UA 93: not a single drop of blood found

[Andre II]

Coroner Wallace Miller:
"This is the most eerie thing," he says. "I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop."
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/specialreports/oneyearlater/s_90823.html

Evidently the coroner is very surprised by the absence of any blood.
Here my question: What does have to happen to a human body that not a single drop of blood is left?

[DoYouEverWonder]

1. What bodies?

Only remains and effects were found.

[rman]

5. what remains, remains of bodies?

What does have to happen to human remains that not a single drop of blood is left?

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Make7]

3. Where's Buffy when you need her? ( n/t )

[killtown]

92. Obviously Make7 is AFRAID of this thread

by the single immature hit-and-run post he left.

I guess he sees this no blood evidence is very damaging to his govt's case.

[Andre II]

4. I think your answer is supposed to be funny

yet I don't get your joke.
Besides the fact that eyewitnesses right after the crash basically found not a hint of human remains and it took even
the coroner one hour to find the first trace of human remains the absence of any blood is extremely unusual. Extremely unusual to the coroner and extremely unusual as I've found no plane crash where this was noticed (not to mention that I've found no plane crash with such an absence of human remains).
Therefore my simple question: What did have to happen to the bodies?

P.S. Where does the government claim to have recovered the DNA of the hijackers??
Any source for that one?

[LARED]

7. What are you talking about

right after the crash basically found not a hint of human remains

From the article

He saw three chunks of torn human tissue. He swallowed hard.

Investigators crawled through the debris field, bagging bolts and bone fragments.


By his own statement the coroner does not think the absence of blood is unusual enough to make him think something is odd

He takes off his glasses, cleans them with his T-shirt. "This is the most eerie thing," he says. "I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop."

Every day he thinks about the people on that plane.....

He obviously believes there were people on the plane.

Just one more case of the CT'er taking something out of context to make a question out of thin air.

[Andre II]

8. Just one more case

where a simple question isn't answered but a conclusion drawn about the person who raised the question.

I think we can agree that the coroner is highly surprised by the absence of blood therefore the question I've asked deserves an answer. As you might have realized: I haven't drawn any conclusion from the absence of blood. But I'm allowed to ask a simple question and waiting for a scientific answer.

As for the amount of human remains that have been found by the eyewitnesses who arrived right after the crash:

Immediately after the crash, the seeming absence of human remains led the mind of coroner Wally Miller to a surreal fantasy: that Flight 93 had somehow stopped in mid-flight and discharged all of its passengers before crashing. "There was just nothing visible," he says. "It was the strangest feeling." It would be nearly an hour before Miller came upon his first trace of a body part.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8¬Found=true

So, what does have to happen to a human body during the crash that not a single drop of blood is left?

[killtown]

29. Yes LARED, I'd like to know too!

[LARED]

47. Lets see what we have here

The coroner said

"I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop."

You restate this as

What does have to happen to a human body that not a single drop of blood is left?

No where does he say the body parts were bloodless. No where does he speak about whole bodies.

Yet it is clear the coroner believe there were bodies. There are numerous accounts of body parts found at the scene. People at the scene believe there was a plane, believe there were body parts.

The coroner does not say there was so blood at all, as if the parts were void of blood, only that he did not see drops. So, what does that mean? He saw no blood drops on non human parts? No blood splatter anywhere? You seem to be reading more into his statement than you should.

Perhaps he was embellishing a tad. Perhaps he did not see everything that was removed. The coroner said it was eerie, not that he was very surprised. We already know much of the plane burrowed into the ground. Perhaps that has something to do with it.

What I do know is this issue about the insignificant statement from the coroner is just an attempt to confuse the facts. You have already (before you understand what was said) framed this as some scientific quest of a phenomenon you think is real.

Maybe the hijackers were vampires. Maybe your questions are based on false argument?

Anyone want to place a bet?

[Andre II]

48. Answers

Thanks, LARED, for explaining to me what my motives of opening this thread have been ....
It's a bit surprising that nobody simply comes up with an answer to my question, eg in a huge explosion its is not at all surprising that human remains don't contain any blood anymore.

"People at the scene believe there was a plane"
Links please!

"There are numerous accounts of body parts found at the scene."
Links please!

[Andre II]

94. LARED?

Links please for your claims.

[Andre II]

118. LARED?

LARED?
LARED?

As your around on Du every day I'm surprised you don't come up with any links for you corageous claim...

[LARED]

127. I didn't post any links because the link you posted already

provides the information you are seeking.

I try not to waste my time on completely idiotic requests.

[Andre II]

132. I first thought of

altering the mod cause your only answer for me asking you three times to back up your claims is to insult me but I decided to let your post visible. It speaks for itself.

May I tell you that the link I've posted is an article that proves that the crash site is faked?

People at the scene believe there was a plane, believe there were body parts.

No, they didn't.
Show me a single eyewitness who was at the crash site on 911 and "believed that there was a plane".
Oh, sorry, I've forgotten it's supposed to be in my link. Wait. Is it this one maybe:

“He (Coroner Wallace Miller) was stunned at how small the smoking crater looked, he says, ‘like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it.’”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8¬Found=true

Or this:
Nina Lensbouer: "But I got there and there was nothing, nothing there but charcoal. Instantly, it was charcoal."
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912somerscenenat4p3.asp

And concerning people believed that there were body parts:
“Peterson said he saw no bodies at the scene, but saw no signs of life, either.”
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/News/957434/index.html

Somebody who saw slightly more:
“He (Dave Fox) saw three chunks of torn human tissue.”
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/specialreports/oneyearlater/s_90823.html

and somebody with a very trained eye agrees with the above mentioned observation:
“Immediately after the crash, the seeming absence of human remains led the mind of coroner Wally Miller to a surreal fantasy: that Flight 93 had somehow stopped in mid-flight and discharged all of its passengers before crashing. "There was just nothing visible," he says. "It was the strangest feeling." It would be nearly an hour before Miller came upon his first trace of a body part.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8¬Found=true

No, LARED, people didn't believe that there were bodies parts at the crash site they are surprised (even the coroner is) of the absence of body parts. I really don't know if "three chunks of human tissue" and a "trace of a body part" found after one hour suffice for your claim that people believed that there were body parts at the crash site and it certainly doesn't suffice for insultinig peoplpe who have to ask three times for the most normal thing, that YOU give links for your claims.

So, questions remain:

Prove your claims!

[Andre II]

143. LARED come on

you can do it.
I know this.
You cannot only write unproven claims.

Maybe this helps you out:

Rick King
“Never in my wildest dreams did I think half the plane was down there.”
(Among the Heroes)

[killtown]

95. How did all those "body parts" of Flt 93 passengers

get strewn all over the woods (and apparently only in the woods and not in the field!) when they are telling us the ground swallowed the plane (they even said the tail section was found 15 ft below the ground!!!)? How did everything escape outside of the plane???

[Kevin Fenton]

97. According to the coroner,

as quoted in ATH, only 600 pounds of remains were found. Therefore, only a maximum of 8% of the body parts could have been found in the woods (although there may be more there not yet found). Why, in your opinion, should the impact and subsequent explosion not have flung 8% of the body parts some distance from the impact site?

[Andre II]

99. You're correct

September 22
4 identified:
mostly through dental records and fingerprints:
"The identifications we have made for now have been mostly through dental records and fingerprints. We're also using radiology (records), and we can find surgical work such as hip replacements," he said.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010922coronernat3p3.asp

September 24
Seven further
identified by fingerprints:
“The coroner's office was able to identify victims with help from FBI fingerprint experts”
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010924scenenat5p5.asp

More infos on identification ou UA 93 here:
http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?7.1162

But the fact remains that the human remains found at the crash site and used for the identification process were extremely tiny that certainly they can't be taken as a proof that a plane actually crashed there.

[Andre II]

141. "People at the scene believe there was a plane"

LARED I'm waiting for a whole month now for a single link for your claim. Really it shouldn't be that difficult to find, should it?

Wake me up when you have a link please. Or do you mind to acknowledge that your claim is simply wrong?

[Andre II]

142. People at the scene believe there were body parts"

LARED I'm waiting for a whole month now for a single link for your claim. (Or do you consider a trace of human remains found after one hour that contained not a drop of blood a proof?) Really it shouldn't be that difficult to find, should it?

Wake me up when you have a link please. Or do you mind to acknowledge that your claim is simply wrong?

[dchill]

98. You would seem to be even more...

irrational than I previously thought.

From your post:

By his own statement the coroner does not think the absence of blood is unusual enough to make him think something is odd

He takes off his glasses, cleans them with his T-shirt. "This is the most eerie thing," he says. "I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop."

So to you, most eerie = not unusual?

The lack of blood at the Flight 93 "crash site" must be anathema to followers of the Official Theory.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Andre II]

14. Remains on the ground

which would be the next question:
How do you explain that on the one hand there is such a huge explosion that a finger is found 300 yards away and on the other hand the plane went straight into the ground. That on the one hand the black boxes are found deep in the crater on the other hand a bible is lying on the ground.

And do you agree that your statement is not correct that the DNA of passengers were found?

[MercutioATC]

20. I don't see the contradiction.

The majority of the force was downward, making the crater and entobming things like remains and black boxes. There were also bits (and, apparently, engines) that "bounced" into the trees.

Throw a tomato onto soft dirt or sand. At the point of impact, the tomato will make a crater and bits of tomato will be buried in that crater. Bits of the tomato will wind up "bouncing" away and scattering around the crater.

None of the TERRORISTS were identified by DNA...you need a known sample to match and the authorities didn't have known samples from the terrorists. However, PASSENGER DNA was used in identification.

"Yesterday's confirmation of victims' identities by the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology DNA lab in Rockville, Md., means that 34 of the 44 people who were aboard the jetliner crashed Sept. 11. have been identified."

http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011027flight931027p5.asp

[Andre II]

24. DNA

Do you seriously believe the FBI wasn't able to come forward with samples of the alleged hijackers as they did for the ten in New York?? Nothing in Jarrah's car? Nothing in their hotel room?

If understand you example of the tomato correctly the center of the tomato would go straight into the ground while parts of the skin might remain above. So how come black boxes are inside the crater deep deep down, most of human remains are deep deep down and some personal belongings of the passengers and a part of a seat are outside?

On edit:
As I've pointed out: There have been no engines (plural)! Only one engine or a part (accounts contradict) have been found. And not in the woods but in a pond. This was btw a couple of days later.

[MercutioATC]

25. Big crash = little pieces.

I don't think your expectation of how the pieces would have behaved is realistic. It's also possible that the plane began coming apart in midair (as airplanes moving at high speed and subjected to violent maneuvers are wont to do).

[killtown]

30. "Armed Forces Institute of Pathology"

Oh yeah, I blindly trust them!

