How does MIHOP or even LIHOP fit if 93 was shot down?

I am trying so hard to put this puzzle together, and I can't seem to get a coherent picture.

Of course, perhaps that is the precise intention of all the contradictory evidence? To make us give up because it makes no sense?

What could have gone wrong with the plan that allowed flight 93 to be shot down, if indeed that's what happened?

think about it?

that flight 93 landed in Ohio and that a decoy plane (drone?) was shot down as a show?

But why? How does that benefit LIHOP or MIHOP more than actually shooting down 93?

passengers had taken control of the plane, and there were things about the hijackers that the
government didn't want anyone to know.

If you look at Paul Thompson's timeline, you'll see the FBI was hooked into the passengers' phone calls
by 9:45 or so, so the gov't knew what was going on with the plane. Assuming it was shot down, you
have to wonder, why Shanksville? If they were headed for DC they'd be over "Blair Witch" territory for
another ten minutes. So what was the big hurry to bring it down?

insofar as ANYthing about 9/11 makes sense anymore..

thanks

just imagine if four of the hijackers were taken alive..

Not to mention the hijackers on the plane would be witnesses..

So imagine if four/five Saudis were taken into custody, the legal/diplomatic ramifications.

The way it panned out with no survivors was just perfect for *'s "this is the first war of the 21st century" speech.

One of the fighter pilots actually made it to within missle firing range and got a shot off - he was just doing what he's been trained to do, take out a hostile threat, covertly of course, to prevent public lash back against the military. This still allows for MIHOP to have occured.

... in a 1st anniversary piece on General Winfield, who was in charge of the National Military Command Center that day:

"STARR: It is now 9:40, and one very big problem is out there: United Airlines Flight 93 has turned off its transponder. Officials believe it is headed for Washington, D.C."

"WINFIELD: That is almost the exact same scenario that the other three hijackings had followed."

"STARR: Fighter aircraft begin searching frantically. On a secure phone line, Vice President Cheney tells the military it has permission to shoot down any airliners threatening Washington."

"WINFIELD: If you can imagine for a split second or two there was complete silence in the NMCC as the impact of those words sunk in."

"STARR: Minutes later, the wreckage of Flight 93 is spotted in Pennsylvania."
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0209/07/nac.00.html

How many times have you seen the story of United 93 without the "hero passengers" mentioned?

Did the earth swallow it whole next to a convenient service road and:

1. spit out one of it's engines a mile away

2. and spit some jet fuel off and over to the side that burnt some trees, yet didn't burn any of the grass between the crater and the trees, or anywhere else around the crater

3. and spit out unburnt debris no bigger than a phone book (besides the one engine)

4. and spit out bits and pieces of human remains that didn't have a single drop of blood

5. and only let out one small smoke plume?


Is that what happened to Flight 93 Kevin?

One of them, "Flight X", has been argued to be the real 93.

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=323

at Shanksville.



Note the hemlock around the small crater is unburnt and it even looks like some grass is still growing inside the crater and some of the dirt in the crater looks like it wasn't recently turned/disturbed! (see middle bottom of pic)



See also:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=68679&mesg_id=68679

and

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=60970&mesg_id=63694

Everywhere else, the tragedy was well recorded, but we have gotten very little info about this site. I know the plane was swallowed up in the hole, but there must have been some sizable pieces of wreckage excavated that would be conclusive of the 767 impact. What I've seen to date is nothing that is even circumstantial. I've never seen any aircraft part pics of 93.

The reason this crash wasn't well recorded is because it is well the most obvious the crash scene was faked.

Here's what the coroner said...


"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. It became like a giant funeral service."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8¬Found=true



"The impact of the crash of Flight #93 left almost no trace above ground. Photo by S.C. Spangler/Tribune-Review" - FEMA

The BIGGEST distraction

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x68800

:toast:

just kidding. This is perfect example of how they are trying to confuse people. And, of course, it works, with me anyway. Then recently, Moussaoui changes his story to say that he was supposed to fly a plane into the WH. I think we're supposed to think that that was where this was headed. Then there are reports that Moussaoui has a stun belt on. I don't know if he's a patsy or an asset or what.

OCT has it that it "crashed" - which it obviously did not.

This does not exclude "shoot down".

Weren't plane parts found over a large area around the supposed crash site?
If so, that indicates "shoot down" rather than "crash".

and 2 result in the complete destruction of two 110-story buildings because the fires were so intense etc., and one (93) results in a mere scratch in a field. Compare and contrast...

Flight 93 was a back up in case one of the other airliners missed the towers. It was absolutely needed, within the ruse, that both towers be hit by planes.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1207667

that put forth the idea that hijacked jets actually existed that day.

Scientific observation proves that no such event happened.

It also was most likely part of the story that the neocons fed to Congress. The Pentagon missile being another part of that tale.