RE: What is it that went wrong (at WTC 7)?

In regards to the post, what is it that went wrong, I have an idea I'd like to float by the community.

I have a feeling something went quite wrong on that day, ie not according to plan. I dont mean Shanksville and all that, but WTC7. I mean, it cant have been part of a master plan to bring it down as obvious as it was done, i think. So, what should have happend? Another plane? Hm, i dont think so. What else ? Im sure people here have a few ideas to offer.

For many years I've heard people speculate as to where Flight 93 was headed. People would say that it was headed for Camp David, The White House, or even The Statue of Liberty, oh my! To that, I would always reply, "what if it was headed towards WTC 7?" That's the point that people would flip-out. Should I go on? I will.

The military says the plane wasn't shot down. Truthers say the plane didn't crash in Shanksville. When a group is very adamant about a view, I tend to believe them. When two groups are so adamant about seemingly opposing views, I'll try to look for a third view that fits the story. So, if the plane didn't crash, and if it wasn't shot down, then what happened? The mission was aborted. The flight took off late, and it would be gross negligence if that plane hit its intended target (its target being WTC 7). In fact, the 9/11 Commission almost indicted military officials because the current story doesn't add up. If another plane would've hit another building in New York an hour later, and the military didn't stop it, the story would not have held as long as it has. It would turn the story from the military responding slowly, to the military standing down.

So, what happened? They aborted the mission. Flight 93 was intended to hit WTC 7, but it was way to late. The explosives were already in the building, and WTC 7 seems like the real target of the day. So, then they are left with a building full of bombs, but no plane. Just because they aborted part of the mission, don't mean that they could abort the whole thing. Not if WTC 7 was the target. So, I'm sure you know where this is going. I digress.

Very interesting. It is

Very interesting. It is something that should be tabled, but definately revisited when these bastards are indited.

I agree... I have no

I agree... I have no evidence for this, but it's the story that fits every other story.

i don't want to get into too much speculating...

but the supposed "crash site" of flight 93 had a hole blown out of it. I'm not saying flight 93 crashed there, but am saying that that hole had to be created some how.

and if it was 'created' on 9/11, then it seems to be that the whole flight 93 story was part of the plan.

But again...who the f-cares?

This isn't the stuff that's going to get us a new investigation. No offense to you. It is an interesting question. But questions like these bother me sometimes.

Some have said WTC-7 was supposed to fall w/the North Tower...

but something went wrong, so they had to "pull-it" much later than originally planned.

P.S. I don't think UA-93 was going to come all the way back from Ohio to hit WTC-7. The two planes that supposedly hit the towers were out of Boston, don't forget. Then again, I believe drones hit the targets that day, because it makes the evil plot so much easier to accomplish. Some or all of those passenger flights may never have been real, just like many/most of the "passengers". This type of treachery was even proposed in Operation Northwoods, 45 years ago.

I often wonder why in the Betty Ong call, she says flight 12...

and then "corrects" herself & says she's on flight 11. (The 4 minutes of Ong's 25-minute call that Kean played sounded bogus in many other ways too.)

flight 93 & WTC 7

It is true that WTC 7 was a target and was destroyed by, what appears to be, traditional controlled demolition. WTC 1 & 2 were pulverized, method unknown, but not traditional controlled demolition. Using a similar catalyst ("plane crash") to create an entirely different type of destruction would only serve to highlight the highly unusual aspects of the WTC 1 & 2 "collapses".

You say "they aborted the mission" but do not say what became of flight 93.
It is likely that Flight 93's inclusion in the 911 myth was necessary to create the "let's roll/passengers saved (choose target) from certain destruction" psycho-drama beliefs within certain groups and the "military got there in time but just can't admit it" belief in other groups. I don't know who got where when, but there was no airplane in the crater.