16th anniversary of the biggest conspiracy to date

a reply to: InhaleExhale


Why can that not be proved? Why was it not visible on video tapes or still photos? Why did Miller report he found nothing?

Which is to ask, was Miller telling the truth when he came out of the field, or was he telling the truth days later when he changed his story?

Which was truth, and which was a deception?

a reply to: Salander

Quote the actual article where he said there was no crashed flight 93?

Did you read this post?

The link to the actual CNN interview in this thread. www.abovetopsecret.com...

The link to the actual Post-Gazette article posted in this thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please reference the source material and stop pushing the quotes edited by conspiracists to form a false reality to push a false narratives.

The actual CNN interview...

edition.cnn.com...
edition.cnn.com...

MATTINGLY: From our distant vantage point on September 11th, all that seemed to remain from United flight 93 was a shallow, charred pit. What we didn't know was, according to county officials at the scene, the cockpit and approximately a third of the airplane bounced off the ground and shattered, pieces scattering through the burning treeline across a 50-acre area. The rest collapsed on top of itself, buried into the burning pit.

WALLACE MILLER, SOMERSET COUNTRY CORONER: I had never actually witnessed an aircraft disaster prior to this. But what I've seen on TV, you see some of the big pieces of fuselage or engine, or something like that, but there was nothing like that. I've been told that it was due to the speed of the aircraft.

MATTINGLY: At an estimated 500 miles per hour on impact, the devastation was complete, compounding the delicate job of recovering remains of the passengers and crew.

MILLER: It was a really a very unusual site. You almost would've thought the passengers had been dropped off somewhere.

MATTINGLY: Partial remains of just 12 people could be identified from fingerprints and dental records. Identifying the rest on board depended on DNA testing on the few remains not incinerated in the crash or contaminated by jet fuel or flame retardant.

MILLER: Even by the standard model of an airplane crash, there was very little, even by those standards.

MATTINGLY: But it was enough to eventually identify everyone onboard. Remains of the passengers and crew began going back to the families shortly before Christmas, Coroner Miller sharing with them one inescapable conclusion.

MILLER: For all intents and purposes, the final resting place of their loved ones was at that particular site where the crash occurred.

MATTINGLY: Today, it's almost impossible to tell there was a crash here, the impact pit filled in, the area covered with topsoil and grass, surrounded by a fence, trees burned by the fireball removed. And the task begun on September 11th still incomplete. MILLER: We're going to go through here one more time here in the spring, and hopefully that'll be -- at some point, we have to say, we did the best we could.

End of video tape

The actual Post Gazette Article...

Newsmaker: Coroner's quiet unflappability helps him take charge of Somerset tragedy
Monday, October 15, 2001


old.post-gazette.com...

After the crash he swore in a cadre of deputies -- helpers such as hospital workers and fellow funeral directors -- but Miller chose largely to go it alone.

Even in the middle of it all, where trees were scorched and the Boeing 757's fuselage disintegrated in a crater that collapsed on itself to leave a gouge maybe 14 feet across, the destruction was so complete that it was hard to imagine what happened.

"It was as if the plane had stopped and let the passengers off before it crashed," Miller said.

a reply to: Salander

Sad a "truth movement" survives in they present misquotes, quotes out of context, and try to belittle anyone that doesn't drink the truth movement kook aid by conducting independent and honest research?

a reply to: Salander

And this has been presented to you with no rebuttals...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Salander

Again, provide actual quotes from first responders and site crews where individuals said no jet crashed at shanksville, no wreckage at shanksville, or there was no human remains. You have been part of threads were people have posted the effects of high speed aircraft crashes.

Sorry this is morbid....

But the results of this P-51 crash results in no recognizable human body and no recognizable P-51, yet it is clear the aircraft crashed on the runway. Is this a conspiracy?

m.youtube.com...
m.youtube.com...

m.youtube.com...
m.youtube.com...


m.youtube.com...
m.youtube.com...

a reply to: Salander

Do you post rants just to push facts in a thread into the background?

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Yep...and a lot of folks think 911 was a start-point...the 1st one-conspiracy started there...when it was not...

There was a first bombing there years before....and the 911 theories...a lot of them... go out the window if you dont take that into consideration.

And that makes a majority of those here...as you and I agree..inaccurate with a lot of effort put into just that 911 date...when that was farther down the line....with a lot of players and incidents not even considered by the 911 conspiracy theorist membership here.