[MercutioATC]

44. You have no problem citing government officials when they support your

pet CTs.

In fact, you started an entire thread on those qoutes:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=125&topic_id=63516



Have you noticed that you're willing to use the statements of government officials and the media when they suit your purposes while sarcastically claiming "Oh yeah, I blindly trust them" when they don't?

[rman]

6. so you resort to ridicule to distract from the fact that

you can't explain how the absence of blood fits the official story.

[MercutioATC]

11. IVampires are every bit as plausible as "pods", "fuel sprayers" and

holograms.

Turnabout is fair play.

[rman]

18. Great, more ridicule

You know full well that there's much more besides fringe CTs involving holograms etc.
I have yet to come across anyone in this forum who defends the hologram CT.

To me and many here it is obvious those CTs serve no other purpose then to discredit 9-11 CT-thinking all together. It is primarily naysayers like yourself who keep trying to associate those fringe CT's with genuine 9-11 CTs.

[MercutioATC]

21. Did I say anything about ALL 9/11 CTs?

I did what I have seen SOME CTists here do. I made a ridiculous proposal based on a biased interpretation of flimsy evidence. At least SOME of the CTs I've seen here (like the pods and fuel sprayers and holograms) do the same thing. I'm not associating any of the CTs. I'm pointing out that ridiculous fringe CTs DO exist.

[rman]

46. why do you come up with ridiculous CTs to begin with?

such as your vampire theory.

[MercutioATC]

53. To illustrate the silliness of some 9/11 CTs.

More pertinent, perhaps, would be to ask why some come up with ridiculous 9/11 CTs.

[rman]

58. Why don't you try refute CT on content,

rather then ignoring the content and going for ridicule?

[MercutioATC]

59. I'm sorry, I didn't realize that humor wasn't permitted.

I'll be more careful to eliminate it from my future posts.

:eyes:

[rman]

60. When humor substitutes content,

what's the point?

And of course it's completely over the top to paint yourself as a victim of my not "permitting" you to be humorous. Poor fellow you.

[MercutioATC]

71. Sometimes a humorous reference IS the content...

...but consider me duly chastised.

As far as the "no blood" issue, my guess would be that scraps of tissue left out in the elements for a couple of days might exsanguinate...but that's only a guess.

[Andre II]

74. The coroner

arrived within hours after the crash. Not within days.

[MercutioATC]

77. Like I said, I'm no expert...

For the remains that were discovered days later, however, this seems a possibility.

[Andre II]

79. I agree

but my question is concerning his remark
that neither when he arrived nor till this day he ever saw a single drop of blood.
Besides that it took him more than one hour to find the first sign of a human remain.

[MercutioATC]

83. Actually, it took him "nearly an hour"...

"It would be nearly an hour before Miller came upon his first trace of a body part."

http://www.biblenetworknews.com/northamerica/062602_usa2.html

[Andre II]

86. Ok

but so what.
It doesn't change anything that obviously there were extremely few human remains at the crash site.

[MercutioATC]

89. Few identifiable human remains.

..as in few that were big enough to identify.

The mass didn't disappear, it was just reduced to VERY small pieces. Only 8% of it was big enough to recover and identify.

That said, the remains WERE identified as having been UAL93 passengers and UAL93 passenger belongings.

[Andre II]

90. Identified mainly by DNA

What's interesting is that in the end it comes down to the conclusion that nothing that was seen at the crash site proves that UA 93 crashed there. The only proof is the identfication via DNA. Nothing more. Show me anything at the crash site witnessed on 911 eg a personal belonging of a passenger or anything that proves that the plane with the passengers really crashed there.

[MercutioATC]

91. When all that's left is bits, you have to work with the bits...

Initial glances at the crash site didn't show any obvious large pieces of plane or intact bodies but there WERE human remains and personal belongings found once people started looking. It's not as if there was no evidence of a plane crash...there was plenty of evidence, just in very small pieces.

[Kevin Fenton]

96. Only DNA identification?

Actually, it is claimed (presumably by the coroner) that a dozen pasengers were identified by their fingerprints or dental records. The rest are supposed to have been identified by DNA. p. 363 of ATH.

[drdtroit]

64. "I'm pointing out that ridiculous fringe CTs DO exist."

Such as the "official" story apologist/enablers.
:tinfoilhat:

[woo me with science]

219. Umm....so what do you think happened

to the people who got on the plane and disappeared?

[killtown]

28. Funny the same military morgue did Flt 77's autopsies

ya know, the other plane that disappeared after crashing, but all but one passenger was said to have been recovered!

[MercutioATC]

45. Why is that "funny"?

It's a specialized facility. I'm sure they do a lot of this sort of thing.

[killtown]

67. Same place

same conspirators, less people in the know.

[MercutioATC]

84. It's hardly a question of "less people in the know."

It's a pretty large facility:

"The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) is a tri-service agency of the Department of Defense specializing in pathology consultation, education and research. AFIP maintains 22 subspecialty departments with a combined workforce of over 820 personnel, including over 120 pathologists and other scientists."

http://www.afip.org/

That aside, why is it odd that the government would use its premiere pathology research facility to analyze the remains of more than one of the planes?

[Andre II]

87. If a government facility

is the only basis for proving that the plane actually crashed there then this certainly not a lot.
And, well, there have been quite a few eyewitnesses at the crash site.......

[MercutioATC]

88. Cleveland Center data can't prove the plane crashed at all.

UAL93's flight profile data from Cleveland Center definitely seems to support that, but we don't see to the ground at Shanksville. We have "evidence" that supports the theory that UAL93 crashed but, since we don't see to the ground, it's not "proof".

[MrSammo1]

9. Goes hand in hand with.....

not a single drop of jet!

[MercutioATC]

12. In that pic, no. However, the "jet" was found...

"His fingers end up pointing 300 yards away towards a fenced off area where the United Airlines jet nose-dived into the grass. The engines sheered off and bounced into the woods as the fuselage drilled into the ground."

If UAL93 didn't crash there, how did its engines get there? How did the remains of UAL93 passengers get there? How did their personal effects get there?

You don't see a plane in a PICTURE and use that as "proof" that UAL93 didn't crash there in spite of all of the other evidence? How do you resolve that?

[Andre II]

16. Hm

and all official accounts only have ONE engine (or only a part of it) found in a nearby pound a couple of days later.

[MrSammo1]

19. Show proof please.........

Hearsay is for wash women.

[MercutioATC]

22. What sort of "proof" would you deem reliable?

We have a statement from authorities. What would satisfy you?

[killtown]

32. I blindly trust the authorities too

NOT! :bounce:

[MrSammo1]

36. We have a statement from authorities. What would satisfy you?

Physical proof of a crash will do just fine.

Hearsay is for myth minds.

[MercutioATC]

43. How about a crater, plane parts, a site that correlated with radar data,

and the remains and personal effects of passengers un UAL93?

[Andre II]

51. Please explain

Why is a crater a proof that a plane crashed there?

You have repeatedly mentioned two engines which have been found in the woods. This is simply wrong as I've explained twice.
If yo consider plane parts that have been found as proof of a plane crash then please name just a single first hand account that actually saw anything that reminded him of a plane crash.
Indian Lake or Indian Lake Aiport correlates also with radar data.

[MercutioATC]

52. It's not proof, it's evidence.

A crater is proof that something made the crater. There are no reports that it was there before 9/11, so associating it with the crash (epecially in light of the fact that UAL93 passenger remains and personal effects and UAL93's black box were found in the crater) doesn't seem unreasonable.

I'm not sure what your point is about Indian Lake airport is, but there's no way a commercial jet could land there.

[Andre II]

54. So we agree

that the presence of a crater might quite likely have been caused by the plane but there is no way the presence of a crater suffice to prove that it was caused by the plane. So I'm eagerly awaiting your sources about the remains of the plane that were disovered right after the crash especially your two engines. Just show me a few eyewitnesses that came to the crater and saw what reminded them of a plane.

[MercutioATC]

55. You're ignoring the other evidence...

...namely the UAL93 passenger remains, personal effects and black box found IN the crater.

The only report I've seen of two engines being found is:

"His fingers end up pointing 300 yards away towards a fenced off area where the United Airlines jet nose-dived into the grass. The engines sheered off and bounced into the woods as the fuselage drilled into the ground."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/campaigns/war/waryear.xml


Some other reports only mention one engine. I don't know where the error lies.

[Andre II]

61. On the one hand

all eyewitnesses agree that the plane was extremely low flying
all eyewitnesses agree that there was nothing ressembling a plane.
all eyewitnesses agree that there was no identifiable human remains.
all eyewitnesses agree that the size of the crater was smaller than a Boeing 757.
All photos show that the grass around the crater shows no mark of a fire.
Even very few trees burnt.
That's what people saw. Right after the crash (the crash itself was seen by how many btw?)
That's what photos show. Why aren't there more photos taken from the air?
Why were journalists not permitted to get closer to the crash site but had to take photos from miles away?
On the other hand are mysterious findings as Jarrahs' and Saeed Alghamdi's passport that survivded a crash that was so strong
that plane parts weren't bigger than a phone book.
And DNA identifies all passengers but NO, NOT A SINGLE hijacker. Why did the FBI not come up with DNA samples?

And concerning the two engines. Thanks for the link but this is simply wrong. All accounts of the first days plus the account of the guy who actually found the engine speak of one and only one. (as does the FBI itself)

[killtown]

31. They got there because they were PLANTED

Btw, the engine is the heaviest part on a plane. If Flight 93 drilled itself into the ground, how did one of it's engine "bounce" off the "soft earth" (an explanation I keep hearing as to why the fuselage was swallowed up) and not drill itself into the ground FURTHER then the fuselage???

The crash of Flt 93 there makes NO SENSE AT ALL.

[jschurchin]

40. Wanna read what they should have found?

Try this on for size, the NTSB report from a crash outside of Pittsburgh, US Air flight 427. Remember it? Nose first into the ground at 280 knots, alot like Shanksville. It can be found at http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/1999/aar9901.pdf

Description of the wreckage and locations start on page 37 (60 of 370)
Section 1.12 Paragraph 1.

This is what they should have found, I know you will enjoy it Killtown.

P.S. Huge file loads pretty fast though.

[Old and In the Way]

13. No blood, no plane

Too bad we never got an independent investigation, one that wasn't controlled by the actors and those people who responsible and criminally negligent on 9/11.

[leftofthedial]

15. Rummie and Chertoff must have made it to the site first

:patriot:

[stickdog]

17. It's almost as if the "evidence" was planted. (nt)

[MercutioATC]

23. Yes, I'm certain it would be no problem to bury human remains and effects

in a crater that's being watched 24 hours a day....

:eyes:

[stickdog]

26. The scene was being watched 24 hours a day to make sure

that nobody collected any evidence of what really happened there.

