with others who have said the explosion didn't make a noise. Hopefully they too will participate with the documentary, if not they're more than willing to speak with me off camera about it so I can clarify their accounts. They did say they thought it was odd that all their windows were blown in towards the explosion and not out and away from it and that the explosion actually sucked their garage door off and towards the crater as well. These witnesses also describe a "screeching" sound as you asked indicative of a missile.
Apparently there was a vacuum effect at the time of the explosion. Thermobaric bombs are producing a vacuum when exploding and they are also called "Vacuum bombs.


Killtown
May 25 2008
Whatever exploded there bounced of the ground first, left the crater (that's why the displaced dirt is only enough to fill the crater back up), and blew up in the woods (broken trees and white smoke).

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/297240/1/


Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet | December 5 2005

The report you're watching and hearing was filed by an MSNBC news anchor Rick Sanchez on the morning of September 11th 2001.

The details contained therein seem to have slipped under the radar amidst the huge body of evidence proving controlled demolition brought down both the twin towers and Building 7.

Sanchez states,
"Police have found what they believe to be a suspicious device and they fear that it may lead to another explosion."
"I spoke with some police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me they have reason to believe that one of the explosion at the World Trade Center besides the ones made with the planes, may have been caused by a van that was parked in the building that may have had an explosive device in it."

It would make sense that police would find at least some of the bombs that tore down the only steel buildings to collapse from fire damage in history at speeds that defied physics. There would have been so many devices involved in the demolition that stumbling across some was inevitable.

This report mirrors those that emerged in the hours following the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, where bomb squads removed numerous unexploded secondary devices from the Alfred P. Murrah building.

The twin towers were wired to the brim with highly powerful explosives, some of which exploded before the collapse of the buildings and some during.

This is why people like construction worker Philip Morelli, working in the fourth sub-basement of the north tower, were thrown around like rag dolls in an earthquake.

With the sheer volume of evidence and basic straightforward common sense proving controlled demolition, the possibility still remains that the federal government, backed by FEMA, will come forward and announce that another Al-Qaeda cell placed the explosives days before the attack.

This of course is ridiculous, it takes highly trained explosives experts weeks and sometimes months to correctly rig buildings many times smaller than the twin towers, and with varying degrees of success. The towers imploded perfectly and fell down right in their own footsteps, as did Building 7 which wasn't hit by a plane. Any building not owned by Larry Silverstein, despite having closer proximity to the towers, strangely stood its ground.

Larry Silverstein admitted that Building 7 was "pulled," an industry term for demolition, in a September 2002 PBS documentary, but has failed to respond to a firestorm of subsequent questions.

Others argue that the powers that be will simply continue to ignore the evidence now being certified by such credible individuals as Professor Steven Jones and former chief economist for the US Department of Labor under George W. Bush, Morgan Reynolds.

To change such a major element of the official version of events would throw into question all the other pieces of the puzzle and the whole house of cards would come tumbling down.

Nevertheless, the report that police did find explosives in the World Trade Center before the collapse of the towers is another giant smoking gun to add to all the rest proving that the collapse of the buildings and 9/11 was an inside job.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2005/051205foundbombs.htm
 
Killtown
May 23 2008
Zaph was arguing perhaps a thermobaric bomb blew up UA93 and it crashed in Shanks.
I argue that spot in Shanks had a pre-existing drainage ditch, similar and yards away from "wing scar" ditch seen in the '94 aerial and that the perps just dropped some time of bomb in the middle of it in which I personally think it bounced and blew up in the forest. That's why the middle of the crater has no ash marks on it, because you can see the dirt was pushed towards the damaged forest section and the amount of displaced dirt is enough to fill back into the crater. The only ash marks in the crater are seen on the "wing scars" on each side of the center crater.
It also explains why hardly any of the grass around the crater and between the forest and crater was scorched.

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/293706/1/


911 - THE BASIC QUESTIONS

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_questions.htm


Judy D. Wood is a former professor of mechanical engineering with research interests in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, optical methods, deformation analysis, and the materials characterization of biomaterials and composite materials. She is a member of the Society for Experimental Mechanics (SEM), co-founded SEM's Biological Systems and Materials Division, and currently serves on the SEM Composite Materials Technical Division.

Dr. Wood received her
B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering),
M.S. (Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983), and
Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992) from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.
Her dissertation involved the development of an experimental method to measure thermal stresses in bimaterial joints. She has taught courses including
Experimental Stress Analysis,
Engineering Mechanics,
Mechanics of Materials (Strength of Materials)
Strength of Materials Testing
Is this what Eisenhower warned us of?

From 1999 to 2006 Dr. Wood has been an assistant professor in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Clemson University in Clemson, South Carolina. Before moving to Clemson she spent three years as a postdoctoral research associate in the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Tech.
One of Dr. Wood's research interests is biomimicry, or applying the mechanical structures of biological materials to engineering design using engineering materials. Other recent research has investigated the deformation behavior of materials and structures with complex geometries and complex material properties, such as fiber-reinforced composite materials and biological materials. Dr. Wood is an expert in the use of moiré interferometry, a full-field optical method that is used in stress analysis, as well as materials characterization and other types of interference. In recent years, Dr. Wood and her students have developed optical systems with various wavelengths and waveguides. Dr. Wood has over 60 technical publications in refereed journals, conference proceedings, and edited monographs and special technical reports.

Dr. Wood started to question the events of 9/11 on that same day when what she saw and heard on television was contradictory and appeared to violate the laws of physics. Since that day she has used her knowledge of engineering mechanics to prove that the collapse of the World Trade Center twin towers could not have happened as the American public was told.