Thanks

a reply to: Salander

Why can that not be proved?

Why can what not be proved?

Why was it not visible on video tapes or still photos?

Context?



Are you asking about this ........"Flight 93 headed straight for the ground. Crashed head first. "?

a reply to: InhaleExhale

I think the individual is ignoring the accounts of small pieces of wreckage, and thinks because the wreckage is not obvious in low resolution internet reproductions of areal photographs of the site, there is a conspiracy of no crashed jet?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Do you post rants just to push facts in a thread into the background?

Says the guy who just posted 6 posts in a row...

Meh.
It was nineteen very nasty men and a plan that exploited our complacency in air travel safety.

But don't worry cuz as soon as those horses wuz stolen we locked up that barn good and tight.

So tight that you know when the man across the aisle has athletes foot fungus because you could smell his feet three people down the security check point line.
And the agent at the gate knows your wife has an IUD because he saw it on the xray machines you have to go through.

Our government failed to act on intelligence it was getting. That and only that is Bush's shame.
We didn't do this. No no building seven no nothing. In sixteen years there's been nothing.
Time to put this with the Kubrick moon landing theory and JFK was killed by the government theory.
That or everyone change your name to Jerry Fletcher and call it a night.
Lol.
Nite Jerry

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Do you post rants just to push facts in a thread into the background?

Says the guy who just posted 6 posts in a row...

not like that's under his control. If no one else is in the thread when you're answering posts it can happen .

a reply to: Nothin

With quoted material, examples how conspiracists use misquotes, use quotes out of context, what happens to aircraft during a high speed crash, and reminding certain individuals their repeated attempts to push fantasy as fact has been already debunked.

I do apologize that individuals that have been debunked over and over again bring their arguments into threads as if their misquotes were presented for the very first time. As in their same old arguments and rants.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Why tell the whole truth and story when telling half truths, misquotes, and lies gets you notoriety.

The falsehoods will continue as long as the likes of Richard Gage, Steven Jones, Dr Wood are enabled to exploit 9/11 for book sells, coast to coast radio interviews, and speaking tours.

I learned early on, on ATS, if you give a conspiracist an inch, they will run a light year with ignorant rants. Then once cornered, the argument becomes, "Its all a lie." But will quote items from NIST, such as the collapse speeds of the towers as absolute fact, when it suits them.

Or will think the jets should have bounced off the towers.

Or nukes brought down the towers, ask Salander. That is the individual's pet theory.

a reply to: neutronflux


I saw it with my own eyes dude! On TV, as it happened, cameraship flying around the field, for probably more than 15 minutes. They guy in the backseat with the microphone said what the camera showed--there was no wrecked airliner in that field that day.

That was my first glimpse at the deception I guess, but I did agree with Peter Jennings that the towers coming down sure looked strange somehow, like a controlled demolition.

The ship that was 93 that day was still flying in Illinois 30 minutes later.

Quite by accident, a friend of mine observed some unusual aircraft movements on the night of September 10.

It was a spectacular deception.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Salander

Why can that not be proved?

Why can what not be proved?

Why was it not visible on video tapes or still photos?

Context?



Are you asking about this ........"Flight 93 headed straight for the ground. Crashed head first. "?

That UA93 had crashed in that field.

Why could nobody find it, walking in that field? Why was that wrecked airliner invisible to cameras?

Ask Occam that question and he would say because there WAS NO AIRLINER in that field that day. I do somewhat understand how sleight-of-hand works, but you can't say an airliner crashed somewhere if the airplane is invisible.

I just looked up a recreation of 93, damn those people went through hell

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Salander

Why can that not be proved?

Why can what not be proved?

Why was it not visible on video tapes or still photos?

Context?



Are you asking about this ........"Flight 93 headed straight for the ground. Crashed head first. "?

That UA93 had crashed in that field.

Why could nobody find it, walking in that field? Why was that wrecked airliner invisible to cameras?

Ask Occam that question and he would say because there WAS NO AIRLINER in that field that day. I do somewhat understand how sleight-of-hand works, but you can't say an airliner crashed somewhere if the airplane is invisible.

Do some research.

First responders found the engine core that day about 2-300 yards away in a ditch.

There's a lot of reports from first responders reporting debris that afternoon. They were on the ground. Not flying around. They saw it. They reported it.

Honest research proves you don't have a clue.