Well, it's good they shot it down, so they didn't waste any extra effort on building seven, where they already had explosives in place.
Flight 93 was not needed to bring down building seven.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
4 minutes. Compares 1994 US Geological aerial photographs of Shanksville, Pennsylvania vs 2001 news photographs. 1994 Geological Survey Aerial Photo shows the long earthed ditch (scar purported to be airplane crash site). The round crater was not.
Witness quote comes from emergency radio transmission. It is the final statement included in this newsreel. The radio transmission was recorded on that fateful day. As the gentleman wrote on the investigative report, "I am not a scientist. But, I ain't stupid either."
Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul ☑
or there would have been wing marks. This doesn't detract from the flt 93 vid here. None of these 25 witnesses saw a plane hit the pentagon. Please watch this. It seems truthful on every level and almost unbiased in its approach.
A USGS photograph from 1994 showing the flight 93 crash site, with the wing marks in the ground already! In 1994!
Picture gallery of Fl 93
Why dig a hole to bury a damning story when there already exists a long enough trench? Let that question stand on its own rhetorical merit.
Thank you for your interest in this matter.
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - Mark Twain
I really find it hard to believe that someone has a recorded video from 1994 of zooming in on an empty field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania to see if that scar is there. Why would you have that, seriously? In short I would need more evidence to prove that video was indeed from 1994 or even the same field in Shanksville, there's nothing in that video that proves either. Any further evidence to support the claim that video is of the same Shanksville field and indeed a satellite image taken in 1994?
Video shows specific governmental trail of evidence. Go US Geological Survey data: http://earthexplorer.USGS.gov/ & other sites that report their maps.
Driving directions: For a personal visit, new directions to the new entrance to the permanent memorial which was dedicated on September 10, 2011.
Address/Place: Shanksville Memorial Park w/ GPS coordinates.
16424 Lincoln Highway, Stoystown, PA 15563, USA
Latitude: 40.0818 & Longitude: -78.8858
National Park Service directions to Shanksville Memorial Park: http://www.nps.gov/flni/planyourvisit/directions.htm
Investigate what you feel is impartant. Conclude what you may.
Do you think it was shot down go213mph?
and this witness from Shanksville...
to become public, my best guess is that the plane was shot down BUT, we are deprived of vital information that could help confirm what really happened. I'm more comfortable stating that flight 93 did not crash directly into the ground, creating that hole, in Shanksville, PA. There are other possibilities besides the plane being shot down but that type of speculation will only muddy the waters at this point.
I'm also convinced that flight 77 did NOT hit the pentagon but there is a persistent group of people (many that I agree with on virtually every other aspect of 9/11) who contend flight 77 DID hit the pentagon. I've got no agenda for wanting flight 77 to hit or not hit the pentagon...I just do NOT see anywhere near enough evidence that a 747 hit the pentagon.
I worked in the guided weapons evaluation facility on a local military installation here in NW Florida from 2000-2010. I held a top secret clearance and I saw drones and global hawks up close and personal. There is no question that the MIC had/has the ability to make a UAV of any shape and size which could easily be painted to look however they choose.
All I want is the truth...because I've been awake a long time and I can handle the truth! :-)
Well first off, I completely respect your point of view. You are simply telling your opinion from the information you have considered, and that's all I expect anyone to do. I think we should be able to have a discussion on our different opinions of what happened on 9/11 here on the DailyPaul, aren't we all just trying to figure out the truth.
On this I was asking if you thought it was shot down because then you would acknowledge that this was in fact a hijacked airplane. That's one of my problems with the theory it wasn't the alleged planes that hit the Pentagon or the WTC. There's not an answer for what "really" happened to the actual planes in that theory, not any evidence of their existence anywhere else to my knowledge. So if you think this was a hijacked airplane that was shot down then you have to have come to some belief about what "really" happened to the other hijacked planes if you don't believe they hit the WTC towers and the Pentagon.
I don't have my mind made up either way on flt 93, I believe it could have been shot down. Not enough evidence to prove either way for me. I do definitely believe it is one of the two that happened though, it crashed from them rushing the cockpit or it was shot down.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul repres