There is a wealth of information here: http://www.drjudywood.com

Also, check out this Alaskan magnometer data. It seems that immediately before the Towers were brought down there was a surge in magnetic (electromagnetic?) activity observed in Alaska. This is where HAARP is located (compare the UT times to the graph, because the graph is in UT time):

WTC1 gets hole 08:46:26 AM 12:46 UT
WTC2 gets hole 09:02:54 AM 13:03 UT
Pentagon Event 09:30-9:40 AM 13:35 UT
WTC2 goes poof 09:59:04 AM 13:59 UT
Shanksville, PA Event 10:03-10:10 AM 14:05 UT
WTC1 goes poof 10:28:31 AM 14:29 UT

This definitely appears as though HAARP started warming up before the buildings were hit, and increased in output power, disturbing the Alaskan magnetosphere, at the exact same time that the attacks began, peaking in intensity when the buildings were brought down at 14:00PM UT / 2:00PM UT.

Lastly, Dr. Judy Wood has had an ongoing law suit with several companies over 9/11. She is suing them for covering up the truth and being involved in 9/11. Her court case has reached the Supreme Court but no one knows about it because the many corrupt insiders within the 9/11 Truth Movement have been trying to suppress it from getting out to the public and have been trying to discredit Dr. Wood.

"My intellectual integrity prevents me from calling this a collapse. This is why I have chosen to stand up. My conscience leaves me no other choice."

http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/12121131/fpart/1/vc/1
 
u2r2h said...
6/21/2006 4:21 PM
My guess is that it was a bomb.. more than a 500pounder.
Then, how do the airplane-snippets get into the crater, and what is their distribution on the surrounding area?
All these things are inside a report that we have not seen. Until we see it, I hold the US government responsible.

Rev. Munchi Mike Goldsun said...
8/28/2006 3:27 PM
The site was NOT a farm pasture as some liars claim.
It was an abandoned mine/quarry. It was up on a ledge, with hills above it and below it, which made it completely concealed. It was/is a terrific place to bury a remote receiver, some plane parts, and a bomb. Not one person would ever suspect mysterious trucks full of 'evidence' arriving, nor would anyone suspect digging and burying the 'evidence' in advance.
A guy cannot fly a jet overland by looking out the window.
You've flown in a jet most likely, and know what the ground looks like from a jet window at 30,000 feet; IF you can see it!!
I find it EXTREMELY unbelievable that four men looked out of four 757's and found their way to NY or DC, besides the fact that out of 19 hijackers, (None of whom were on the passenger lists) 7/9 are still alive, that would leave, let's say 12 hijackers.
That's four jets, 12 hijackers. THREE PER PLANE!!
that means TWO guys waving flimsy box cutters, held off all the passengers while the third guy forced two pilots out of the cockpit and flew the jet to it's target by looking out the freaking window!!!!?????

http://killtown.blogspot.com/2006/06/shanksville-crater-oddity.html


What Probably Happened at Shanksville

As the 757 flew over the crash site, pre-planted explosives (remember this is a former mine) were detonated creating the central crater. This caused the mushroom cloud in the photo. The wing and tail imprints were dug in advance, plus some of the central crater, long enough for grass to grow. Aircraft debris, paper and fuel were pre-planted and blown out by the explosives.

http://www.whale.to/b/flight_93.html


One of the most curious facts of 9/11 is how the same C-130 Air National Guard plane, Golfer 6, was able to visually identify 2 of the 4 planes within seconds of the crashes, even though the crash sites were over 100 miles apart.

In order for the C-130 to identify the Flight 93 just minutes after the crash it had to have a pre-determined flight plan that took it almost directly over Shanksville. What are the odds of that?

According to the official story, they had dropped stuff off in the Carribean, and were returning to their home base in Minneapolis. They took off from Andrews about 9:30, almost at the same time the controllers spotted Flight 77 screaming in from the west.

The controllers then asked the C-130 if they could ID 77. The pilot said that 77 was filling up his wind screen. Then the pilot said that 77 seemed to have crashed into the Pentagon. At this point ATC told the pilot to continue on with his trip to Minnesota.

There have also been conflicting reports about what the pilot said. The story I just read today talked about another crew member looking down and to the right watching 77 coming in for what he thought was a landing. There were also reports that ATC asked the C-130 to follow 77.

BTW, there's apparently a version of the C-130 with electronic jamming equipment that theoretically could have taken a plane out of the air without firing a shot. This might have been a more palatable, politcally correct option re Flight 93 as opposed to a shoot down.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread281920/pg1


Did a Military Plane Drop Airplane Parts Over Shanksville?

What if a C130 just flew over Shanksville and dropped bone yard wreckage that scattered eight miles wide? Also, what if a missile was fired from a drone into the ground that already had a long scar that had been there since 1994?

Therefore, it would look as if an airplane had crash. What if a bulldozer had been where the hole is in the ground and buried more bone yard airplane scraps to make it look as if a plane crashed before the drone fired the missile right in the middle of that scar in the ground?

We are given two such stories from the media the flight UA93 crash in a hole, and flight UA 93 may have been shot down due to the wreckage was scattered eight miles in all directions. It is almost like two airplanes crash in Shanksville; however, the FBI is claiming only one crashed. So why are we hearing about two separate debris fields? My belief is no airplane crashed in a hole in the ground; however, as for airplane debris that was scattered eight miles I am convinced that they were dumped from another plane from the air. (Parts from airplane bone yard) Why did the FBI fail to bother to match any serial numbers to the alleged plane as they always do in most plane crash investigations?

I believe the crash debris does not belong to the alleged airplane: that is why the FBI did a deliberate sloppy investigation on all four plane crashes.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread453323/pg1
 
911 In A Nut Shell
Jan 24 2011

On 911, NORAD was involved in military exercises [war games]…some parts simulation and some parts "Real' World".
Global Guardian, Vigilant Guardian, Vigilant Warrior, National Reconnaissance Office drill, Operation Tripod bioterrorism exercise, plus the FBI, NASA and FEMA…all involved
Somewhere in the mix…two to four airframes [that had been modified in the past] were to be flown by remote control to targets within the realm of the War Games. But like the 7/7 London Bombings the exercise went 100% "Real World".
Backdoor technology allowed and gave these airframes new targets. This is why the transponders were turned off…not to fool the FAA but to fool the military.
Apparently, the takeover of the WTC7/Shanksville airframe didn't work…so Rudy Giuliani and his handlers went to plan "B" which was "Pull it".
The Pentagon was a planned flyover using trained military pilots. The unknown object at caused the actual destruction was a planned "Black Operation" outside normal military protocol.
Only a very tight group of people could have been involved in this…some from the Department of War

The degree of pre-planning required to create the Shanksville scene suggests that it was always part of the plan to create a hero story for the masses.