It's kind of like the way the FBI rushed to where Wellstone's plane crashed to make sure that the wreckage continued to burn to hours.

[MercutioATC]

27. And all of the people who searched the woods?

They were all in on it, too?

[killtown]

34. Who says everything wasn't planted BEFORE the crash?

[MercutioATC]

42. Remains and personal effects of the UAL93 passengers?

Planted BEFOREHAND??

How, exactly, would one do that?

[iconoclastNYC]

147. How do we know any of these people are real?

Or that any of that stuff was really thiers?

[TheWraith]

156. Do you want to think about how insane what you just said is?

Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that all the people who died on the plane were made up? How about all the families who lost people, others who lost friends, and on? Are they all ficticious? All their Social Security numbers, high-school yearbook photos, friends from college, ex-spouses, they're all a figment of our imaginations?

[Bolo Boffin]

167. I have never understood the obsession with proving

the 9/11 attacks to be the exact replica of one of the Northwoods incidents.

That operation was going to involved a small group of false people. Over three thousand people died in the 9/11 attacks. It is impossible that all of these people were faked.

That's not completely fair, a Northwood advocate will say. Only the people on the planes were faked. This still defies rational belief, as the Wraith has clearly pointed out. The incredible effort to have created all those passengers, and then to continue to maintain this illusion for five years without a single "family member" going for a book deal, isn't something anybody would actually do. It would be far simpler to hijack four planes and fly them into buildings.

[stickdog]

39. Why would any of the guards or searchers have to be "in on it"?

You think Osama and his 19 killed 3,000 Americans. Asking me if the all people who searched the woods were "in on it" is like me asking you if everybody fighting terrorism in the NSA, FBA, CIA were in on it with Osama. Or asking you if all the airport security people, porters and counter clerks who let the hijackers past them were in on it.

You have no problem believing that a ragtag group of 19 Muslims managed to:

1) escape the detection of everybody in the US intelligence for years,
2) take the FAA, NORAD and all other national leaders by complete surprise,
3) subvert our entire national air defense, and
4) hold 3 planeloads of Americans at bay while they suicidally crashed themselves and their fellow passengers and crew into major US landmarks over a 40 minute period.

But you can't possibly IMAGINE how trained operatives could have planted a little evidence behind the backs of the scores of the ever-vigilant underlings -- all of which you've nonsensically attributed the detective skills, insight, skepticism, courage, integrity, disposition, inclination and power to somehow expose their unproven allegations to the greater public against their superiors' wishes.

[MercutioATC]

41. My views on whether or not the planes were hijacked by terrorists

has nothing to do with this particular discussion. At issue is whether UAL93 crashed where we were told it did. Let's retain some degree of specificity.

I'd like somebody to explain how "operatives", regardless of their degree of training, managed to create a crater and plant the personal effects of UAL93 passengers. The remains and personal effects of the UAL93 passengers were found at the crash site. How did they get there if UAL93 didn't crash there?

[stickdog]

49. "You believe me, don't you?"

They could have created the crater with a missile or a drone or even a small plane. About 8% of the expected remains were found at the crash site.

http://www.biblenetworknews.com/northamerica/062602_usa2.html (orignally published in the WaPo)

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

Miller was among the very first to arrive after 10:06 on the magnificently sunny morning of September 11. He was stunned at how small the smoking crater looked, he says, "like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it." Once he was able to absorb the scene, Miller says, "I stopped being coroner after about 20 minutes, because there were no bodies there."

Immediately after the crash, the seeming absence of human remains led the mind of coroner Wally Miller to a surreal fantasy: that Flight 93 had somehow stopped in mid-flight and discharged all of its passengers before crashing. "There was just nothing visible," he says. "It was the strangest feeling." It would be nearly an hour before Miller came upon his first trace of a body part.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/newsnight/1726647.stm

ALICE HOGLAN: I took the phone and I heard my son's voice and he said to me, "Mom, this is Mark Bingham." I knew from that he was trying to maintain composure, but I could tell he was a little rattled because he was giving me his first and last names. He said, "I want to let you know that I love you. I'm on a flight from Newark to San Francisco, and there are three guys on board who have taken over the plane and they say they have a bomb."

It sounded as if someone was speaking to him quietly, possibly sitting right next to him, then he came back on the line and said, "You believe me, don't you?" I said, "I believe you, who are these guys?" There was another long pause. I listened and then the phone went dead.

Who was talking to Mark and why was he so worried that his mother wouldn't believe him?

[MercutioATC]

50. You still haven't explained how the remains and personal effects got there

About the crash itself: Usually, when a plane crashes, there are people in the cockpit trying to avoid the crash. The plane is usually slowed and maneuvering in a way that reduces the force of the impact. That wasn't the case in any of the 9/11 crashes. Comparisons to previous crashes might not be accurate without taking this into account.

[stickdog]

56. According to the coroner, the cockpit broke off and landed in the woods.

[MercutioATC]

57. And the remains and personal effects?

Again, how did they get there if UAL93 didn't crash there?

[stickdog]

65. According to the coroner, it took over an hour to find the first

sign of any body part. I'm thinking it was more like several hours.

http://www.biblenetworknews.com/northamerica/062602_usa2.html

Immediately after the crash, the seeming absence of human remains led the mind of coroner Wally Miller to a surreal fantasy: that Flight 93 had somehow stopped in mid-flight and discharged all of its passengers before crashing. "There was just nothing visible," he says. "It was the strangest feeling."

Somehow, somewhere the passengers of Flight 93 were obviously killed. After that, it was just a case of getting a few of their body parts and some of their personal effects from wherever they were killed to vicinity of Flight 93.

Tom Ridges' helicopter, anyone?

http://americanmemorials.com/memorial/tribute.asp?idMemorial=1320&idContributor=7487

Gov. Tom Ridge arrived about 6:15 p.m., flying over the crash scene in a National Guard helicopter before being briefed on the ground by state police.

[MercutioATC]

72. So they killed the passengers, shredded them, stripped them of their

personal effects, transported it all to Shanksville, and planted all of this stuff (without anybody noticing) in a couple of hours?

(remember, this is AFTER substituting another plane for UAL93, landing UAL93 someplace completely undetected, and offloading the passengers and their possessions...none of which has ANY evidence to support it)

I guess that's a theory, but I'm not buying into it.

[Andre II]

75. In a couple of hours

you would have a valid point if indeed all these things you mentioned were found right after the crash.
But as I've repeated over and over and over again:
all eyewitnesses who arrived after the crash found
no recognizable parts of an airplane
no recognizable human remains

So, what's your point?

[MercutioATC]

76. My point is that remains were found shortly after the crash...

...more were discovered over the next few days, but some were found within a few hours. The site was populated by federal, state and local authorities...and, I'd imagine, a number of civilian gawkers.

There's ZERO evidence of any "plane swap", but for the sake of argument let's assume that one was accomplished. Since the first remains were found within a few hours and the site was heavily populated afterward, that means that the following would have to have taken place in a few hours:

1) UAL93 "swapped" and the real UAL93 landed undetected at an unknown location.

2) The passengers and their possessions offloaded from UAL93.

3) The passengers and their possessions killed and shredded.

4) The shreds packed up and delivered to the crash site in Shanksville.

5) The shreds "planted" (some in treetops and 20 feet underground in the crater).



Do you REALLY feel this is likely? Is it even possible?

[Andre II]

78. Well

please tell what was found within hours after the crash:
Recognizable parts of the plane
recognizable belongings of the passengers
recognizable human remains.

[MercutioATC]

80. I'd have to read the scene report...

...have one handy?

:)

[Andre II]

81. Well,

you claimed it so you should be able to prove it ......

Anyway:
John Doe II went through the hazzle of analysing all eyewitnesses.
Maybe that helps:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x60970

[MercutioATC]

82. Actually, I do have a cite, just not an official scene report:

"Miller was among the very first to arrive after 10:06 on the magnificently sunny morning of September 11."

"It would be nearly an hour before Miller came upon his first trace of a body part."

Miller is the Somerset County Coroner.

http://www.biblenetworknews.com/northamerica/062602_usa2.html

That says "nearly an hour". Let's call it an hour. It also says he was one of the first to arrive. It was probably less, but can we agree on 30 minutes after the crash for the sake of argument? That would mean that the first recorded finding of body parts (that I know of) was 90 minutes after the crash.

[Andre II]

85. I have no problems agreeing on that

on the contrary the quick presence of Miller strengthens the importance of wonderinig what could have happened to the human bodies that he didn't find any trace of blood.
Btw as you well know there is no scene report. No official statement at what angle the plane crashed. No official statement about the size of the crater etc etc etc
A simple question: If you look at what eyewitnesses saw the very first day (I'm not interested in any summaries written years later) that refutes the possibility that the crater is faked? (as you mentioned human remains, personal remains, recognizable parts of the plane)?
eg a personal belonging of a passenger that was found on Sep 11 still would convince me. A recognizable plane part would convince me.

[stickdog]

119. Yes. It's extremely likely and extremely possible.

And it fits extremely well with the evidence as presented in time. There are no reports of body parts found within the first 48 hours.

[stickdog]

120. Wrong. There are no reports of remains being found

shortly after the crash.

[Andre II]

62. Interesting

never heard of that one.
Do you have a link, please?

[stickdog]

66. Here ya go.

http://www.airdisaster.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59772

http://www.biblenetworknews.com/northamerica/062602_usa2.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2004/190904noplane.htm

http://www.airdisaster.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-58533.htm

http://positiontoknow.com/S-11//html/sept11_moments_3.html

[stickdog]

68. More weirdness

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12940.html

“The tail was a short distance from the rest of the wreckage,” said would-be rescuer Brad Reiman, 19, who lives near Berlin in Somerset County. “It looked like the plane hit once and flopped down into the woods.”

The largest piece of wreckage he could identify looked like a section of the plane’s tail, he said.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12942.html

Barry Lichty, the mayor of Indian Lake Borough, said the ground shook and the town’s electricity went out. He called the utility company to find out the cause.

Later, Lichty learned that a plane crash had disrupted service to the borough.

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/focus/terrorism/archives/0102/w07flight93.html

United Airlines Flight 93 slammed into the earth Sept. 11 near Shanksville, Pa., at more than 500 mph, with a ferocity that disintegrated metal, bone and flesh. It took more than three months to identify the remains of the 40 passengers and crew, and, by process of elimination, the four hijackers.

Those remains were gathered by the FBI and other investigators from the 50-foot-deep pit the Boeing 757 jet gouged in a reclaimed strip mine, and from the woods adjoining the crash site.

But searchers also gathered surprisingly intact mementos of lives lost.

