Although it is highly unlikely any of the alleged cell phone calls from flight 93 could have been possible, skeptics will always persist that they may have been. However, there is one thing that is even more suspect than the calls themselves, and that is their contents. Passenger Jeremy Glick allegedly says, "There’s three of them, Arab looking, possibly Iranian. They’ve got red headbands on, one of them is standing in the aisle wearing a red sash and bag round his waist. Says there’s a bomb in it." Also, air hostess Sandy Bradshaw allegedly says, "My aircraft has been hijacked by three guys with knives. One of them is sitting in the back row first class. They’ve got red bandannas on their heads and they’re Islamic-looking people. We are in the back galley boiling water to throw on them".

The claim of the hijackers wearing red bandanas is further "supported" by the following find at the crash site:


It's surprising how a body can completely vaporize, yet leave a bandana behind that is barely creased, let alone singed!

There is one significant problem with the claim that the hijackers were wearing red bandanas, and that is that in Islam the color red is quite unacceptable. If the alleged hijackers really were devout Muslims, they would not dare mock the Prophet Mohammed or Allah in their moment of martyrdom.

The Prophet Mohammed voiced his disapproval of the color red on Muslim men in the Hadis (Prophetic Traditions). The fact that the text is located in the Hadis makes no difference to devout Muslims, as they follow these traditions as closely as they follow the teachings of the Koran. As with all other directives in the Middle East, these are discretely given as an inclined disapproval of a habit, rather than a direct order to stop one's habit. Two examples of this disapproval are given below:

Abdullah Bin Amr reports, "Once we were accompanying the Prophet on a journey and I went to see him and I was wearing red saffron colored garments. He said to me ‘What is this you are wearing?’ I sensed he did not like me wearing dress of that colour, and when I returned home I took it off and threw it into the fire.” Bara Bin Azib reports, “That the Prophet, peace be upon him, prohibited the use of the red saddle".

"We were once with the Prophet on a journey. The sheets we had spread on our camels were decorated with red thread on the border. The Prophet, peace be upon him, said ‘I notice that the red colour has begun to catch your fancy.’ On hearing this we stood up and dispersed in confusion at the rebuke and immediately removed the sheets from the camel’s backs." Reported by Rafe in the Hadis

If you look into Middle Eastern culture, you will see that the color of Islam is green, not red. In fact the region is awash with green. Even the martyrs of the Hamas and Hezbollah wear green headbands, not red. This one simple oversight on the part of the government destroyed the hijacking myth from the outset. Had they done their research, instead of opting for clichéd Hollywood stereotypes, they might have been able to make the story of the hijackers stick. However, in their arrogance, they have taken advantage of the fact that so many Americans are misinformed by the media on basic cultural traditions, that most people bought the story without question.

Can anybody spot the red bandana in any of the pics below?



here?



... or here?







How about here?



Found one! Oh wait, it's just that silly United 93 movie :rolleyes:

So boys and girls, to sum up today's lesson: If you decide to make up some cock and ball story about Muslim hijackers wearing red bandanas, I would suggest you do your homework instead of just watching re-runs of Rambo! [crylol]

But they werent good muslims. Didn't they go to Vegas and stuff?

Yup, and according to the official story they also visited a strip club, bragged about the upcoming attacks, paid by credit card and then left a copy of the Koran behind! [crylol]

Apparently Mohammed Atta also hung out in strip bars, drank vodka, snorted cocaine, and adored pork chops!

There comes a point where you have to draw the line and realize that something’s very wrong. If these people were religious Muslims, they would never have been out partying and drinking. Honestly, you have to ask yourself, why is the government so arrogant that they enjoy insulting our intelligence in this way? If anyone really believes that a suicide bomber would be out one night shoving dollar bills down a stripper’s panties, and then go and hijack a plane in the name of Islam and crash it into a building, then you really need to take a reality check.
[nono]

Good info Beached [cheers]

1.AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TAPE: http://69.57.136.18/cvrfiles2/ua93.wav
2.THEY TRACED FL93 ALL THE TIME, NEVER LANDED AT CLEVELAND!
3.WHY THE HELL WOULD THE GOVERNMENT CRASH 2 PLANES INTO THE WTC KILLING THOUSANDS, BUT THEN EVACUATE FL93 AT CLEVELAND AIRPORT, WHERE THE PLANE WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE SEEN BY MANY PEOPLE?

