A problem I have with Flight 93, Am I the only one?? Options

[IVXX]

OK we've all seen hundreds of pictures of the crash site. The nice little "cartoon cut-out" in the ground. Here's a list of a few problems I have.........

- First and foremost, the grass around the imapct isn't burnt. It would seem no fire touched it at all.

- You have the body of the plane and the wings in the "cartoon cut-out" but no tail section mark.

- Also where is the "cartoon cut-out" for the engines that should be about midway from body to wing tip along the wings.

- The official lie tells us that due to the force of imapct with the gorund at almost 500 miles an houir most of the debris and remains are buried 50 ft or better into the ground. At first I thought, "OK I can buy that" but then one small problem. As they're moving earth to dig up debris and remains one of the first things they recover is an engine. What?? The engines are the heaviest thing on these planes and by official lie logic should have been buried deeper into the earth than anything upon impact.

Anyway I know I'm not the only one to think of these things. They definitely make you go "Hmmmmmmm" and I can't believe that anyone who buys the official lie doesn't ask these same questions. I just figured I would share incase anyone here missed one of these details.

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif)

[Atjoer]

There was absolutely something not normal with flight 93 and I have strong feelings that the plane landed safe somewhere, maybe Chicago, I will tell my story....

On September 10th 2001 me and my wife moved to New Jersey, after unpacking our moving truck I met my neighbour and we started talking, she told me she was a flight attendant for United Airlines and I was always wondering how those people organize their lives with all that flying so we started talking about that a bit more, apparently she only flew domestic so she was home several times a week which would make a "normal" life possible, I asked her when her next flight was and she said tomorrow morning, flight 93 from Newark to San Francisco, I wished her a safe trip and went on returning our rented moving truck.
Well, next morning the War Game started and it took me about two days before I remembered the details about the talk I had with my neighbour and I told my wife that we probably wouldn't see her back because she was on that flight.
A week later I see her coming home and I asked her what happened and without any emotion she told me that she was put on another flight and got stuck in Chicago because all flights were down and it was clear that she didn't wanted to talk about it.

I don't know, never thought anything weird of it but since two days I'm trying to find the real truth about what happened on 9/11 after seeing a documentary on History where I feld that the real facts didn't pop up and after reading a truckload of stuff it might be interesting enough to share it with you guys.

[Obwon]

There was absolutely something not normal with flight 93 and I have strong feelings that the plane landed safe somewhere, maybe Chicago, I will tell my story....

On September 10th 2001 me and my wife moved to New Jersey, after unpacking our moving truck I met my neighbour and we started talking, she told me she was a flight attendant for United Airlines and I was always wondering how those people organize their lives with all that flying so we started talking about that a bit more, apparently she only flew domestic so she was home several times a week which would make a "normal" life possible, I asked her when her next flight was and she said tomorrow morning, flight 93 from Newark to San Francisco, I wished her a safe trip and went on returning our rented moving truck.
Well, next morning the War Game started and it took me about two days before I remembered the details about the talk I had with my neighbour and I told my wife that we probably wouldn't see her back because she was on that flight.
A week later I see her coming home and I asked her what happened and without any emotion she told me that she was put on another flight and got stuck in Chicago because all flights were down and it was clear that she didn't wanted to talk about it.

I don't know, never thought anything weird of it but since two days I'm trying to find the real truth about what happened on 9/11 after seeing a documentary on History where I feld that the real facts didn't pop up and after reading a truckload of stuff it might be interesting enough to share it with you guys.

What I've read is that flight 93 didn't exist until sometime in early Sept. it's
on one of the threads here, maybe: "Something strange about flight 93".
In any event, two of the skyjackers supposedly purchased their tickets in
August, and so, they would have reserved seats on flight 91.
I have no idea what this might mean to you, you might find something
useful in it. Flight 91 was supposedly canceled because of a cracked
windshield and some of the passengers transferred to flight 93.

Yet, when the "no fly" order came down, flight 91 was sitting at the
head of the runway waiting for clearance to take off. Go figure.

Anyway, my working theory is that flight 93 contained the real passengers
from those other supposed flights, somehow collected and flown to Newark,
some sort of "magic trick" was played. But, it was to assure higher
ups, who would have had to approve the 9-11 plan, that no passengers
had be harmed. At the towers, the "strikes", would have all but assured
that most people there would be able to evacuate. "Northwoods" was to
have no real casualties.

So, 93 was flown to Cleveland Hopkins where the passengers were deplaned
and held at the NASA Center, so that the "big boys" could confirm that they
were safe, and that things were going according to the plans that had been
approved by them. Then the perps working inside the plan, detonated
charges that blocked the stairwells, trapping thousands inside who couldn't
get out. There were "unavoidable deaths" and so that's when the plans
had to be changed.

The people who had landed on flght 93 at Cleveland, could not now be
allowed to survive. So they were taken away from there somehow and
silenced. The story of the Shanksville crash was just yet another creation.

I still haven't sorted out how such a thing could be worked out. So far it's
just a collection of logical/reported pieces, that I haven't been able to line up.
So it's just a jumble, but maybe someone who reads it, might find a piece
or two they can use.

Oh yes, while I'm at it, here's some more interesting stuff:

Over the last few year I've been noticing a discrepancy
between the times of the north and south tower hits, of
about three or four minutes. I noticed no one had thought
much of it, nor did anyone else. That is, except to note
that the discrepancy existed and is even reflected
and memorialized in the official 9-11 reports.

Over the last few weeks I've been watching the videos on
youtube and those reposted here. I came across those
videos that show the nose of the aircraft, emerging from
the north face of the south tower intact.

Two of them, apparently filmed from the west and
broadcast as "live" on tv, showed this feature. The
writer noted that when the film (that's all they could
be is "film") was broadcast, both stations made what
appeared to be an effort to "cover the error", by going
to a black screen for about 15 frames.

Well, this morning while in that half sleep state before
waking, the videos started playing in my head. There
were two more vids that appeared to be taken from the
east, that showed the same thing, the nose of the
aircraft emerging from the north face of the south tower.

Well, by dumb luck, the last threads I had read yesterday
had to do with people debunking the "NPT" by saying that
all of these videos couldn't be false, to which the reply was
"the nose knows". Obviously a sly reference to the
"nose out" videos (okay, that's me, simplifying it).

Much of the debate centered around "live" or not live. The
posters seemed to think that the reason that the videos were
so badly done, for a project of such vital importance, is that
there was so little time to do it. In fact, the point was made
that the 3 to 6 second delay, would hardly be enough to
make and insert fake content.

That's when I thought "Gee, how much time was there?".
The NPT detractors were saying that with only a three to six
second delay, there wasn't much time to both make the
videos and then insert them into the live program stream.
That's when it hit me, there had to be more time, and
perhaps that accounts for the difference in times that
appear in the 9-11 reports and elsewhere.

If so, then in reality there were some 3 to 4 minutes
available to prepare the vids and insert them. And this
difference accounts for those impact time discrepancies.

The planes were disappearing behind a layer mask, which
accounts for them going so smoothly into the buildings.
Because there just wasn't time to do anything else and
still meet the deadline. Especially since more than one
vantage point was needed, meaning that more than one
video had to be produced in that same time slice.

Thus rushed, they didn't notice that the layer mask
had moved allowing the nose of the craft to appear to
have emerged from the building intact. So, because
they were so pressed for time, they had to release these
gosh-awful videos as they were.

To cover up that these videos were not shown in "real time",
the actual time of the event had to be moved to match the
release time. Only in this way, could it be reasonably claimed
that the videos were being shown "live".

---
Well that's my take.

Obwon