This is an interesting theory. Perhaps the commercial flights were real flights but hijacked by the actual alleged hijacker patsies but they were remote controlled into the war games and shot down as assumed inserted targets.
Substitute planes were remote controlled into the towers perhaps with additional explosives or incendiaries as payload. This may have created fires / heat etc which was much hotter than "office or jet fuel fires"
The pentagon was a media show and apparently an attempt to knock off accountants. The data was inserted from a flight simulator... not actual flight data from that day... how are controllers to know where the data on their screens comes from? They can't. But it the DOD spooks know how to insert data onto ATC screens.
93 was another show in which a hero cover story was created to distract people. No plane commercial jet... but perhaps some plane with remote control was exploded to bits. The hole was likely created by some ordinance dropped there.
WTC 7 was intended to become a raging inferno caused by debris from WTC 1 and then collapse from fire... though it was to be taken out with some sort of engineered explosives. The fire never really was terribly threatening so they decided to go ahead with the plan rather than let it extinguish itself or be fought. Lots of records were destroyed there conveniently....
Apparently gold was taken from the vaults under the towers as pay off for whomever.
Once the cover story was trotted out to the media, everyone jumped on board and if they didn't they were branded unpatriotic. That lasted long enough to get the wars going and shove 9/11 facts down the memory hole of manufactured history.

Susan = Small, cylinder shape, spoiler, pure white, fiberglass looking, low noise, missile or 1 manned plane
Word 31: B742 [E4B], a NAOC (National Airborne Operations Center) flight, according to the flight strip, that staged at 7:36 hrs. Word 31 was airborne at 9:27.
Gofer 06: A Minnesota Air National Guard C130H, airborne at 9:33, ultimately an observer to the aftermath of the alleged impacts of AA 77 and UA 93.
Venus 77: B747, airborne under VFR rules at 9:45; it became the "white plane."

Boeing AGM-86D Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile is able to destroy buried or hardened targets from standoff ranges of hundreds of miles. It incorporates a penetrating warhead capable of piercing up to 12 feet of reinforced concrete and near-precision, GPS guidance. Top Speed 500 mph (Mach 0.67)

The interesting thing about the Boeing AGM-86D is that it did not become public until shortly after 911, therefore it was a UFO.
With the right pods, these critters can be launched by a C-130.
Boeing got a fat contract.
Powered by a turbofan jet engine that propels the missile at subsonic speeds, the CALCM deploys its folded wings, tail surfaces and engine inlet upon launch.
It possesses the following operational characteristics:
• Flies complicated, low­altitude routes to a target by using a terrain contour­
matching guidance system and GPS/INS
• Has a small profile that reduces the likelihood of detection by radar

So far…it appears that Lt Colonel Steve O'Brien was flying the control vehicle for the UFO operation over Shanksville and the Pentagon.
The Lockheed C-130 Hercules is notorious for psychological warfare and stand-off projects. O'Brian could deploy, destroy, and dump materials and also psyop communication all from one point. "Big-Brother" was in the sky above him…
In different configurations the C-130B-II was distinguished by its "false" external wing fuel tanks, which were used to disguised "Signals Intelligence" (SIGINT) receiver antennas.
In the C-130E form it is an extended-range development of the C-130B, with two under-wing fuel tanks and increased range and endurance capabilities.
Similar to the E model, the C-130H was updated T56-A-T5 turboprops, a redesigned outer wing, updated avionics, and other minor improvements.
It would have been a no brainer to attach two [or more} Boeing AGM-86D and disguise them as external fuel tanks.

IMO a B-52 would be a better platform for the ACLM, and from a distance. No need to be close to the target, and probably better to be further away.

We know that the same exact C-130 flew over both the Pentagon and Shanksville and it was capable of carrying the ALCM…that just so happens was not released to the public for another two months.

AGM­86D Payload: Advance Unitary Penetrator
Flies complicated, low altitude routes to a target by using a terrain contour matching guidance system and global positioning system (GPS) receiver and inertial navigation system (INS)
An INS can detect a change in its geographic position (a move east or north, for example), a change in its velocity (speed and direction of movement), and a change in its orientation (rotation about an axis). All inertial navigation systems suffer from integration drift.
Avoiding roadside infrastructure such as road signs, guardrails, light poles and other assets would require a current land videograph.
They have an extremely tough casing and a delayed fuse which contains three hard-backed (Depleted Uranium steel alloy) contact penetrating, tunnel and final-depth penetrator charges. Basically, the bomb doesn't go off till a few seconds after it hits the target. This allows the bomb to penetrate (or burrow into the structure or ground) as far as possible before it explodes.

I think Susan McElwain is as good a place to start and reverse engineer this. Her UFO came in from the South on a heading to the North East and targeted itself perfectly into an existing mining excavation in a fairly safe location.
Viola Saylor on the other hand describes the C-130 flyover with its external fuel tanks appearing to be silver fins. Both Susan and Viola witness more than one plane and as Viola put it…the white one had 2 eye balls…indicating that it was Word 31: B742 [E4B].
Somewhere in the mix Gopher 06 had deployed ALCM-2 and dumped some decoy debris that floated toward or from Indian Lake…up to two miles off course.
In no way, shape or form was the FBI interested in these witness accounts. [And possibly anyone else's]

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t20990-0.html
 
23 Mar 2006

Similarities Between Pentagon and Shanksville Crash Sites

My main argument is the 9/11 plotters did not create completely different attack plans for "Flight 93" and the Pentagon -- the two plans were basically the same -- but, with different details. Same as the WTC attacks -- same plan, different details.