...and then fly back and crash it into the ground? Or shoot it down when they were in control anyway?

One might argue that it was shot down, but saying no terrorists onboard seems very far fetched..

On the contrary, the idea of hijackings carried out by real terrorists with box cutters; men who were terrible pilots, and whom would not have had a clue how to navigate without help from air traffic control is a little far fetched.

There are problems with the air traffic control tape. While I have no doubt this is a live recording of communication with what they believed was flight 93, there was an inherent weakness in the radio system just waiting to be abused. Without getting too technical here, it would be possible for anyone in the general direction of that aircraft to broadcast on the same frequency as if they were aboard the flight. This person could be in another plane, car, or even a building in the same general direction, and air traffic control would not be able to differentiate between the two. Also, if you listen to where the "hijacker" claims that "they have a bomb", the voice is almost drowned out by feedback on all occasions. This makes positive voice recognition almost impossible with current technology. All you could positively make out was that this is someone speaking in a foreign accent, nothing more. Unless the cockpit had turned on a loudspeaker, there is no scientific explanation for this feedback, as it is different to the "hum" you would recieve from a bad connection. The feedback has been deliberately added for the reason previously stated.

They certainly did trace the transponder of flight 93 all the time. I'm not going to touch that one as I have no solid proof that flight 93 even did land in Cleveland. However, there is a radar black spot very near where the hijacking was alleged to have taken place, and this would have made for a good place to switch to a drone with a duplicate transponder. The original aircraft could have landed at a nearby military base and changed it's staus. It's quite possible, and we know the military have at least contemplated this before in Operation Northwoods. Again, I’m afraid I have no idea if the real flight 93 ever landed at Cleveland. Here all we can really do is speculate as to how they pulled this off. However, the evidence strongly suggests that there were NO hijackings!

If flight 93 had landed at Cleveland, it is quite unlikely anyone would know it was there, since after all it wouldn't have had "flight 93" written on the side in magic marker! :D The two aircraft that the government crashed into the WTC were either drone aircraft, or the real aircraft flown by remote control. Like you my guess is as good as yours, but clearly the impacts at the WTC were intended to be a "live event".

The reason there would have been no real hijackings with kamikaze pilots on board is simply because it would have been much more reliable with remote controlled drone aircraft. Also, this would have been done for the sake of precision. In a real hijacking there are 100’s of things to go wrong. They certainly wouldn’t want a passenger revolt onboard the planes headed for the WTC – that would ruin their spectacle! Also, I doubt they would have been able to trust these nincompoops who could barely fly to even find the buildings!

Let me start at the beginning. Listen very carefully your freedom maydepend on it.

#1 Deception - on 9/11 we were deceived maybe a little maybe a lot. What I can tell you is that the Flight 93 scene was 'salted'. Salted, in this case, means that things were done to what was only a crater to make it seem like a fully fledged 80 ton airliner accident.

Proof.

Shanksville, PA. On Sept. 11, 2001.

Men showed up and set the scene on fire.


PIC #1
This is the Mayor of Shanksville and a couple of his long time friends. You are looking southwest towards a treeline. It is morning as it leaves the treeline in shadow. You are looking to the southwest. Civilans arrive first gawk at hole. No smoking in the hole. No smoke in the trees. A white suited scout is there to.


Yellow and white suited people arrive. Scare off the civilians and begin doing stuff. No one knows who these people were. No one knows what they were doing. Notice the exact location of the yellow suited man on the far side of the closeest foreground - we will call him Bob. Bob is going to plant something.


