Did 9-11 Flt AA11, Flt UAL93 & Flt UAL175 'Survive' ?

a pseudonymous article without any primary evidence (or indeed, any real evidence at all) is hardly the smoking gun ...

just another wild goose chase to distract people from facts

it's possible this anonymous person may be proven correct

The "woodybox" anonymous writer also promotes material that was proven to be untrue a long time ago (the fake claim of "pods" under Flight 175 -- merely a photographic trick at shown at  http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html and  http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/pod.html).

No court or newspaper editor is likely to use anonymous hearsay that lacks primary evidence sources.

Who benefits from distracting from the proven beyond reasonable doubt evidence of complicity -- the NRO and NORAD wargames, failure to intercept, insider trading, warnings / foreknowledge, the fact the Pentagon was hit in the nearly empty part of the building.

save your hatred for yourself. No one elected your website as the dictator of the 'truth movement,' eh? And you guys' 'pod hatred' is ridiculous.

since INN globalgreepress went down i mirrored this here...

 http://911search.bravehost.com/didthe911planes_survive.html

Other INN mirrors, including the lost war drills and Johnstown team coverup here
 http://911search.bravehost.com/
 http://911search.bravehost.com/Johnstown.html

comment on reader above,
"failure to intercept, insider trading, warnings / foreknowledge, the fact the Pentagon was hit in the nearly empty part of the building. "

OK, so i guess some general should be slapped on the wrist for letting 911 happen? that is what you are suggesting, follwing this line of thinking, the truth will not be found.
The part of the building the pentagon was hit has NOTHING to do with if it was a 757 or not, and NOTHING to do with being complicant OR holding anyone accountable.
Anyone who tries to discredit 20 different research pages about 911 and puts his "bogus" signature accross the web on every post, must be cointellpro