Keep in mind that there are odd ownership connections with the abandoned mine at Shanksville (see Nico Haupt's research) -- and that the area of the Pentaon hit had just undergone reconstruction -- with damage extending into the section next to be reconstructed. This allowed the planners to prepare both crash sites in advance.

First, I maintain an airliner ("Flight 77") flew over the Pentagon and landed somewhere. It was necessary to have a real plane because the area around the Pentagon has many experienced plane watchers, frequent fliers, military personnel, pilots ...

I also think "Flight 93" flew over the crash site and then disappeared.

http://letsrollforums.com/similarities-between-pentagon-and-t10749.html?s=de09374f23d4891e9cb339c0fecb80e2&


Domenick DiMaggio
Dec 10 2008

i can tell you todd beamers cell phone made phone calls to a new jersey location until 8:00pm on the 11th long after he was said to have died on flight 93.

i can tell you the evidence presented in the moussaoui trial states todd's airphone call lasted until 10:49am on the 11th, again corroborating he did not die in a field in shanksville.

and based on that corroboration i think it is safe to say that jeremy glick didn't die in a field in shanksville either since his airphone call lasted until 11:43am on the 11th.

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/956795/1/
 
O'Brien verbally confirms his plane's presence at both Pentagon strike, just prior to 'impact' and at Shanksville, 2 minutes after 'impact' having seen plume of smoke.

He was flying a C-130 on an apparently "routine mission" and returning his aircraft from Andrews AFB to Minnesota's Air Guard Air Base -- taking off at 9:30am.

Did you know that DC-St Paul takes you RIGHT OVER SHANKSVILLE? at least close enough to see the smoke plume, identify it as crash site, meaning 5-10 miles.

having read the Northwoods scenario involving F-111 bombers dropping key 'payload' -- i'm going to have to ask O'brien and schumacher what they were carrying in their hold ---

(audience members: if you said "plane debris in small fragments" -- case of corndogs coming your way...)

completely agree that Steve-O was droppin a payload of engine parts and shiny AA scraps on the lawn, parking lots, and streets surrounding the Pentagon. Not to mention the goodies found at the Shanksville crater.

I would be in agreement of this too. It definitely would explain how light debris traveled so far from the shanks crash.

The C-130, IIRC, usually has a crew of 4 (Pilot, Co-pilot, Engineer, and Loadmaster). So the entire crew is in on it, not just Mr. O'Brian.

And the parts would have been loaded where? The Carribean? Andrews? Who procured the parts and made them up to look like Boeing 757 parts?

I do not know how a C-130 can drop -- whether from tail section ONLY or from side (low speeds means you don't get sucked out) --

Perhaps the fact that the 'flying object' struck the pentagon meant that there was no need to drop at Pentagon. Mission critical was flying over Shanksville between 1000am and 1006 am.

After making visual contact with pentagon plane, the C-130 turned for Minnesota, and on the way, was directed to fly right over the Shanksville area.

A better case for debris-drop could be made here -- fewer witnesses -- and confetti like debris that rained down in a timing pattern TOO EARLY....

I would bet that if the C-130 dropped debris, it only dropped debris at Shanks, since there is such sparse debris at the Pent.

Shanksville -- all bets are off. NO ONE witnessed what the C-130 did or did not do -- confetti sized debris, to 'sell' news reporters on a crash, would be brilliant. I mean, the hole is small -- but if you add hole + witnesses to plane + boom + debris, even a skeptic starts admitting 'well there must have been a plane'

Secondly, dropping debris over a large field is the perfect set -up to Rumsfeld's planned false choice of "UA93 crash vs UA93 shootdown by missile" -- again, this is possibly a logical trap -- and you don't have to accept EITHER theory.

Just like Pentagon -- we are set up to either buy 100% that AA77 hit the pentagon, or that NO-757 hit pentagon. Meyssan started this false choice. Rummy abetted it with the 'missile' comment. The problem is that either choice does not acct for all evidence, so you end up falling short.

These guys are pros at misdirection. Do not accept either polar extreme without question, and look for a 3rd answer.

But the only way to get cargo out of a Herc is by lowering the rear door. The side door is just person-sized and would be woefully inadequate for dumping metal shards (or that large engine part seen in the Moussaoui evidence pictures).

So the only way to dump a quantity of material is from the rear door, whch means lowering the door, getting the stuff perched on the edge, and then dumping it on the pilots command, all at the speed of about 130 knots and you get only one chance to get it right--and drop some of the large elements right in the big hole in the ground. Radar-guided bombs may have that type of accuracy; several National Guardsmen are rather unlikely too. IMHO of course.

If this idea had been employed, however, I do NOT think accuracy was an issue. The most effective parts dump would have been small fragments dispersed without attempting to 'hit the empty hole in shanksville'

This debris serves the point of "window dressing"

"Fat Albert" piloted by O'brien and Schumacher is the only ID'd craft in the area besides mystery "white jet".

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8868
 
8673566d129285622o.jpg


shanksaerialspots.jpg


789334c6250a.gif

Viola's house lays between the 'o' and the 'f' of the words "Site o-f Crash".
Susan's car had just stopped at the junction (where in this map the short dark line ends with the text "Grove Run" just under the small square indicating the crash site), when the little white drone passed over her car's roof and hopped over the tree line on the other side of the crossing road, in the direction of the crash site she could not see at that moment.

When you add 180 seconds (3 minutes) to the FDR and the CVR published by the NTSB, you can see and calculate for your self, that suddenly all eyewitness and ear witness accounts fir perfectly in the now corrected heights and positions of the new FDR and CVR.
And those extra 3 minutes flightpath are proven by the seismic record, the radar data and the FAA flight controllers written down reports of the UAL transponder signals, their electronic records connected to GPS and atomic NIST clocked data.

This is an area view of the official crash site, with Viola's house where the red circled "?" is placed by me near the name Lambertsville on this early map I made. That's where she really lived. Not the other signs by me in the long red rectangle I drew then.
The drone could have also flown in from behind Susan's car over that road while she drove on that road towards the junction.
7a829a235b80.jpg


It flew in those last few minutes in a long slow right bended arc from Boswell to a bit north of Stoystown then over Lambertsville to the crash site.
And it seems more and more likely that it made then a slight left turn and continued its flight in the direction of the Indian Lake and the marina there, flew over that and disappeared from the radar screens at 10:06 AM.
But what made that seismic signal then at 10:06 AM if it was still flying according to that last transponder signal at 8200 feet (2500 meters)...?
Well, that was the ordnance exploding in that 1994 scar on the USGS map.

It should be noticed that a small airstrip was situated east of the middle land tongue at the right side of Indian Lake, it is now disbanded, but the main northwest to southeast airstrip is still perfectly visible. You can see its cross-like shape clearly laying above the name "Indian Lake" printed on this map near the red dot:
76a6fffb2e4a.jpg


It seems to me, that the drone could have been launched there by any foreign agency, or local agency, who wanted visual recorded proof for later political advantageous blackmail purposes. Chinese, Russian, NATO, Israeli agencies.

It was quite busy in the air above Lambertsville that morning, they even send a possible Doomsday plane flying so high that all witnesses described it as "like a real big triangular formed white plane with drawn back wings, with a clear military look about it".
And some saw an eyeball on top of it, exactly the radar dome on top of the nose part of one of the 4 white Doomsday planes in the air that day.
And then we had the C-130 which just came from the Pentagon crash, just 20 miles northeast of the UAL 93 crash site passing by. Perhaps used as a jamming station to camouflage the sudden disappearance of the real, still flying at 8200 feet UAL 93 at 10:06 AM as reported by those FAA flight controllers.
And that Falcon 20 business jet owned by a Warren Buffet company, sent to see if they saw an airplane crash by some Cleveland Airport flight controller.
And the little white drone.
And, UAL 93.

That's probably why all those US fighter planes had been sent to Alaska on 9/10 and 9/11. And, conveniently, there was thus no USAF shield in the eastern seaboard regions.

I have read somewhere that the US had some very early contacts by red telephones with the Russians and the Chinese top, to tell them that they were convinced that it was not an attack by these two, but a terrorist attack.
Both two understood quite fast that this was a US false flag attack, but it suited them greatly too, so why interfere?
More probable is that they were already informed in certain circles.

Imagine a 757 flying with its belly upwards just over the top of those trees.
That's what Viola and her sister saw around probably 10:02:45 AM that 9/11 morning, hurrying towards the later official crash side. She could not see it go down, but she also did not see it go UP, which would have been necessary to fit the last seconds of the fraudulent last part of the NTSB provided FDR.

I believe the fdr and cvr to be total fabrications based on my interviews with numerous eyewitnesses. Attempting to do anything with either of this is a waste of time. They are fake.

The seismic data does indicate whatever happened occurred at 10:06am. Most likely this would be the drone plane approaching and delivering its payload which created the circular impression or triggered a pre-planted 'package' in the drainage ditch.

But the FAA guy reports an 8000 feet height at the last transponder recorded position, so that plane was still flying, and just switched the transponder off, or that omni-present C-130 or the Doomsday plane very high up jammed the radar and radio signals from that moment on, and thus Cleveland radar lost that transponder signal again at 10:06.

One, the original UAL 93 plane loaded with all the passengers from all the other flights flying extremely low under the radar over Viola and her sister's heads, and also over Peterson the carpenter who lived at the other side of the junction a few houses southwards, and all the others who saw it flying very low in those last 5 miles.

So, basically, two planes on a "collision" course, both flying at that time under the radar, one came from the south and flew up higher after it switched to the other its transponder code, and the other coming from the north (UAL93) flew further low, after it switched its transponder off.

That explains the too early witness accounts at Indian Lake Marina and at nearby spots around there, clocked before the "crash" explosion sound. That would have been the decoy plane going to the north.
And Viola and all the others saw the real UAL93 flying over real low, that one coming from the north.

In this third scenario case, the UAL93 heroes story was the main reason for this transponder switch. There was no intended fourth attack on Washington or elsewhere.
It was all for psychological warfare intentions, to boost the patriotic feelings of the US populace to above Pearl Harbor levels.

This scenario only needs a few operators, and some forty dedicated US military hardliner men, who were convinced that a new Pearl Harbor was needed. (Or 40 Israeli's, who knew that 911 would safeguard their homeland for many years to come. There was one real Mossad man on the passenger list, who was reported as stabbed to death in the onset of the "hijack".)

My research has led me to conclude this plane did not crash anywhere nor was it shot down. There's a group of witnesses in Indian Lake including the mayor who heard it fly over his home. They can't exist if this plane crashed 3 miles prior for any reason.

I've been to Indian Lake and New Baltimore, there is no site where a 757 crashed yet it flew over Indian Lake. The 2000 census determined that 168 people live in New Baltimore. If a 757 crashed anywhere near there 168 people would have known about it. But it flew over Indian Lake heading that way.

Air Force had about 180 of these white planes with rear engines at that time:
T-1A Jayhawk:
http://www.af.mil/information/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=123

The lights flickering as their first noticeable event could indicate strong radar jamming before launching a rocket, by the C-130 25 miles away (that's possible and in their range), or by a higher flying doomsday plane which was later also sighted by several people, who described it as a 4 engines, huge white jet plane with a military look and swept-back wings, and a telltale "eye" above the fuselage. Which is the elevated radar dome on top of its nose section. This plane is supposed to carry defensive rockets on board.

Instead of an attack on UAL 93, this rocket could have been sent to the later crater instead, impacting straight down. They have no smoke trail and would be very hard to detect by a human eye at the supersonic speeds they fly.

http://s3.invisionfree.com/CIT/ar/t1563.htm
 
Say the C-130 takes off from Andrews at a little before 9:30 if it isn't already airborne. Say the crew knows what it's going to do and is all pumped up. Say they see the smoke at the Pentagon on the run straight for New Baltimore.