They continue to do it. There is no sign of any smoke coming from anywhere. The trees are still pristine. Bob surveys hit plant job.

Smoke! Fire ! The third guy from the left looks down at what just began smoking in front of his shoes. The wind blows gently from left to right in the frame.

Fire pours from the treeline. The yellow and white suits begin to melt into the treeline.

The fire department now arrives and is cleared to enter - only two yellow suited men remain. Whatever Bob planted now comes to life as smoke gently comes from exactly what he was standing over in the second and third photo.

The news arrives. John Q. Public watches. The lie that is the crash site becomes immortalized.




So Flight 93 did not crash. It is easy to assume that someone who stood to gain wanted you to think Flight 93 had crashed. Why would anyone want this?

Who stands to profit in wars? Those who know it is coming. Those who make money when wars come. Those who have already known connections to Halliburton and big oil. This paragraph is conjecture, but the pictures are immutable.


#2 - Physics - an 80 ton 757 cannot vaporize. Well it can, but it takes a great amount of energy. Flying it into the deck at top speed would not do it. Hell, flying it in at orbital speed would not do it.

Listen for the beat and try to keep up.

Get ready for school.

THIS APPLIES TO BOTH THE PENTAGON AND THE SOMERSET COUNTY PA CRASHES

The boiling point of aluminum is 4566 °F . This is the point at which it goes from liquid to gas.
Most of the aircraft consists of this. There are about 47 tons of it in this air frame.
The boiling point of iron - the primary component of steel is 5182 °F.
The engines and gear are made up of this.
There is about 13 tons of this in this air frame.

The maximum you can get JP-8 fuel to is 1796 degrees Fahrenheit.
4566 - 1796 =
2770F that need to be created by impact to vaporize the bulk of aluminum.

I know it has been a long time since chemistry class but you need this.
The heat required for vaporization is 294,000J per mol of aluminum.
Since 39% of this heat could be made up by the burning jet fuel. If it competly covered the aircraft and it was at max temperature. Which would require 5 times the aircraft's amount of maximum fuel to be aboard, but this I will overlook.

That only leaves about 177,000J of energy that needs to be made up by force of impact. Per Mol of aluminum.
There are 26.9815386 grams in a mol of aluminum.

So how much energy, in this case heat, does 27 grams make when it hits an object at 550mph? An immovable object for sake of equation.

Standard energy equation.

Energy = 1/2 mass *velocity (sq)

When your parents tell you that speed kills in vehicle accidents THIS is why.

.026 kilograms * 887 kph (550 miles per hour) squared = energy
.026kg * 786854 = 20,458 Joules created by impact at 550 mph

You needed a total of about 197,000 Joules applied to each mol of aluminum. Only 20,458 were created by impact.
Which is not enough to vaporize any of the aluminum or any of the steel. Titanium is even higher on the scale.

So just like Mythbusters I will find how fast it would need to be going to vaporize on contact with an immovable surface.
177,000 Joules is required on top of jet fuel heat.

177,000 /20,000 = 8.85 times faster than that

So 550mph * 8.85 = 4867.5 mph which is roughly Mach 7 would do it.

This is if the jet fuel was applied evenly over the entire airframe and if the entire airframe came to the surface at the same time. If the nose hits first it slows down the fuselage some and reduces the energy that will be needed for the tail of the aircraft.

This is why all aircraft disasters produce wreckage.

This is why it is scientifically impossible to vaporize an aircraft. Unless its going Mach 7. In a jet fuel fired furnace.


This why planes could not have crashed at PA and the Pentagon.

The official story is impossible. Logically, physically and mathmatically.

Something else happened. I cannot say with enough certainty to tell you for sure, but what we have been told is false to the core. The loose change video does a good job of putting it all together. I think it is the best working theory that fits physics and logic at this time. It is probably close to 80-99% correct.