Those items — such as a wedding ring and other jewelry, photos, credit cards, purses and their contents, shoes, a wallet and currency — are among seven boxes of identified personal effects salvaged from the site. They sit in an El Segundo, Calif., mortuary and will be returned to victims' families in February.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/yesterday/s_90399.html

The crash knocked out power to his house for the rest of the day and left him without telephone service for six weeks.

...

The jetliner appeared to be gliding, he said, because the turbines in the plane's engines were revolving in a low, soft whir as it cruised over Westmoreland County. ... "It was making a funny sound," Hixon said. "It was flying awfully low, and almost hit the tree tops. It went over the top of my neighbor's house and then it was gone."

...

"We recognized immediately it was not an accident," Murtha said, but added that he kept working and went on to another subcommittee meeting for a defense bill. A few minutes later, he got a call from a Defense Department employee who said a bomb had gone off in the Pentagon.

...

Murtha, who flew to the crash site in a Blackhawk military helicopter, said his impression was that the hijacked jetliner disintegrated upon impact, with the tail collapsing into the front. Considering that debris was found miles away, he believes the plane started to come apart during the struggle on board.

[seatnineb]

69. Fantastic work Stickdog!

Great finds!

Miller
It hit... and, um... the front portion, the cockpit, and first class section broke off, and bounced into that area which is...obviously, there's no trees there now, but... the treeline came all the way out. And then the rear two-thirds of the plane just telescoped right into the crater. When I got here, you looked across there and you couldn't even tell that there was a plane there.

...The cockpit bounced, and flew into those, into those trees. And it just... it exploded...an explosion. And everything just, uh... everything just blew into pieces... (strains to pick up debris) ...like this. Lot of these. Now, there were some quite large pieces, of course, that, uh... the biggest piece I think they said was, uh, a section of the fuselage that had four windows. That was the biggest.
http://www.airdisaster.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59772

[Andre II]

73. Thanks a lot, stickdog!

:toast: :toast:

[stickdog]

70. They didn't return the remains or personal effects until February 2002.

They had crews searching for these effects and remains (they found only 8% of the expected remains) several weeks after 9/11. I'd say that gave them plenty of time to drop whatever shit they wanted found out of whatever plane or helicopter they thought was convenient.

[iconoclastNYC]

148. Don't forget "temerity"

Being "in on it" can mean as little as knowing that your career will suffer for asking the WRONG QUESTIONS.

Such as the engineer at Under Writer Laboratories who was fired for saying it was very unlikely that the fires in WTC 1,2,7 were hot enough to compromise the steel super structure.

[killtown]

33. Almost???

;-)

[MakeItSo]

35. multiple eyewitnesses saw a white unmarked jet in the area

Flight 93 wreckage was found within an 8 mile wide area, on a day with little wind. Rumsfeld himself slipped, saying the plane was "shot down" in a CNN interview from Dec. 24, 2004.

I'd hate to be a spook troll on the other side of the truth. Holding the lies together is akin to plugging a leak in a dam with your little pinky.

Look for other work, guys!

[MrSammo1]

37. Rumsfeld never slipped..........

He knew exactly what he was saying. The purpose of the deception was to suggest a shoot down from the start.

If you remember, he also said a missile hit the Pentagon. Again.....not a slip of the tongue. He told you a lie you'd believe. Jamie Gorelick of the 911 Whitewash Commission also slipped and said missile.

[MakeItSo]

38. so what do you think happened? what's his motive for lying?

I strongly suspect that there is a coverup and that members of the Bush Administration, notably Dick Cheney, were not only aware of what was going on but helped make it happen.

This isn't a court of law. I don't need "proof" to make this assertion. I make it on the basis of the emperical evidence at hand.

What about you, MrSammo? Without beating around the bush and confuscating the matter, exactly what do you *suspect* happened? And yes, it's perfectly reasonable to "suspect".

[MrSammo1]

63. There is no way a rational person.....

would accept that a 757 crashed into the Pentagon. This also applies to Congress. (I can't believe they're ALL that stupid) The neocons had to know this fact. Therefore and alternate lie had to be put forth under the guise of "National Security" in order to silence the critical thinkers.

Watch the video Fahrenheit 911. Replay the scene of the Pentagon's collapsed section burning brightly on the night of 9/13/01. Replay it over and over. Ask yourself what's wrong with the clip!

[savemefromdumbya]

93. No real witnesses

people 'saw' a small fighter plane and another plane but don't believe any of the witnesses.

[Andre II]

100. Science

What has to happen to the human body that there is no blood anymore?
(Why do explosions of suicide bombers leave huge amount of blood?)

[mirandapriestly]

101. Well, if the blood has coagulated does it appear

as blood does when you are alive? I'm not very good at biology. So, if someone died from, say, nerve gas , before the impact , then would there be blood at their death from the violence of explosion, crashing? Or, if the body had already been to the morgue or whatever and they were "planted" there. This and questions like this are why it is so obscene that there is not a proper investigation of that day.

[mirandapriestly]

102. anybody?nt

[Andre II]

103. Well,

bodies taken from a morgue certainly would be an explanation ...

Where are the typical naysayers?
Where are the people always screaming USE SCIENCE AND COMMON SENSE???

Here you go:
A simple question: How can the absence of blood be explained?

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

104. So there was no flight 93?

How did they dispose of the people that they say were on the plane?

Who were the families on Larry King? paid Govt agents?

Who? Who? Who?

Who invented all of these people and got "survivors" from their families to play along?

Be careful, I worked with one of the passengers (not one of the "famous" ones or airline employees).

You have to prove that NONE of them existed for your theories to hold merit.

The ONE issue that shoots all of your flight 93 didn't exist theory to crap is that at least one of the people on the flight 93 manifest DID exist. I TALKED to him and exchanged emails frequently with him, well before the * administration was in existence?

[Andre II]

106. Nowhere

did I write that the passengers "were invented". They're certainly dead. As dead as the students in Operation Northwood would have been 1962 if Kennedy would have accepted the plane.
The fact is no plane caused the crater. This crater is faked.
There is no logical conclusion that the passengers are invented.
In case you haven't read the document of Operation Northwood please do.
In case you did already you'll certainly understand that saying the plane with the students WASN'T shot down as officially stated doesn't imply that the passengers are alive. (Even if Operation Northwood doesn't say what they intended to do with the students after they arrived at a military airport the most logical assumption is that they would have been killed on the spot).

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

107. Boil it Down for Me

What is closest to what you are trying to say:

1) The jet was shot down and not run into the ground by hijackers or passengers

2) A jet did not crash there and the remains were planted.

Which is closest?

[mirandapriestly]

108. He is asking "why no blood?"

we are looking possibilities for that.

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

109. Not merely looking for reasons for "no blood."

he says
"What's interesting is that in the end it comes down to the conclusion that nothing that was seen at the crash site proves that UA 93 crashed there. The only proof is the identfication via DNA. Nothing more. Show me anything at the crash site witnessed on 911 eg a personal belonging of a passenger or anything that proves that the plane with the passengers really crashed there."

This along with other statements tells me he doesn't believe that a plane crashed there.

Tell me simply what you think happened.

VERY VERY Simply.

[petgoat]

110. "Tell me simply what you think happened."

Instead of examining the evidence from the ground up, you want to examine the conclusion.
People make the same logical error in analyzing the WTC explosive hypothesis. Instead of
calmly examining the evidence they jump to the conclusion that explosives=government conspiracy
and then because they believe government conspiracy is impossible they refuse to consider the
evidence for explosives.

We all need to honestly and dispassionately examine the evidence and follow it wherever it leads.
If we start with the facts, they might lead us to the truth.

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

111. The "evidence' presented here...

...is leading to statements that no plane could have crashed at that site.

Obviously some people have at least a working theory and a positive position that they must then prove.

What is the working theory? That is what I am asking.

Make a concrete statement instead of implying a position, then forcing others to prove that this position is wrong.

Positive statements have been made (or at least implied) that the remains were planted. Where is your evidence? What is the basis from which you take this position. Merely not trusting the government is not evidence.

What happened to the people they came from?
Did flight 93 exist?
What happened to the plane dubbed flight 93?

Just one positive Thesis statement that you need evidence to prove is what I am asking for.

[orleans]

112. okay--here's a theory

there was no plane "crash" in penn.

according to a tv station out of ohio & an ohio newspaper--flight 93 landed in cleveland along with a delta flight. between the tv station account and accounts written in the plain dealer & akron beacon (i think) the passengers from both planes were taken off the planes. the delta passengers were taken to a faa office, the flight 93 passengers were taken to a nasa office located in/around the airport.

according to those reports, united confirmed it was flight 93 that landed in cleveland.


theory: the passengers on flight 93 were "renditioned" in a sense.

and the plane? apparently it was in service until fall of 2005--that's the cancellation date of the plane. it was not listed as destroyed
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNumSQL.asp?NNumbertxt=591UA

flight 11 is listed as destroyed
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNumSQL.asp?NNumbertxt=334AA

riddle me that, batman (as the expression goes)

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

113. How about this...

There weren't two flights that landed in Cleveland, only one. The flight that landed in Cleveland was a Delta flight 1989, which was in flight the same time as UA93.

DL1989 & UA93 were being handled by the same ATC, DL1989 had just checked in with the ATC center (after UA175 had crashed into the WTC) when they heard an unidentified transmission that sounded like a "cockpit struggle." The almost overlapping transmissions along with the fact that DL1989 also took off from Boston, like UA175, caused the ATC to mistake that for DL1989 and contact DL HQ, which contacted the flight and instructed them to land in Cleveland. UA93 is shown to have been climbing to cruise altitude then make its turn over a suburb of Cleveland. The takeover happened over Cleveland.

http://thepost.baker.ohiou.edu/archives3/sep01/091101/brief16.html

http://256.com/gray/thoughts/2001/20010912/1989_9_11_travel.html

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2002/08/15/loc_sept_11_tension.html

As for the serial numbers, the FAA is a government bureaucracy. It is not unusual for mistakes to happen with flight serial numbers, especially when another bureaucratic entity must take specific action to have its serial number de-listed.

Easy answer to this one is that no one took the time to do it. If you want an example of a plane that crashed but was still listed as active, Check out N497FE. Crashed in 2002 but is still active.

[Andre II]

116. How many planes landed at Cleveland

the airport whose tower was evacuated for reason still unknown:
http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=323


And concerning the Delta story; Please tell what the reason was for considering Delta a hijack? Cause there are three different stories out there.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x25173

And in case the ATC considered Delta a hijack: Why didn't he ask the pilot? The communication between tower and Delta never broke down.

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

122. I told you the reason for assuming it was DL1989

Please point me to where it says the tower was evacuated during these events. The ONLY reference to people being taken out of the tower is that it was taken to "minimum staffing levels." This is far from total evacuation and comes from a statement by Richard Kettell himself.