Say UA93 is coming down from Cleveland.

Say their speeds are coordinated so they are in the right places at the right times.

Say UA93 descends toward Shanksville and ascends away from Shanksville. Say the C-130 flies at 300 feet or so dumping debris from New Baltimore to Shanksville and ascends at Shanksville, sticks around a little and then heads for Minnesota.

Say Susan saw a small drone and not a large plane or a missile south of the crater field. The missile that created the crater came from the northeast, and that rules out Susan seeing a missile coming from the south.

Say the crater was made by a missile coming in from the east. Could have been launched from the USS George Washington or anywhere that is feasible to launch the missile from.

Say the C-130 needs to dump debris at New Baltimore and Indian Lake. Say the C-130 doesn't have to dump debris at the crater field, but say that it does. The strip mine could have been somewhat of a landfill. The burning tire is of unknown origin. Could have been hard to plant that at the scene. Could have been landfill material. Rollock scrap could have been planted in the grass on foot.

Now, how do we prevent a mid-air collision at the crater field? Say UA93 flies over the field and ascends, the missile explodes immediately after that, and the C-130 immediately locates the smoke plume and flies through it while dumping debris. Say Viola sees UA93 and hears the explosion at least a few seconds later. She is looking toward the horizon and doesn't notice the C-130 above the smoke plume. Say the people at Indian Lake don't pay much attention to whether the plane they see or hear is going southeast or northwest or whether they notice it before or after the explosion or the rain of debris.

There is a Guerilla News Network video which says there was a second plane flyover at Shanksville a few seconds after the explosion. I have read that GNN is a spook site, but theoretically they could be telling the truth about Shanksville in this case.
 
Viola Saylor on the other hand describes the C-130 flyover with its external fuel tanks appearing to be silver fins. Both Susan and Viola witness more than one plane and as Viola put it…the white one had 2 eye balls…indicating that it was Word 31: B742 [E4B].

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t20990.html


So I f i am understanding this right...there were 3 planes
Plane 1
The big commercial (I'll call it commercial for simplicity!) plane that was upside down (although Viola described it as having fins?)
Plane2
The white one with the "eyes "on top (Viola describes this as a bigger plane-but in relation to what..bigger than the plane that was upside down..or bigger than the 3rd silver plane off in the distance?).....is this too big to be the one that Susan Mclewin saw?
Plane3
the small silver plane off in the distance (as an outside hypothesis...could this have been the same big commerial tha had been upside down.....but now it was just further away...so it looked small to Viola).....alternatively is this the small white/silver plane that Susan Mclewin saw!

yes you are correct there are 3 planes involved in this operation :
plane #1 - 'commercial airliner'
plane #2 - small white plane
plane #3 - larger white plane
plane #3 [the one with the eyes on top] is not susan mcelwains plane which is plane #2.
my numbering system is based on their arrival at the scene.
plane #2 was witnessed by susan, rick chaney, viola [small white or silver one high in the sky], and i am in contact with 2 other witnesses to it.
plane #3 was witnessed by viola, bob blair, doug miller. bob said he wouldn't call it a fighter jet but said it was definitely a military plane. doug told me the fbi told him it was a c130 but doug also denied it having any propellers. both men had this plane pass over their heads at treetop level while at the crash site. this was several minutes after the explosion.
By the time bob & doug arrived at the scene the plane #2 was finished and at a higher altitude that they did not even notice it. This is when #3 arrived and as it was leaving is when viola came back outside to see it leaving the scene from the treetop level bob and doug described to me. That is when viola noticed the little plane, #2, at a much higher altitude leaving the scene heading off in the opposite direction [which would be south but not clear if it was southeast or west].

In the interview from about 13:20 to 14:30 Viola explains in depth, what she had seen.
She believes, that the plane was upside down because the top was deep-blue. She also remembers that the fins where upside down. First she didn´t realize that, but later by conclusion (blue on the top instead on the belly) and because the TV had explained her what she had to see, she was sure.
But the most exciting statement was for me, when she described the color of the belly as a "shiny silver glistening in the sunlight".
She repeats "silver" three times.
The top of UAL 93, tailnumber N591UA is a light grey, not silver, not shiny, not glistening!
I am very sure that Viola describes the camouflage of the decoy-plane at shanksville.

http://s3.invisionfree.com/CIT/ar/t394.htm


1. Plane skims, flying upside-down, her Maple tree in the back of her garden and she sees the treetop leaves all move in the jet stream.
2. Within a few seconds, she stops hearing the thundering noise of the upside-down flying plane, and then a very muffled short "thump" sound. The ground is not shaking.
3. Plane went not down in Shanksville, but in between Lambertsville and Shanksville.
4. She later notices a low flying BIGGER plane, white, with two kind of eyeball engines on top of it. (Warthog A-10? Even an E-4B perhaps?)
5. And she later notices an other smaller plane much higher up in the sky, could be white or silver colored. (The business jet asked to take a look?)
First part and most impressive, totally conflicting the official story, of her recollection of events of 9/11 :
That plane could not have went up vertically, then dropping back the same distance, and crashing head on into the soil. She would have noticed the vertical ascend and the following descend.
The official story wants us to believe that flight 93 went perpendicular, nose diving from at least many hundreds of meters high, into the soil, leaving nearly no trace of it because the soil was so soft there, that it took up the plane as if it went down into silly-putty. What I recall is that the media reported it coming down from about 3000 meters high in a steep nose dive, after having flown a few times upside and down.