Thank you for your time and your patience.



Not one to leave out sources:

http://ghlin2.greenhills.net/~apatter/general.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminum
http://www.webelements.com/webelements/ele...xt/Al/heat.html
http://www.webelements.com/webelements/ele...xt/Fe/heat.html



P.S. One disappearing plane in one day would be a miracle sent by God himself. Two disappearing 757s in a single morning? Impossible.

Orbital speeds I said would not vaporize a 757. How can I say such.


As you can see a spaceship can break up at extreme altitude and they can manage to reconstruct it!
8:58:20 (EI+851) – Columbia crossed from New Mexico into Texas. Speed: Mach 19.5; altitude: 209,800 feet (64 km).
At about this time, the Orbiter shed a Thermal Protection System tile, the most westerly piece of debris that has been recovered. Searchers found the tile in a field in Littlefield, Texas, just northwest of Lubbock.

A 757, while not made of ceramics, would fare decently coming down because it is less dense. It would not survive the re-entry, but large chunks like tails and wings and cockpits would come raining down. The shuttle does poorly coming in because of its density make it a flying ceramic brick. Just as fragile too.

Point is they recovered 24% of it. They recovered 0% of Flight 93 and 0% of Flight 57. Bandana's and magazines notwithstanding.

I do agree that there is something fishy with the fl93 crash site and the pentagon crash site. Both seem to be inconsitent with a 757 crashing there.

Yet I don't understand how they could make all those passenger's from all 4 flights disappear.
The passenger's boarded the flights, and then what? Do you think they boarded remote controlled jets? Without the pilots noticing?
There is no evidence that the 2 flights that hit the WTC towers landed somewhere.

People saw a large passenger jet approaching the pentagon, why would the government use a smaller plane to hit the pentagon? They would know that the damage to the pentagon would not be big enough. You can hit a building with a 757, its just a more tricky target since its so flat meaning not as high.

look at this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWpRGLrkIsw

Ok, maybe the pentagon doesn't have that kind of wall....

anyway last bit was off topic for this section of the forum..

That is one kick ass video with Carol Vorderman narrating! :D I saw that once before where she shows a fighter jet being flown into a re-enforced concrete wall. It's quite unlikely that would have happened to whatever hit the Pentagon, and if so that means the government are certainly lying about any DNA recovered as there simply wouldn't have been any! Everything would have vaporized, yet we have these random flimsy pieces of aircraft body surviving, which makes the scenario outlined in this video quite unlikely, especially in the case of Shanksville. There is a considerable difference in the density of soil vs re-enforced concrete! :D

There's also a discrepancy in the statements from some eyewitnesses around the pentagon. Some saw a large jet, some saw a smaller jet. My question is this - if a smaller military aircraft were painted up in the livery of an American Airlines flight were moving at 400mph, would your mind know the difference? Consider that witnesses commented how quiet it was as it passed over the freeway! That doesn't sound like a 757 to me!

Also, and i believe someone has also pointed out on the forum - the reason it is likely that a smaller jet was used instead of a 757 is simply a matter of precision. It was only a very small part of the Pentagon that had been specially renovated to withstand that type of impact, and the necessary maneuvering to hit that area would not have been possible in a 757! Honestly, if a 757 had hit the building the government would have had no problem releasing the tapes! You would have seen it played over and over just like the WTC. The fact that they haven't, and that they've hidden evidence of what really did hit the building means that it is quite unlikely it was an American Airlines jet, and certainly not a 757!

A smaller jet, buzzing around on a zig-zag course to get rid of the light poles and then hit the pentagon? <_< [hmm]

"....very small part of the Pentagon that had been specially renovated to withstand that type of impact...."

That statement makes the youtube clip more valuable than ever! :D

Besides all those buildings around the pentagon that as some say "caught the event on tape" How can the government be sure that they will confiscate all tapes within minutes, and none of the employees would have the idea to quickly check the recordings and submit them to the news networks.