“As a precaution, the tower at Cleveland Hopkins "went to a minimum staffing level" as the Delta flight landed. The plane taxied to a safe area."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x25173

The tower does not handle landing aircraft, an ATC approach center does that. The tower handles runway clearances once the aircraft is on the ground.

DL1989 was not the only "suspicious" aircraft that was being tracked, there were 10 others, 4 of which were the actual hijacked aircraft.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002-08-12-hijacker-daytwo_x.htm

The fact that TWO planes from Boston had already crashed into the WTC, DL1989 had taken off from Boston SOON after UA175. No planes other than those from Boston had yet been reported as hijacked or done anything. So the prevailing evidence AT THE TIME showed that flights from Boston were at threat. No other airport was involved yet.

[Andre II]

125. Cleveland

Nowhere I stated that a "total evacuation" took place I only said it was evacuated. This is btw the word they use on their homepage as well:

Perhaps the most evident demonstration of the high level of professionalism of the employees of Cleveland Center occurred on September 11, 2001. When the unbelievable events began to unfold, it was one of our controllers who urged the Command Center to ground all aircraft. Controllers did so with astounding efficiency while still maintaining system safety. The controller who had direct contact with United Flight 93 remained focused on trying to re-establish contact, never giving up. When the decision was made to evacuate the facility because of a possible threat, individuals from each and every area refused to leave their post in order to maintain the needed coordination. All hands briefings were held twice daily by management, with representatives from Airway Facilities and NATCA also playing an active role, to inform employees of any news or developments. These briefings were "standing room only". From the very beginning of these meetings the main concern of every controller was, almost miraculously, when they could get back to what they do best – control airplanes.
http://www.faa.gov/ats/aglzob/What.htm

DL1989 was not the only "suspicious" aircraft that was being tracked, there were 10 others, 4 of which were the actual hijacked aircraft.
True. Other reports even go up to 21 I think. But it was the only plane where indeed fighters were scrambled to intercept.

What is quite strange is btw that our ATC from Cleveland here on DU states that Cleveland was evacuated due to UA 93 ...

And it is also a fact that there are three different accounts out there why Delta was considered a threat and fighters were scrambled.

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

128. When were fighters scrambled?

First of all, you show that this facility was not empty but "individuals...refused to leave their posts..." So your own evidence contradicts your statement.

Second of all, an ATC is not a tower. Two totally different facilities. The controller that had direct contact with UA93 in-flight would have been in ATC Center, not a control tower.

Show me where fighters were scrambled for DL1989 specifically, and not for a general alert.

What three different accounts, all accounts lead back to the confusion at the time, the fact that DL1989 was a large airplane, fully loaded with fuel, flying cross country, headed towards Cleveland, flying a flight path to the WC from Boston, the same as the two other planes that had already been involved in incidents.

Not a logical leap to see why DL 1989 was put on the suspicious list.

Okay, let's see the creds for the ATC that posts here.

[Andre II]

131. Empty, total evacuation

I don't get it.
Nowhere I said that a complete, total evacuation took place and that the facility was empty.
I said which is a fact that an evacuation happened. Not a total evacuation.
So, I don't see where the contradiction is.

Show me where fighters were scrambled for DL1989 specifically, and not for a general alert.
With pleasure:

NEADS never lost track of Delta 1989, and even ordered fighter aircraft from Ohio and Michigan to intercept it. The flight never turned off its transponder. NEADS soon learned that the aircraft was not hijacked, and tracked Delta 1989 as it reversed course over Toledo, headed east, and landed in Cleveland.
CR, 28.


What three different accounts, all accounts lead back to the confusion at the time, the fact that DL1989 was a large airplane, fully loaded with fuel, flying cross country, headed towards Cleveland, flying a flight path to the WC from Boston, the same as the two other planes that had already been involved in incidents.

Not a logical leap to see why DL 1989 was put on the suspicious list

Please epxlain me as the communication between the controller and Delta pilot never broke off and the transponder never was switched off how the confusion could have persisted for longer than a few seconds. If the controller mistakenly assumed that Jarrah's bomb threat came from Delta then a quick question back to the plane would have resolved everything.
And why, if according to the CR it was soon clear that Delta wasn't hijacked did Delta receive such a strange welcoming party at Cleleland?

Okay, let's see the creds for the ATC that posts here.
Read for yourself. It's MercutioATC
See: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x26505

May I ask what your credentials are as you seem to know your stuff?

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

137. Your own Mercutio ATC...

..States that the the Centers were never completely evacuated and that he wasn't even there on 9/11. So how does he add credibility to anything you say about the evacuation of the centers.

What is your source for the fighter aircraft being scrambled?

Also, it was quite frequently and openly admited that NORAD & NEADS did not talk very openly and efficiently and that neither of them talked to the FAA efficiently.

So, NEADS doing something is like the left hand not knowing what the right is doing when it comes to the FAA/ATC knowing what is going on.

DL 1989 was already being watched closely by Cleveland Center b/c it had taken off 5 minutes after UA175 on the same flight path when two other planes from the same airport on cross-country journeys had already been involved in two MAJOR incidents. So again, it is not a logical leap to watch flights from the same airport closely. No one knew how the planes had been commandeered or where the hijackers had come from yet.

If you really want to know, my only real creds are that I want to know what really happened. I am not saying that what the govt told us was 100% accurate, but I have not seen any evidence that points me away from the fact that theirs is the most plausible explanation of what happened.

[Andre II]

138. MercutioATC

First of all my apologies cause I didn't realized you're new here:
Welcome!

Let me repeat that nowhere I've spoken of a full evacuation but simply of an evacuation. This is exactly the words the homepage of Cleveland uses as well.
MercutioATC wasn't there on 911 but asked what happened. If you find the time and check out my position towards his explanation you'll see that I certainly don't agree with him stating that the evacuation took place due to UA 93 and before 9:35. In my eyes this is simply impossible.

The Commission Report (see my quote) clearly states that Delta was a special plane and not just one of the many (some reports I tyhink speak of even 21 or 27 considered hijacks) but was the one and only plane where airfighters got orders.

If Delta was just a normal threat how do you explain the warm welcome this plane received by the FBI when arriving in Cleveland?

Sorry, for not answering your post concerning the altitude. It takes a bit more time as you've written a detailed post so I want to be precise as well and am just deep into John Doe II's files on the alleged hijackers and their doubles. But will come back soon.

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

136. I made a misstatement

The Local Controller is in the tower and gives final landing clearance.

Approach is handled by the ATC En Route Center.

[Andre II]

117. I understand your attitude

but the point is
the government's theory is analysed here and it's simply full of contradictions.
You ask for an alternative scenario; I have one which explains the crater and all eyewitnesses accounts yet it of course does have contradictions I can't solve. If I put the scenario here I know for sure that people only start pointing out the one or two holes and completely forget about the twenty holes in the official story that are as big as a crater.
It's not my duty to present alternative scenarios. It's the duty of the government to come out with the truth. So let's talk about the official theory and see if we agree that it's pure nonsense.

Btw Stating that the crateris faked includes that the question if UA 93 was shot down or not isn't of biggest concern. The question is: Where did it go?

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

123. What contradictions...

...that cannot be explained by the chaos of a never before seen event?

How do we know your theory only has one or two holes? You are viewing from a biased viewpoint, i.e. it is your own theory.

At this point, I do not see anything that cannot be explained by the facts that are presented.

The govt. has posted the truth, or can you at least agree its version of the truth, and the evidence that it has used to come to this conclusion. People are trying to knock holes in it. Honestly, all I see are minor contradictions explainable by the chaos AT THE TIME.

When will you present your alternative scenario? Just remember, that you will also have to show Motive & Opportunity, but we'll leave motive out of it for now.

So far, I have the answer to where UA93 went, in the ground at over 500mph.

Consistent with another plane crash at the same type of angle, almost straight downward, Valujet 592.

"That left 40 passengers or crewmembers whose remains were never identified. The impact of the crash had pulverized their bodies into more than 4,000 fragments, says Roger Mittleman, Miami-Dade County chief medical examiner at the time of the crash."

[Andre II]

124. The truth

Honestly, all I see are minor contradictions explainable by the chaos AT THE TIME.
Ok, let's start with a simple question: At what time did UA 93 crash?


Consistent with another plane crash at the same type of angle, almost straight downward, Valujet 592.
Again a simple question: Numerous eyewitnesses recall having seen UA 93 flying almost horizontally at an altitude of 100-300 feet) when vanishing behind the treeline, seconds before an explosion.
Question: How does a Boeing 757 manage an almost 90° downward turn when flying at an altitude of 100-300 feet?

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

126. Okay, I'll play

According to the published evidence, it crashed between 10:03 & 10:06.

What witnesses saw the plane flying horizontally and can verify that it was 100ft to 300ft?

[Andre II]

129. Sorry, that's a bit vague!

Was the crash at 10:03 or 10:06?

You'll find all the witnesses you need here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x30634
(where maybe we should continue the discussion concerning the altitude)

and here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x28985

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Andre II]

140. Crash Time

As mentioned above I'll come back to the whole altitude stuff later.

Just this:
Of course the crash time matters a great deal.
The government insists that the seismic recording of 10:06 is wrong and the Commission Report names satellite images and many other sources that they used to state the crash site was 10:03.
So my question is simple:
Do you think the government is correct or are they lying and if then why?

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

130. One more thing...

Just thought of this one. Above you say "...Show me anything at the crash site witnessed on 911 eg a personal belonging of a passenger or anything that proves that the plane with the passengers really crashed there." -Post #90

Which is implying that you think no plane crashed there or at least that you see no evidence of a plane being involved. However, in this post, you use eyewitness accounts of UA93 "...vanishing behind the treeline..." There is no logical link to your positions. Either UA93 disappeared over the tree-line with a resulting explosion or it didn't exist at that point i.e. it had already been disposed of in Cleveland.

[Andre II]

133. No, certainly not

Simple possible explanation could be:

A plane vanishes behind the treeline considered to have been UA 93. A second later a loud explosion etc.
Of course witnesses will connect these two events but they are not necessarily connected. The plane could have continued its flight and the explosion could have beena bomb at the crash site or the famous white jet that was seen at the same moment as well could have bombed the ground.
I don't say that it certainly was like this but there is no way to take witnesses that saw a plane vanishing behind a treeline as a proof that the explosion happening a second later must have been the plane crashing in the ground.

Of course I can't say which plane it was that people saw. For the simple use I name it UA 93 as people who witnessed the plane believed it was UA 93. But, well, you know there was also another plane coming from the opposite direction at the same time and people witnessing this plane also considered it as being UA 93 ....

[Show_Me _The_Truth]

135. One of your witnesses though...

...saw a plane coming steeply, and hit the ground.


Lee Purbaugh, 32, was the only person to see the last seconds of Flight 93 as it came down on former strip-mining land at precisely 10.06am - and he also saw the white jet.