1) she's not 100% sure the plane actually made contact. in retrospect she couldn't say whether or not the tree was actually contacted or if it was the turbulence from it being so close which caused the leaves to be shed.
2) this is key. also note her telling that she hears someone yell 'oh my god' after the plane passes and before any thud. now if you google her address at that time on pompey hill road you will find that her house is probably the closest to the crash site from the north just northwest of the junk yard. a plane traveling at 585mph would have impacted the site before she could say 'oh my god'.
3) she actually says that location has always been lambertsville and it was only on september 11th that it was now considered to be shanksville.
4) I dont think it was the e4b because no witness describes it having 4 engines. i ruled out the a10 because of multiple witnesses to this plane having told me that the wings were 'slicked back' [saylor, blair, miller]. although it is interesting to note that the fbi told doug miller this plane was a c130 cargo plane. After Doug confirmed the plane did not have any propellers he didn't wish to discuss it any further.
5) it was white but it wasn't a business jet. this was the operational plane that was above the crash site at the moment of the explosion as confirmed to me by 2 eyewitnesses willing to testify in front of congress. it remained at the scene for a period of about 5 minutes before ascending quickly into the sky and taking off. this was at the time that the other white plane approached coming from the south.

I have listened out a few more times to Viola's interview from the opening post, and this is what comes out of it as the basics:
She first heard a deafening roar coming her way, standing in her back door, looking north, then she saw a big passenger plane with a row of windows, flying towards her at approx. 100 feet high (30 meters), as if it would hit her. The plane flew upside-down, she thinks, because the fins of the tail part were under the plane.
She also describes it as having the blue line along the belly in the wrong place, the silver top side was now down and the blue line was on top, that's another reason she thinks it flew upside-down.
It passed her 30 meters above her head, and then was out of sight at the other side of her house, continuing its path somewhere along the right and then the left side of the south going lane of Lambertsville Road.
She went in the house with her sister, who was speechless but also saw the same plane, and the sister left the house shortly after. Then Viola went to her porch, about 5 to 10 minutes later, and sees a new plane coming to her, but now from the side of the crash crater, the south side. This plane was "bigger, white, with two kinds of eyeballs on top of this plane" and flying medium low. The fact that she described it as bigger as 93 and military-like with swept-back wings is amazing. It will be difficult to find a picture of such kind of plane which she could recognize. If we find one she does recognize, that will be an interesting day.
Right after this bigger one flying to the north, a littler, white or silver plane came flying by at a higher altitude, coming from the opposite direction, so from north to south.

White plane was Falcon business jet owned by VF company which makes North Face. Was heading into Johnstown when FAA controllers alerted it to verify crash site. Was descending into Johnstown when
received call. Made pass over scene to verify Flight 93 was down

There was no corporate jet in shanksville. I've spoken to susan, viola, rick chaney, bob blair, doug miller, and several other eyewitnesses.

UA93: 35 Airfone phone calls and 2 cell phone calls

The alleged black box serial numbers were never released.
None of the data contained within that alleged black box can be relied upon, as the true identity of the alleged black box has never been verified.

When Viola Saylor was shown a picture of one of these
(A-10 Thunderbolt II)
she confirmed that this is what she saw.
I think it's safe to assume she was a bit confused about its size.

The third plane she saw, probably was the Fairchild Falcon 20 business jet which FAA controllers alerted to the crash of UAL93 and asked to verify the crash site.
It was descending to Johnstown airport, which is situated about 30 km to the north of the crash site, thus it is quite possible it came from the north.
In my opinion, when I read her description of the second plane coming from the south, I immediately think of an E-4B "Doomsday" plane.
One is normally and especially in an "Attack on America" situation, always near the presidential plane, "Air Force One". They can stay for many days airborne, while being re-fueled in the air.
The E-4B is a lot bigger than UAL93, has clearly swept-back wings and is white, with two kinds of eyeballs on top of this plane, one is the usual big and long dome-like nose of the 747, and its second one is the smaller satellite communications antenna dome on top of it, just at the end of the standard 747 dome-like nose.
The A-10 has definitely NO swept back wings, they are straight, and under a 90° angle to the fuselage. And an A-10 is considerably smaller than UAL93, a 757.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread421852/pg1
 
November 4, 2006
September 11, 2001 Revisited
ACT IV: PART II

Reporters from the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review also encountered residents who spoke of a mysterious jet: "At least two witnesses in Shanksville said they saw a large plane circling the crash site following the explosion. About two or three minutes after the explosion, the airplane climbed into the sky almost vertically, the witnesses said. 'It sure wasn't no puddle jumper,' said Bob Page, general sales manager at Shanksville Dodge. Page said he could not see if there were any markings on the plane or what kind it was." ("Homes, Neighbors Rattled By Crash," Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, September 12, 2001)

Unfortunately, however, O'Brien seems to have trouble keeping the details of his story straight, which doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in him as a witness. In the video interview, we hear that "O'Brien speaks of an unusually clear and beautiful summer day along the East Coast. But the splendor of that summer morning ultimately gave a more clear view of the first horrific sight of his day [the alleged crash of Flight 77 at the Pentagon]." But when O'Brien spoke to the Minnesota Star-Tribune, he said that when he was allegedly asked to shadow Flight 77 over Washington, he "had a hard time picking him out" because of "all the East Coast haze." (Bob Von Sternberg "How We've Changed," Minnesota Star-Tribune, September 11, 2002)

O'Brien also told the Star-Tribune that, after passing over the Pentagon, "He flew west, not exactly sure where he was supposed to land. Somewhere over western Pennsylvania, O'Brien looked down at a blackened, smoldering field. 'I hoped it was just a tire fire or something, but when I checked with Cleveland center, he told me he'd just lost a guy off the scope petty close to where we saw it. By then, we were able to patch in AM radio, so we heard about all the planes. It was like a domino effect – a really bad day for airplanes." About a year and a half later, in May 2004, O'Brien told Minnesota Public Radio a much different story: "In a recent interview, Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien, commander of Gopher 06, says he remembers seeing a big explosion … Through the haze the shape of the Pentagon emerged where the explosion had occurred. The crew alerted the controllers and tuned in a newscast using navigation radios. 'The first thing we heard on there was 'We're now hearing about a second airplane hitting the World Trade Center.' That was not what we were expecting to hear. We were expecting to hear about an airplane impacting the Pentagon, and they haven't even mentioned that yet,' says O'Brien. 'They're just talking about a second airplane hitting the World Trade Center, and the light goes on, and it's like, 'Oh my God, the nation's under attack!''" (Bill Catlin "Museum Features Air Guard's History and Role in the War on Terror," Minnesota Public Radio, May 31, 2004)