Beached, green is not the color of Islam. Don't insinuate this.

Hamas or Hezbollah are NOT legitimate authorities in Islam. Islam has no colors. If it went by colors, then the only colors of Islam is either white or black. These colors were embroided with the `Arabic inscriptions "La ilaha illallah wa Muhammadar Rasulullah" (There is no God, but one, and Muhammad is God's messenger). These flags were carried during the Ghazawat (military expeditions) of Muhammad and his companions.

Again you are misquoting hadith. You are typically representing the Wahabi methodology of deducing literature without any training in Islamic jurisprudence. There are hadith which also state "Red" clothing with stripes of sorts being permissible to wear. Also, one of the companions of Muhammad used to wear a 'RED' turban, particularily in the Ghazwa e Badr (Battle of Badr). His name was Abu Dujanah. There is no blame in wearing a red head band or turban. Correct yourself.

To me, flight 93 is the major oddity in the group. Let's see why:

- It was a good 40 minutes late taking off.

- many of the passengers weren't supposed to be on the flight (check killtown's site).

- There were A LOT of calls being made from the plane compared to the other 3.

- The plane did not make their "target".

- There were very little eyewitnesses.

- The crash occured (according to eyewitnesses) while the plane was only hundreds of feet in the air, turned upside down, then dove at a 90 degree angle at 580 mph and hit the ground.

- photos specifically show no smoldering wreckage, no aircraft parts larger than 2 feet.

- both black boxes were found, but in different areas in the ground (black boxes are in the back of the plane, since most planes nose-dive in an uncontrolled crash).

- one of the turbines was found almost a mile away in a pond.

- debris was scattered for 2 - 8 miles from the "crash site".

- many eyewitnesses identified a white plane in the area, and were specific about it's appearance.

- trees were "scorched", but no fires, smoke until AFTER the guys in hazard suits showed up.

- no bodies in tact, only body parts (if that), BUT.....a bandana survives virtually unscathed.

- official report states time of impact was 10:03 but seismologists state an impact of 10:06.

- Most of the convos were allowed to go public, except the last 3 minutes. Right before, there was a whooshing sound, like there was a hole in the plane. Then silence.


Flight 93 to me is the biggest coverup (and the sloppiest as well). The smoking gun is the fact a plane full of jet fuel expelled into the air, all the while the wreckage buried itself underground and no debris got out.

..but that's of course if you believe a plane can crash into dirt at 580 miles an hour with only a couple of hundred feet to arc it at a 90 degree angle.

I'm afraid this thread is becoming nothing more than a skeptics snake pit. Believe what you will, believe there actually was a plane hijacked by terrorists with box cutters. The idea alone is just ridiculous! I appreciate it's more dramatic than a drone, but as far as I’m concerned there is no evidence to suggest there were any hijackings! If you can't see that the red banana was obviously planted at the scene. If you honestly believe that those phone calls were really made from the cabin of a hijacked plane then I feel sorry for you. Sinewy, to clarify my point, I should have been clearer - the Middle East is awash with green, and the idea of Muslim hijackers wearing red bandanas is a Hollywood stereotype, nothing more. Luca, from your comments i can see you are obviously a stubborn skeptic - that youtube video is a skeptic’s wet dream, and there is no comparison between it and a plane crashing into the pentagon, let alone a field, so i’m not even going to waste my time debating this with you anymore. Also there is no evidence that an airplane even hit the light poles as it passed over the I-395 freeway. There’s not a clip to them! For all we know they could have been blown out of the ground by pneumatic charges underneath. My guess is as good as yours; I don’t claim to have all the answers, I just point out irregularities as I see them, and draw my conclusions from the evidence at hand. The bottom line is this:

There were no hijackings and flight 93 never crashed in Shanksville!

Ok, have a nice day.

See ya.. [wave]

Unsurprisingly, you're making conjecture based on an assumption.