He was working at the Rollock Inc. scrapyard on a ridge overlooking the point of impact, less than half a mile away. "I heard this real loud noise coming over my head," he told the Daily Mirror. "I looked up and it was Flight 93, barely 50ft above me. It was coming down in a 45 degree and rocking from side to side. Then the nose suddenly dipped and it just crashed into the ground. There was this big fireball and then a huge cloud of smoke."


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12192317&method=full&siteid=50143

So now you are using the speed of sound vs the speed of light to disconnect the two events?

Also, if the plane was coming in this steeply, then dipped even further toward the ground, which YOUR witness says, this close to the ground, how could it have recovered quickly enough to then maintain flight? From this height , it would have taken only a few seconds to hit the ground, not enough to recover from the steep angle with enough time to stop the downward momentum driving the plane to the ground.


As for your mysterious plane,

Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corp. of Greensboro, N.C., an apparel company that markets Wrangler jeans and other brands. The VF plane was flying into Johnstown-Cambria airport, 20 miles north of Shanksville. According to David Newell, VF's director of aviation and travel, the FAA's Cleveland Center contacted copilot Yates Gladwell when the Falcon was at an altitude "in the neighborhood of 3000 to 4000 ft."--not 34,000 ft. "They were in a descent already going into Johnstown," Newell adds. "The FAA asked them to investigate and they did. They got down within 1500 ft. of the ground when they circled. They saw a hole in the ground with smoke coming out of it. They pinpointed the location and then continued on."

[Andre II]

139. Purbaugh

Purbaugh is indeed the one and only witness of the crash. He worked there for two days before 911.
Of course if you just for the sake of the argument accept my scenario that the crash site was faked and the plane simply vanished behind the trees and a bomb exploded on the ground it is logical that the only witness that supposedly helped to fake the crash site can't be considered as the one and only source to refute this sceanrio. This scenario even implies that a witness is there and gives a false account.


For the white plane.
Sorry, you give here the official FBI explanation that unfortunatly is contradicted by the witnesses who saw a white plane before, during and after the crash.
You'll find them in the first part of "....and kiss the official UA 93 theory good-bye!" (See chapter white plane).

Let me just add that there are not only witnesses who saw a commercial plane they assumed to have been UA 93 west of the crash site but there are strangely also witnesses east of the crash site who witnessed a plane they considered to have been UA 93 as well. Both planes arrived exactly at the same moment cause both groups of witnesses also witness the explosion and connect it to the plane they just saw.

[MrSammo1]

105. Goes hand in hand with......

not a single drop of jet!

[greyl]

114. Coroner Miller: "spent endless hours collecting human remains"

In the grisly accounting of a jetliner crash, it comes down to pounds: The people on Flight 93 weighed a total of about 7,500 pounds. Miller supervised an intensive effort to gather their remains, some flung hundreds of yards. In the end, just 600 pounds of remains were collected; of these, 250 pounds could be identified by DNA testing and returned to the families of the passengers and crew.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/dave_barry/3972571.html

Another 14 victims of Flight 93 identified

"Miller said he will identify as many of the remains as he can. Remains that can't be identified will be interred at a grave in Somerset County.

"We already have issued presumptive death certificates so families could begin to take care of the affairs of those persons we haven't identified," Miller said. "Now we can say for sure on 34 of the victims and that gives the families, some of whom have held memorial services, more of a sense of closure."
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/planes/evidence/postgazette1027_flight93.html

Flight 93 victim identification long, arduous

http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925sledzik0925p3.asp

The 40th identification is expected soon, Miller said, explaining that survivors provided materials that allowed experts to identify the remains. When that identification is complete, only the remains of the four hijackers who commandeered the plane will remain unidentified.

Miller said he has no samples to match to the DNA of the four hijackers. Nonetheless, Miller said he expects to obtain DNA profiles for the hijackers and would not rule out the possibility that federal authorities may eventually identify them.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/computing/s_5929.html

[Andre II]

115. Yes, yes, yes

I know that.
But it's not interesting what the coroner found weeks AFTER the crash but what he and all the other eyewitnesses saw and found ON 911!
And here the story is different: It took the coroner almost one hour before he found the first sign of human life at the crash site.

[stickdog]

121. And that's probably just a figure of speech. (nt)

[shance]

150. So perhaps the better question, is Flight 93 a manufactured lie?

Was there ever a Flight 93?

If so, where is the evidence?

Who can prove it?

[Andre II]

144. Hospital

recently I was in the hospital (only routine) and asking three different doctors what has to happen to the human body that no drop of blood is found and presented them then with the scenario of the crash site (without indicating that I was talking about 911). All three said the same thing: They only can explain the absence of blood with concluding that the people must have died somewhere else ....

I know these gentlemen don't work for forensic analysis but still I guess they know a bit about the human body...

[leftofthedial]

145. vampires

or werewolves

that's the only possible explanation

[Ferry Fey]

146. No blood. For oil?

Andre, wouldn't having died somewhere else in that way require that their blood had been allowed to neatly drain out of their bodies, without getting smeared on their skin?

And how would you speculate that you could fit whatever time that took into the known timeline?

[Andre II]

151. Ferry Fey

Your question assumes that in fact all the human remains found at the crash site were found on 911 and were indeed from the passengers and crew members.

In fact it took the coroner one hour before he came across the first sign of human remains. Other eyewitnesses of that day also recall a striking absence of human remains. Basically all the human remains were found days after 911.

This leaves the possibility for faking the crash site.
You plant very few and very small parts of human remains.
These are parts of people dead for long time (hence the absence of blood).
The human remainss that will be identified can be planted in the days following 911.

I don't say it happened necessarily this way but I don't see your question as a counterproof.
If the absence of blood can only be explained by the fact that the persons had been dead already a long times then the above mentioned scenario seems very plausible scenario.

[politrix]

149. There Was NO Arab DNA At Pentagon, Either

Autopsy: No Arabs on Flight 77

http://www.sierratimes.com/03/07/02/article_tro.htm

Here's part two:

http://www.sierratimes.com/03/07/07/article_tro_flight77.htm

No Arab names on the passenger list, either:

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html

So, we seem to have crashes that don't have DNA or the right DNA.

[TheWraith]

154. There's no such thing as "Arab DNA." You can't tell someone's race from a DNA sample.

And saying that you can is just the kind of typical ridiculous pseudo-science and quasi-evidence that the tin-foil brigade buys into constantly, and the reason why absolutely no one takes you seriously.

[Andre II]

204. Really?

These guys seem to think differently ....

“Phylogenetic associations and frequencies of the power of discrimination of mtDNA testing when commonputative terrorist sequences from the United Airline Flight 93(Shanksville, PA) from a published data set (Haplogrouptypes in the Caucasian population are encountered. Theassociations were determined by adding the putative terroristentire mtDNA genome was sequenced from multiplesequences to representative haplogroup sequences common inindividuals matching 18 common HVI/HVII types thatEuropean and Near Eastern populations; the databases andtogether comprise 18% of the Caucasian population. Thefrequencies were determined from Richards et al”
http://www.cstl.nist.gov/div831/strbase/pub_pres/Edson2004.pdf
(p.84, table 6)

[Andre II]

152. Still question stands

what does have to happen to the human body that no drop of blood is left?

[Bolo Boffin]

153. Oh, you're not being rhetorical.

You must realize that the coroner isn't a skeptic about the Shanksville crash. He is using this to convey to us just how devastating an event this crash was. I don't think he's using hyperbole either. He means it. The naked fact is the sheer horror of the scene. That smoking crater contains a passenger jet, its passengers, and its crew, Andre.

[Name removed]

163. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheWraith]

155. You know that that's been completely debunked, right?

For one thing, the coroner has explained on the record that what he said was simply a reaction to the scene, not a suggestion that there was anything suspicious about it.

Secondly, there's no reason that there would be a lot of blood. People don't bleed unless they're injured before they die. Someone who's killed instantly in a vehicle crash doesn't bleed, because their heart has stopped beating.

[Ferry Fey]

157. Fifty gallons of blood had to go somewhere

There wasn't a single intact body found there, so the blood in each passenger (a bit over a gallon) had to go somewhere.

[TheWraith]

169. It would be inside the remains.

Again, no antemortem injuries = no bleeding. Nor would the remains have bled out afterwards--the heat from the fire would have seared the flesh, carmelized the blood, and cauterized the damage points.

[savemefromdumbya]

158. obviously no blood

because there was no plane crash so no people and no blood

[wildbilln864]

159. rediculous...

"people don't bleed unless they're injured"?
I guess there blood just dries up immediately so it won't run out any open wounds then?
:rofl:

[wildbilln864]

160. and where was that debunked?

Show us or else I think you made up that assertion.

[greyl]

162. The OP's silly insinuation is effectively debunked by reading the

article the OP links to with an open, objective mind.

What do you make of the fact that Miller calls the site a cemetery, believes 93 crashed there, and saw body parts in the trees?

[wildbilln864]

166. not...

an answer...just more deflection.
blah, blah!

[Andre II]

205. Debunked?

Excuse me?
The OP asks a question. I don't exactly know how you can debunk a question.
Moreover I fail to see any debunking attempt save telling over and over what Wallace Miller thought or might have thought.


I know for many OCTer it is hard to take but
The issue of this thread is not the coroner’s opinion or the coroner’s interpretation but a very simple question about the human body. Based on facts asking for a scientific answer. That’s all. So, please spare me the 20th posting of interpretating what the coroner believed or didn’t believe. I don’t care.

Here a few reported facts:

The coroner needed one hour to find the first trace of human remains.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8¬Found=true
And “the largest piece of human tissue found was a section of spine eight inches long”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12192317&method=full&siteid=50143
(Btw the biggest part of the plane found on 9/11 was as big as a phone book.)

We know from the coroner’s statement that these very small pieces of human tissues found at the crash site contained not a single drop of blood.

My simple question is once and again:
What does have to happen to the human body that it contains not a single drop of blood anymore?
Maybe after 200 posts somebody will come up with a scientific answer and stop dropping to pretend that I’m asking about the coroner’s impression.

[greyl]

208. Yes, debunked.

Andre II: "I don't exactly know how you can debunk a question."

When the question asked is framed with a cherry picked quote or false premise in order to provide a sinister insinuation, it can be debunked. (leading question)

Here's an example: "Andre II's posts are very similar to greyl's posts. Gee, I wonder why...?"
You can debunk that question, can't you?

It's clear to me that if the question in the OP was a genuine plea for education, you would have said something like "oh, thanks for the info" 150 posts ago.

[Andre II]

213. Nonsense

You can't debunk a question.
Your example is a combination of a statement and a question that is only rhetorical only.
Come up with any "Why" "What" question and show me how you debunk that.
The question still stands:
What has to happen to a human body that it contains no blood any more?

Care to answer and the discussion wil be closed.

Btw why is "the question asked is framed with a cherry picked quote or false premise"?

The coroner stated that he found traces of human remains (after one hour) and that he didn't find any drop of blood.

What's the false premise?
Why is it cherry picked?

You still avoid to give any scientific answer to a clear question.
If you can't (and I can't that's the reason why I ask) then admit it.

[TheWraith]

170. You'd be surprised how little a dead person would bleed.

In any event, the flesh would have been cauterized and the blood carmelized in the fire.

[seatnineb]

164. You are talkin' grade A - Bullshit......

30 minutes after death(natural or otherwise).....human blood becomes permanently incoaguable......meaning that it remains liquid.

[Bolo Boffin]

168. Calm down.

Using the coroner's statement in this way is twisting it far outside the coroner's intended meaning. This is undeniable in any kind of good faith discussion, and bringing up this contextual point is NOT a distraction.

[seatnineb]

179. Miller was one of the first to arrive at the scene.

He stayed there until 2am.
That is roughly 16 hours.

And in all that time he never found a drop of blood?

Explain how that is possible.....considering that an intact Bible was found at this very same crash site.....and a WHITE bible at that:

two heavily damaged Bibles were found in the wreckage of the flight; a white one at the crash site that belonged to a passenger who was a practicing Buddhist;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8

So lets get this straight......pages from a bible do not burn.....but human blood gets incinerated.....yeah right.

[Bolo Boffin]

196. As I understand it, "heavily damaged" means "pages from a bible do burn".

When you said "yeah, right," you fell back onto your private conclusion about Flight 93. Would you mind sharing that with us?

[seatnineb]

197. Well...if the Bible was completely burnt,Miller would not be reading pages from it.

Then Miller opens the Bible he is holding and starts to read that Old Testament psalm to the church audience: "I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help . . ."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=artic...

[Bolo Boffin]

198. As I understand it, "heavily damaged" does not mean "completely burnt."

You seem to have missed this question I asked you. Let me repeat it:

When you said "yeah, right," you fell back onto your private conclusion about Flight 93. Would you mind sharing that with us?

[seatnineb]

200. Well...even the condition of that Bible seems to be in question.

The Oct. 22, 2001, Tribune-Democrat reported that workers found a nearly unscratched Bible amid the ruins of the crash site.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110003133

So how does all the blood from every passenger get Burnt/Incinerated.....whilst pages from a Bible remain intact enough to be able to read from them?

[Bolo Boffin]

201. Are you sure they're the same Bible?

Yet again, you missed this question:

When you said "yeah, right," you fell back onto your private conclusion about Flight 93. Would you mind sharing that with us?

I really am interested in knowing where you're going with all this. What's your point?

[seatnineb]

202. I don't know....

Are you alluding to the possibility that this bible

The Oct. 22, 2001, Tribune-Democrat reported that workers found a nearly unscratched Bible amid the ruins of the crash site.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110003133

...is different to these 2 Bibles:

two heavily damaged Bibles were found in the wreckage of the flight; a white one at the crash site that belonged to a passenger who was a practicing Buddhist;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=artic...

The real point is that how can you have a Bible survive at all at this crash site......in conditions where every passenger on the plane was obliterated to the point where not an ounce of blood was visible at this same crash site?

Care to answer?

Did not think so.

[greyl]

209. Treat post #194 as a thought experiment.

What do you think would happen?

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

Btw, the specifics about the Bible are a red herring. The integrity of the so called OCT is not dependent upon a legible Bible surviving the crash; there is plenty of other evidence of non-vaporized debris recovered from the site that identifies Flight 93. I think it's possible that at least part or all of Miller's account about finding the Bible are embellishments. He did run as a Republican, after all.
But, so what? What's your point?

Again, treat post #194 as a thought experiment if you can't be bothered with a real world experiment.
What do you think would happen?

[seatnineb]

211. So "non-vaporized" debris is not unsual at a crash site where the passengers

..themselves were reduced .....

to this? :

"I stopped being coroner after about 20 minutes, because there were no bodies there. It became like a giant funeral service."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8

The OTC is really full of shit.

[TheWraith]

171. Where did you hear something as wrong as that?

Blood has no special properties with regard to remaining liquid. It can dry up, turn into a jelly if heated, it can be incinerated, any number of things. It can even remain in the dead bodies, where it would naturally be.

[greyl]

172. He must think "clotting" equals "drying".

Furthermore, what he's talking about only occurs if the body is still intact after death.

I get the feeling he's never cooked a steak.

[seatnineb]

173. I never knew the stakes you cooked contained nearly 10 pints of blood.

World Book Rush-Presbyterian-
St. Lukes Medical Center Medical Encyclopedia 7th edition.
1995
120-121.

"In an adult of average size there is a little less than 10 pints (4.7 litres)of Blood."

There were 45 passengers on Flight 93....and if we take an average of 4.7 litres of blood per Passenger....that leaves us with roughly 211 litres of blood or 405 pints worth of blood that had to be completely incinerated or evaporated at the crash site.....something I find hard to believe.

[greyl]

174. My point doesn't rely on such a stupid statement. You made it up.nt

[seatnineb]

177. Oh I am afraid it does......

Seeing as Miller found his first body part after an hour.............

It would be nearly an hour before Miller came upon his first trace of a body part.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8

Why....that is just about the time that blood becomes permanently incoagulable:

Within 60min blood becomes in-coagulable due to the release of fibrinolysins.
www.fsm.ac.fj/pws/Resources/Forensic%20Path/FM-Time%20of%20Death.ppt

[greyl]

180. No, that's absurd.

My point is that if you've ever cooked a steak, you should understand what happens to flesh and blood when it is heated.

Since you admit that body parts were there, what's your explanation for believing that there were no traces of blood?

[seatnineb]

182. So Ziad Jarrah's passport survived...........

But body parts that also survived ......survived without any traces of blood?

"I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop."
Pittsburg Live (09/11/02)

[greyl]

187. I hesitate to be gruesome, but

1. Buy some bloody red meat and burn it.
2. Search for drops of blood.
3. Listen to someone ask ridiculous questions of you about where the blood went without thinking they must be fucking joking.

Coroner Wallace Miller:

"The interesting thing about this particular case is that I haven't, to this day, 11 months later, seen any single drop of blood. Not a drop. The only thing I can deduce is that the crash was over in half a second. There was a fireball 15-20 metres high, so all of that material just got vaporised."
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/09/1031115990570.html

[seatnineb]

189. Rubbish

So pages/parts from a bible:

Then he tells the church audience that, remarkably, two heavily damaged Bibles were found in the wreckage of the flight; a white one at the crash site that belonged to a passenger who was a practicing Buddhist;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8

and Jarrah's passport:



...... survive

Yet body parts that were used for finger-printing:

Finally, some fragment of each of the dead had been positively identified, either by DNA or, in a few cases, fingerprints.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8

......had "not a drop of blood"

Yeah...right.

[greyl]

190. Invincible Ignorance.

This is a fallacy of circularity because it assumes what is in question, namely the truth of the position being defended. In general, one should defend ones own beliefs. Consistency is a better policy than being too gullible and indecisive. Moreover, since people who have thought a position through tend to be fairly loyal to their conclusions, a person who holds to a position can sometimes appear to be more rational and thoughtful than someone who is too easily swayed by every argument he hears.

The fallacy of Invincible Ignorance mimics the consistency that comes from having a well-thought-out position. However it asks us to overlook the distinction between rational consistency and sheer stubbornness.

http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/invincible_ignorance.asp

[seatnineb]

192. So how did this bible survive?

The Oct. 22, 2001, Tribune-Democrat reported that workers found a nearly unscratched Bible amid the ruins of the crash site.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110003133

[TheWraith]

207. Rubbish yourself.

Nobody ever said, except in your mind, that every drop of blood at the scene was destroyed. But whatever was left would be in the remains. It's not that hard of a thing to grasp. Try doing a google search or two about cauterization, drying, etcetera.

By the way: fibrinolysin release is only possible if the body remains intact.

[seatnineb]

210. Whatever blood was left would be in the remains?

So explain what happened to those bodily remains....

This is what you should get when a plane crashes into the ground......

Bodies...lots of charred bodies.

All 117 passengers and six crew members on board the Faucett Airlines jet liner died Thursday night when the plane, apparently after bursting into flames in flight, crashed into the barren, rocky region. Workers have removed more than 50 bodies so far, but all, they say, are unrecognizably burned. The plane's flight recorders were recovered, but have yet to be analyzed.
www.cnn.com/WORLD/9603/peru_crash/12p/index.html - 6k

[seatnineb]

175. No you are wrong.

Blood becomes permanently incoagulable AFTER 30-60 minutes regardless of whether the death is natural or non- natural.
Meaning that it remains liquid.

And you are asking me to believe that parts of white cloth at the crash site remain unburnt......

He(Miller) saw shreds of that white cloth they put over the headrests.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_90823.html

....whilst every ounce of blood from every passenger onboard was incinerated?!!!!....get outta here!

[greyl]

176. Please answer this simply, for the record:

What evidence do you have that there was no blood at the crash site?

[seatnineb]

178. Do you have any evidence that there was blood?

Please show it to me!

Seeing as you have the Moussoiu trial exibits and County coroner testimony to fall back on...

[greyl]

181. What is your evidence that there wasn't blood? nt

[seatnineb]

184. Where did those bloodless body parts come from?

Maybe they started falling from the plane......BEFORE the plane crashed:

Residents of nearby Indian Lake reported seeing debris falling from the jetliner as it overflew the area shortly before crashing.
(Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 9/14/01)

[greyl]

185. Why do you believe the body parts were bloodless? nt

[seatnineb]

186. Tamil Suicide bombers have bloody body parts:

I am pretty sure that if Miller had come across something like this:

(WARNING: Graphic foto of the head of a Tamil sucide bomber)
http://www.spur.asn.au/News_2004_July_08.htm

....he would have mentioned it.

[greyl]

188. Think.

Coroner Wallace Miller:

"The interesting thing about this particular case is that I haven't, to this day, 11 months later, seen any single drop of blood. Not a drop. The only thing I can deduce is that the crash was over in half a second. There was a fireball 15-20 metres high, so all of that material just got vaporised."
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/09/1031115990570.html

[seatnineb]

191. Gee...Miller forgets to tell us how the Bible he is reading from:

Then Miller opens the Bible he is holding and starts to read that Old Testament psalm to the church audience: "I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help . . ."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8

....somehow managed to avoid getting incinerated/evaporated ......unlike the blood of the victims.

[greyl]

194. After you've aquired that steak,

preheat your oven to 450.
Place the steak and a thick book(I recommend a Bible exactly like Miller's), onto a cookie sheet.
Bake for 30 minutes.
Notice the lack of blood in the steak while you open the Bible to Psalms (near the middle of the book) and read a random passage.

Next, you can contact:

Somerset County Coroner's Office
555 Tayman Avenue, Somerset, PA 15501
[phone]

and ask the relevant source for updated clarification on the "not a drop of blood" issue, just like a real investigator or researcher would.

[seatnineb]

195. That is poor.

How about placing the book on a plane.
Then..subject the book to a powerful explosion due to the impact of the plane into the ground at 400 MPH.
And just for good measure...subject the same book(provided anything is left of it) to a fire(of unknown duration)...and then get back to me.

[woo me with science]

214. They HID the REAL people!

and put FAKE people on the planes!

With no blood!

That was very very CLEVER of them!

[seatnineb]

230. Care to explain how a plane loses "debris" BEFORE it crashes?

Residents of nearby Indian Lake reported seeing debris falling from the jetliner as it overflew the area shortly before crashing.
(Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 9/14/01)

[greyl]

238. If that eyewitness account is accurate, have you ruled out a bomb?

There are passenger accounts that the hijackers claimed to have a bomb.
Have you speculated about all other possible causes for a breach in the structure of the craft and ruled them out?
Use your imagination.

[seatnineb]

240. The FBI said there was no bomb.

The FBI said yesterday that it has finished its work at the crash scene of United Flight 93 after recovering about 95 percent of the downed airliner and concluding that explosives were not responsible for bringing it down.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp

But there not being bomb on the plane did not stop this same plane from littering the scene with debris...........

Residents of nearby Indian Lake reported seeing debris falling from the jetliner as it overflew the area shortly before crashing.
(Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 9/14/01)

[greyl]

241. So, what explanations can you come up with?

Why are you trusting the FBI in this case?

[seatnineb]

243. It would be more interesting to hear your explanation?

Seeing as you believe the official version of events.

[greyl]

245. I bet it would be, but I'm turned off by the "timesink" qualtiy of our exchanges, though.

There must be at least 20 questions in the past few days that you haven't acknowledged.
The final one is "Why do you believe the FBI in this case?"

See ya.

[seatnineb]

246. FBI says there is no bomb despite witness seeing debris fall from the plane.

The FBI said yesterday that it has finished its work at the crash scene of United Flight 93 after recovering about 95 percent of the downed airliner and concluding that explosives were not responsible for bringing it down.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925...

Jim Stop reported he had seen the hijacked Boeing 757 fly over him as he was fishing. He said he could see parts falling from the plane.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_47536.html

So let's see you give an explanation for the above Greyl.

[TheWraith]

206. You persist in believing something that's not true.

I never said that every ounce of blood was incinerated, but your assertion that the place should have looked like the set of a horror movie is equally ludicrous. Please feel free to ask any coroner, how much blood you should expect to see in an aircraft crash where all the victims were killed instantly.

[seatnineb]

212. Blood has been and can be found at plane crash sites:

ATHENS, Aug 20: Six days after the worst air crash to occur on Greek soil, Greek investigators have taken a step closer to piecing together the tragic Cypriot plane’s final moments by matching blood found in the cockpit wreckage to a flight steward.
http://www.dawn.com/2005/08/21/int12.htm

[greyl]

161. Amazing fact:

About 23% of the people in this thread have been tombstoned. (6 of them)
100% of those tombstoned are/were CTists.

It has to mean something.

[Bryan Sacks]

165. Amazing that people will not drop this

Go speak to Miller. Go ask him what happened. It clears up any possible doubt, as if there was much to begin with.

Best thing of all to do, since no one who doubts 93 crashed in Shanksville will take anyone else's word for anything: Go to Shanksville TODAY and you can still find pieces of the plane that some say never crashed! You have to get behind the protection fences, but it's there. It's always been there, in very tiny pieces slightly buried beneath the soil. Some pieces aren't even that tiny.

Do you see? The plane you say isn't there is STILL THERE! What better proof could there be?

[DoYouEverWonder]

183. Parts of the plane are still there?

If that is true, then that is outragous. Because if parts of the plane are still there, then that means body parts are still there too. That also means that the crash site was never properly cleaned up. Why not? It's a big open area. It's not like the site is hard to get to or that they can't get equipment in there. At the WTC they sifted through tons of dust and debris to find even the smallest bone fragments. Why wasn't this done for the victims in PA?

[seatnineb]

193. Miller says 98% of the UA93 was found.............

Miller told us 98% of the shattered 757 jetliner has been picked up, and cleanup operations under his authority will continue until he's sure the site is safe.
http://www.airdisaster.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59772

[salvorhardin]

199. I think it means

I think it means the neo-con mafia is doing its' job. ;-)

[Bryan Sacks]

203. Don't misunderstand

The site is safe. It has been 'cleaned up'. But to clean it up entirely would mean bulldozing several acres of wooded land into which large and miniscule body parts and plane parts splattered. Even then you would never get it all, of course. The crash remains, the small but often not tiny fragments from the crash, have begun to integrate with the dirt and soil near the crash site. That's my point.

"Small but not tiny:" I found a piece of the plane about the size of my open hand, which I picked up. There were several smaller pieces too. This was in August of 2004.

[DoYouEverWonder]

215. Name me one other crash in the US

where they didn't recover every single part of the plane possible? Even Flight 800 which crashed into the ocean was mostly recovered and eventually the remains from every passenger were recovered.

Not only was Flight 93 a crash, it was also a crime scene. There is no reason that every single scrap from that plane at that site was not recovered even if they had to dig up a number of acres. Who knows what valuable evidence might be there without recovering everything possible.

[AZCat]

216. There are quite a few.

Check out this site for several examples.

[DoYouEverWonder]

217. Has in a Major Airline Passenger Jet

Sorry if I was vague.

[Bolo Boffin]

218. Pardon me, excuse me. Goalpost coming through. n/t

[AZCat]

220. You mean civilian?

Civilian crash sites are a little more difficult, primarily because they occur most frequently at or around airports where debris is more likely to get cleaned up than in remote areas, but they do exist. I have included links to a couple at the bottom of this post.

http://joeidoni.smugmug.com/gallery/1889421
http://www.aircraftarchaeology.com/twa_united_airlines_grand_canyon.htm

[DoYouEverWonder]

221. Yes, civilian

So far, you still haven't shown me anything from the last 25 years. Besides, Flight 93 did not crash in a remote area and there was no problem gaining access to the site and/or bringing heavy equipment in. Considering that this was a hijacked plane and the causes of the crash were uncertain, why was no attempt made to recover as much of the plane as possible and rebuild it? Isn't this SOP civilian airliners nowadays?





Flight 800

[AZCat]

222. So now I have to find something within the last 25 years?

Why didn't you list all your criteria in the first post when you asked for crash sites? I'm getting tired of chasing a moving target. Are there any other requirements that I should know of before I go googling (something you yourself are capable of)?

[DoYouEverWonder]

223. I assumed we would be comparing apples to apples

since we were discussing Flight 93, a civilian airliner operated by one of the major US airline companies and not military flights or small commuter jets running off the runway decades ago.

[AZCat]

224. As I said...

most of the civilian crashes occur in the vicinity of airports. These sites are normally occupied by other things so cleanup is going to be more rigorous.

And why is there such a significant difference between aircraft? Shouldn't the NTSB approach all crashes similarly? Or are people who fly smaller planes (Paul Wellstone, for example) just not as important? The military and defense contractors certainly care a great deal about why military aircraft crash - shouldn't their sites be investigated the same way (if not more so - there might be sensitive info)?

[DoYouEverWonder]

225. There's a big difference between an accident

and a criminal act and the level of investigation that different circumstances require. Especially in a crash that is the result of an act of terrorism and the actual cause of the crash is unknown.

[AZCat]

226. Really?!

Why don't you then point out the difference in NTSB procedures for these two events, since it is (in your opinion) so striking of a difference?

Or could it be that perhaps you're talking out of your ass?


Let me see if I now have the complete list:
1. Aircraft crash in U.S.A.
2. Within last 25 years
3. Major airline
4. General aviation
5. Not in boonies (urban/suburban accessible site)
6. Act of terrorism
7. Full-sized aircraft (not sure what the cut-off point is)
8. Unknown cause of crash

Did I miss anything? :eyes:

[DoYouEverWonder]

227. 'Perhaps you're talking out of your ass'

If we can't have a conversation without personal insults, then I refuse to continue to have one.

[greyl]

228. That wasn't a personal insult.

It's a statement about your statement. Your statement was being compared to shit, nothing was said about you as a person. Look on the bright side: you're free to say his argument is shit. It always helps if you also provided some evidence in support of your pov at the same time.

[DoYouEverWonder]

229. Gee

I was taught that 'my' and 'your' are personal pronouns.

So when some posts a response to me and says 'your ass', I assume they are referring to 'my' ass.

[Name removed]

232. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DoYouEverWonder]

235. "Your fingers just typed a total fucking bullshit reply"

Is it possible to state your opinion without cursing at me?

Yes, words do have meaning and it's not my fingers typing the bullshit replies.

[greyl]

237. Can you please try to read more carefully?

It could prevent some wasting of time.
My subject line says "(example)".

Is it possible you're distracting from the lack of evidence for your pov regarding 93?

[seatnineb]

233. According to Miller...98% of the UA93 was found:

Miller told us 98% of the shattered 757 jetliner has been picked up, and cleanup operations under his authority will continue until he's sure the site is safe.
http://www.airdisaster.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5977...

I believe Miller more than Bryan Sack's anonymouse shanksville resident.

[Bryan Sacks]

242. But I agree with Miller! And I spoke with him for two hours as well!

The fact remains that small and tiny pieces of the plane are still there.

[seatnineb]

244. I believe you Bryan but I don't believe in what the resident told and showed you!

With regards to Miller....

He told the gazzette that not everything can be/was recovered.

"We've been as thorough as we possibly can ... but we're not naive enough to think that we've gotten everything," Miller said.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp

Did you ask Miller about the human remains and Blood?....and if so what did he tell you?

[AZCat]

231. Sorry about the idiom.

I get sloppy when I'm tired, and I was posting late last night. Greyl is correct - I was questioning whether your argument concerning differences in investigation procedure was baseless.

I apologize for the confusion.





On Edit: need coffee...

[DoYouEverWonder]

234. I get sloppy when I'm tired too

So I was hoping that we could all cut each other some slack when someone misspeaks, or doesn't dot all the i's and cross all the t's.

However, I will not put up with people who have to resort to personal insults, putdowns, cursing me out and name calling. That's the end of the conversation as far as I'm concerned.

[AZCat]

236. And that occurred where?

Questioning whether your argument has any actual basis other than opinion doesn't seem to fit any of those categories. Are you offended by the idiom itself?

[greyl]

239. It didn't. nt