Now, you would think that, given the significance of the events of that day and the impact they had on his life, Lt. Col. O'Brien would remember clearly whether the skies over Washington were crystal clear or hazy that morning, and whether he learned that the nation was under attack after viewing the alleged Pentagon crash scene or after viewing the alleged Pennsylvania crash scene. You would also think that, if his crew had in fact tuned in a newscast right after the explosion at the Pentagon – which occurred more than a half-hour after the second WTC tower was hit, on live television – the first thing they would have heard would not likely have been "We're now hearing about a second airplane hitting the World Trade Center," as if it had just happened moments before. By the time of the attack on the Pentagon, every station on the dial had already replayed the footage of the second tower strike approximately 12 times.

There is one other minor problem with O'Brien's story: if, as he has maintained in all the interviews that he has done, he called in the location of the smoke cloud immediately after the alleged crash of Flight 93, then why did authorities need to purportedly call in a local civilian pilot to provide those coordinates?

During the 2004 interview with MPR, O'Brien revealed that there was a little surprise awaiting him after he came forward with his story: "the story turned up on the Internet as part of a conspiracy theory maintaining that no plane hit the Pentagon. 'To be called a liar and a part of a government conspiracy kind of affected me.'"

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr87.html
 
UA 93: The Road to Shanksville (Part 1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N018bxCd5Ww
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM9CXo29syo

With the nationwide release of United 93, the story of the tragic crash of the only 9/11 hijack plane not to reach it's target has now become part of American popular history. The initial story of a heroic mutiny, led by the now-legendary battlecry of "Let's Roll" by Oracle account manager Todd Beamer, immediately gripped the nation's imagination. It returned hope and confidence to a people who had been let down by their multi-billion dollar intelligence and military defense systems, affirming that there were heroes among them, that they would stand up against any challenge and fight to the most bitter end.

But there were some who questioned the official narrative of Flight 93. Reports began to surface that residents of Shanksville, the small town just one mile from the crash site, had seen a second plane fly over just seconds after the crash. Yet only one mainstream news reporter, Will Bunch of the Philly Daily News, covered any of these eyewitness accounts. His articles (this is the latest) on the crash remain the only substantive enquiries made by an American journalist into the crash. Never ones to ignore a story being ignored by Big Media, we decided to take a trip down to Shanksville ourselves.

Shot while during research for our book, True Lies, GNN's The Road To Shanksville looks at the wider socio-political issue of how mainstream news covered the initial stages of the administration's response to 9/11. It asks the bigger questions raised by this story, namely: are there some stories that we, as a society, would rather not know? Does that fear of knowing benefit those in power?

But it also touches down at the crash site, featuring interviews with those very eyewitnesses who's accounts of the "second plane" and other mysterious aspects of the crash are enough to make even the most cynical viewer wonder if the official story is actually the truth.

Featuring interviews with aviation expert Dr. Vernon Grose, BBC news producer Steven Williams, best-selling investigative journalist Greg Palast, Philly Daily News reporter Will Bunch and the people of Shanksville. - GNN.Tv

Credits
Directed by: Ian Inaba and Stephen Marshall
Produced by: Ian Inaba, Anthony Lappe, Stephen Marshall, Josh Shore
Edited by: Stephen Marshall
Score by: The Soulsavers
 
John Doe II
Apr-15-05
Proof that the official UA 93 story is a hoax
by Team 8+ and Zaphod 36
The following article will present the evidence we do have for what happened in Shanksville and will compare it to the official explanation. Afterwards all theoretically possible scenarios will be examined if they do account for the found evidences.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x37066


Cargo aircraft used by various branches of the United States Military.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/cargo/Cargo_Aircraft.htm

The C-40A, a derivative of the 737-700C and manufactured by Boeing Information, Space, and Defense Systems, is a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certified, high performance, fixed wing aircraft that will accommodate 120 passengers, eight pallets of cargo, or a combination configuration consisting of 3 pallets and 70 passengers.
A contract for two C-40As was signed in August 1997, with an option for a third. Delivery of the first aircraft is scheduled for December 2000. On July 30, 1999, Boeing Defense and Space Group was awarded a $43,700,000 modification to the previously awarded contract for the procurement of one C-40A aircraft, to be delivered by August 2001.

http://usmilitary.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=usmilitary&cdn=careers&tm=64&gps=59_421_1020_596&f=00&tt=14&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-40.htm

The C-20 Gulfstream III is a twin-engine, turbofan aircraft acquired to fill the airlift mission for high-ranking government and Defense Department officials. From the 89th Airlift Wing, Andrews Air Force Base, Md, seven B-model C-20s fly special air missions.

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/affacts/blc-20a-gulfstreamiii.htm
 
In my two-planes-meeting-at-the-field theory there is a commercial airliner or a commercial airliner replica heading southeast and a military cargo plane heading northwest.

Problem: Shouldn't people have noticed both planes? What if Steve O'Brien is innocent?

New theory: Only one plane and it was a military cargo plane replicating a commercial airliner heading southeast and dropping fake crash debris over Indian Lake and New Baltimore. It was modified by the military for 9/11.

Seems good to me.
 
Problem: Boeing 7x7 planes can't be airdropped or paratrooped out of.

The plane at Shanksville wasn't a Boeing 7x7 plane. It was a Lockheed C-141 Starlifter, Boeing C-17 Globemaster III or an Ilyushin Il-76 which can be airdropped and paratrooped out of.

These planes have four engines instead of two, but if anybody noticed, they kept their mouth shut about it.

These planes have their horizontal stabilizers up high. Maybe that's why Viola thought it was flying upside down.

I doubt it was the same plane as the flyover plane at the Pentagon.
 

Latest posts

Top