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/...on/PA00111.html

The government never claimed the scarf in the photo is from one of the hijackers. It simply lists it as a recovered item.

As for the claim of the person who made the phone call, is it possible she was red-green colorblind maybe? Maybe she was a bit rattled, what with being on board a hijacked plane and all, and misspoke? Since we're speculating big, why not? Too bad we can't find out, because she's rather busy being dead.

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

On 9/11 alone, these included:

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

Some information from, and about, agencies that were on the scene.

http://tinyurl.com/f83mb
http://tinyurl.com/k3jhx
http://tinyurl.com/jx3u7
http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/emergency/p...res/091201d.htm
http://www.epa.gov/region7/news_events/eve...ry/flight93.pdf (this site is good when the link works, which it doesn't always.)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

http://www.epa.gov/region7/news_events/eve...ry/flight93.pdf (this site is good when the link works, which it doesn't always.)

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

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

The Falcon 20 crew's report.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...erjetnat5p5.asp

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

40 Lives, One Destiny.
http://tinyurl.com/m7x3r

Devolve, i have been researching the crash scene at Shanksville for a very long time, and i wouldn't claim that there were no hijackings if there were hard evidence to suggest otherwise. I've looked over every piece of photographic evidence available, and in none of these do i see any signs of human remains. The pictures of victims belongings are quite suspicious - i suppose the next thing you are going to try and tell me is that Jeremy Glick was also colorblind? [crylol] Give me a break! If i thought any of those belongings were genuine i wouldn't have started this thread! If that bandana was thought not to be anything to do with the "hijacking", then i doubt it would have been classified as government evidence!

The only pieces of aircraft consistant with a 757 that were "recovered" can be seen in these two pictures:

http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/size600/P200062-1.jpg

http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/size600/P200061-1.jpg

Both are very small and could easily have been carried there by hand. Also, notice how the ground beneath these isn't even scorched? This is even more relevant with regard to the second picture. You can see that this piece has oviously been burned out, but there is no way that it was hot when it "landed" in that location. Clearly this is planted evidence, just in the same way the other artifacts were. It is quite possible that eyewitnesses saw a plane in the area, but there is no evidence that this was flight 93, nor is there any evidence it crashed.

I have thoroughly read the reports made by the FBI, NTSB, etc a long time ago, and as far as i'm concerned, In the absense of any hard evidence (especially photographic) to support these, they are nothing more than a contrived fiction. The "human remains" recovered from the scene were identified by their fingerpints and DNA by US Military laboratories? Hmm.. there's no chance there might have been a slight conflict of interest here? Wally Miller didn't personally identify these himself. Again, if you would like to believe everything the government claims, be my guest! The official story requires alot of trust and a great leap of faith on the part of the reader; it is thick on claims, yet thin on facts.

So, Devolve, if you are just another die hard skeptic coming here to be disruptive, may i suggest you take your tollesque posts under the bridge.... [wave]

Since when is the debris from a plane crash, particularly one that's part of a larger criminal investigation, returned to the owner?

They can't release security videos to the public, but they give the "plane" back to United. Yeah, rriiigggghhht.

Exactly!! :D

So you say the government is claiming Cee Cee Lyles and John Talignani were among the hijackers?

What do you think happens to debris from plane crashes? Hey guess what... once the investigation is concluded, it GOES BACK TO THE OWNER OF THE PLANE. They don't confiscate your property just because it's in a bazillion pieces. As for involvement in a criminal proceding, the US Dept. of Justice's guidelines state:

Several (if not all) the states have similar laws. For example, the Ill. Code of Criminal Procedure states,

So this is hardly unusual.

Troll, here's where I stop wasting my time reading your posts and say...

I understand that the Wahhabis are the most conservative of Muslims, mostly found in Saudi Arabia, who strongly oppose all practices not sanctioned by the Koran etc. If the alleged hijackers really were Saudi's, it is most probable that they would have followed this methodology.

:rolleyes: