I thought flight 93 hit so hard that there basically wasn't much wreckage at all. I thought that it hit so hard that even the bodies were vaporized. How can there be wreckage being held somewhere when there wasn't that much left to begin with?

I don't know if I buy this story. The pictures from there that I remember seeing showed not much left of the airplane. Unless I missed something (which is entirely possible)

If there is any, perhaps this is just an effort to keep souvenir gools away from it.

"Souvenir gools"
Well then why didnt they just ship the remains off to China,like they did with the WTC steel?

Originally posted by Black_Fox
Well then why didnt they just ship the remains off to China,like they did with the WTC steel?

Good point. The WTC steel went in many different directions .. some even went to a shipyard to help build a navy ship (or so I heard). That was way too big of a site to be able to keep control of things.

Perhaps, since Flight 93 was a smaller they kept the little they had to be melted down and made into a memorial ....

I'm just guessing. Really though .. I don't remember seeing much debris left from the impact.

Wait, let me see if I've got this. They took the wreckage of Flight 93, to this super secret underground facility, where they put an armed guard on it and didn't let anyone see it, but then let a reporter with a camera into the facility and showed her? Uh, anyone else see something seriously wrong here?

They're keeping the wreckage there for a reason, and it's probably to keep someone from walking off with it and selling it on Ebay.

i live in pennsylvania, the site was actually under gaurd untill just recently. (the crash site i mean.)

i didnt watch the whole video, i stopped at the part where they brefly showed the crash site. i again noted the lack of a jetliner at the crash site.

one of the biggest discrepencies of 911 is all the so called experts that say the fire from the jet fuel burned down the towers, yet the same jet fuel couldnt manage to burn an acre of grass in pennsylvania or desks computers and books in the pentagon.

Vaporized?Has anyone heard of a airliner and its passengers being virtually completlely vabefore this??

They weren't vaporized. They didn't find many large pieces of bodies, but that's normal for ANY plane crash. As for the wreckage, it was there, it just buried itself in the ground. That's been known to happen in several crashes I've heard about.

ive heard about the boogeyman. in mexico they call him el cucuy. could you please post a link to an airliner crash of relative size where there was no wreckage found? thank you.

Uhm, try going back and actually READING what I said. I said the wreckage WAS found, it was buried in the ground. And no I can't, because all my accident reports are offline, from sources that were never put on the internet.

i read what you said. i however have spent many hours looking at images of the wreck and of course there is no wreckage there to be seen. not in the hole, not around the hole, not near the site. thats why i asked for a source from similar scenarios.

The cloest example I know of that IS on the internet is of a Boeing 727-200 that crashed from altitude at near Mach 1.00, and it left plenty of debris, despite crashig near vertically, too.

It is very odd that aircraft wreckage would be guarded. Usually the parts are scrapped and/or recycled after an investigation, with only key elements being preserved.

[edit on 1-6-2007 by mirageofdeceit]

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit
The cloest example I know of that IS on the internet is of a Boeing 727-200 that crashed from altitude at near Mach 1.00, and it left plenty of debris, despite crashig near vertically, too.

It is very odd that aircraft wreckage would be guarded. Usually the parts are scrapped and/or recycled after an investigation, with only key elements being preserved.

[edit on 1-6-2007 by mirageofdeceit]

I can't remember the name of the flight, but the one that had crashed outside of New York, that sank into the ocean, that alot of us conspiracy theorists had claimed to have been hit by a missile, was salvaged and stored in a military hanger for a good while as they tried to figure out the cause of its malfunction.

Its not uncommon, I would imagine.

I watched the video , what's your point ? What holographic conspiracy
are you cooking up for this one ? Why can there not be a simple story
about what happened that sad day that doesn't end up a conspiracy ?
It's really sad .

well because not everyone is the same, imfraid. im the kind of jerk that thinks for themself and questions authority. when presented with a scenario as dubious as the missing plane from the planecrash site, the sherlock holes in me just 'kicks in'

[edit on 1-6-2007 by jprophet420]

Anyone else smelling the scent of disinformation? A subliminal attempt to cause confusion among many? We keep old recordings, bill gates keeps some stuff here, the government has some stuff...oh yeah we got flight 93 here also. Even though many who have seen the "crash site" of 93 did not describe anything like a crash site of a huge passenger plane and that the plane appearantly was vaporised on impact? It would be quite interesting to see if there are other newscasts along these lines about 93.

I work at the "super secret undergound facility" and that newscast was the first I heard about the wreckage being stored there. It could be just to keep it safe, as others suggested. Another possibility is to keep it preserved. Underground storage is ideal for keeping things preserved as it's easy and cheap to control temperature and humidity.

The title is incorrect. Here's the correct title:

Wreckage From Wingless UAV Aircraft That Really Crashed In Shanksville Under Armed Guard Buried Deep Inside Iron Mountain

Just slightly off topic but when people state re wreakage/no wreakage, holes in the ground. Do you remeber the Lockerbie incident, 1 engine alone destroyed half a street of houses and left a huge crater in the ground, look at any air disaster anywhere you have massive debris fields covering many square miles yet at this site there is very little.

Was it a drone/light aircraft/missile that hit the ground there, there is very little evidence to say that a large jet liner hit the ground, the impact hole would have been much greater than the one shown.

Back on topic, why would the Goverment want to keep anything anywhere that may incriminate them or the perps to this event, all eveidence would have been destroyed long ago, and nothing is that safe anywhere.

Originally posted by WolfofWar

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit
The cloest example I know of that IS on the internet is of a Boeing 727-200 that crashed from altitude at near Mach 1.00, and it left plenty of debris, despite crashig near vertically, too.

It is very odd that aircraft wreckage would be guarded. Usually the parts are scrapped and/or recycled after an investigation, with only key elements being preserved.

[edit on 1-6-2007 by mirageofdeceit]

I can't remember the name of the flight, but the one that had crashed outside of New York, that sank into the ocean, that alot of us conspiracy theorists had claimed to have been hit by a missile, was salvaged and stored in a military hanger for a good while as they tried to figure out the cause of its malfunction.

Its not uncommon, I would imagine.

I think you are talking about TWA flight 800 that was allegally shot down by accident by a US submarie that fired off a empty missle, that supposly hit the flight and punched a hole trough the cabin, they found residuie that matched with that of a vapor trial from a misslie, in all it remains an unknow event, very diffenert then this unknown event, as TWA broke up over water, and there was MASSIVE amounts of wreakage.


As for the only other crash that left a unreasonbly small amount of debriss would be that 757 that hit the pentagon.