It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Let's speculate about what happened to the passengers of flight 93?

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 03:15 PM
link   
I just got done watching Loose Change for the first time and the only loose end left for me is what exactly happened to the passengers once they went inside that NASA building at the Cleveland airport? NASA as we all know is under the control of the Vice President. I guess if you're willing to kill thousands, two hundred more aren't going to make a difference. I would just like to hear peoples' speculation about what could have happened in that building?

My opinion is that the passengers and pilots on the plane were drugged in-flight. The plane was then taken over by remote control and was landed in Cleveland. Now, I'm assuming the drug kept all onboard awake, but not necessarily alert to exactly what was happening, almost in a hypnotic trance-like state, then again they all could have been knocked out for a short period of time, I'm not really sure. Once the plane landed they were all escorted off the plane and taken into the NASA building. Once inside a few if not all of their voices were recorded in order to create the false black box recordings. After that all of the passengers and pilots were euthanized, if you want to call it that, and their bodies were subsequently cremated.

Any other opinions?

Peace




posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I'm speculating that they all died on impact, when flight 93 hit.


On another note however just to add to you thoughts, I was told once, that at the NASA center in Cleveland... there is a huge "tank" like structure that is a really long drop and it's used to study gravity on objects dropped in it...



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by elevatedone
there is a huge "tank" like structure that is a really long drop and it's used to study gravity on objects dropped in it...


Please my friend, links about this would be appreciated. You could be onto something here.

Peace



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Dr. Love,

If I may, please now watch "Screw Loose Change". This video explains the lies and false claims that are in it. The creators of Loose Change Dylan Avery and Jason Bermas have both been quoted on record as saying the movie contains false claims.


Google Video Link



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 03:36 PM
link   
CaptainObvious, so as to give equal time to both sides I will watch it. I'm running out of time today but I will watch it the next opportunity I get, and I will do it before commenting again.

Edit: Do you have a link to exactly what the false claims were?

Peace


[edit on 22-6-2007 by Dr Love]



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 03:50 PM
link   
im of the same mind, i still question it all, loose change, alex jones. and bush. i think it may all be part of an elaborate preplanned stream of corral the public into the pen, using techniques to rile you all up and get you running like cows. I think that were under direct socialist or neo nazi or both, attack. I hope to god im wrong here. But it looks like a bunch of lying murderers found their way into our power structure, and are evicserating our freredom. Flight 93, shot down or replaced, we will only know when we stop asking eachother questions, arrest these high level criminals, and start getting some answers the way they like to ask us..torcher. quiet you lefties, this is business, not playtime where were all nice and kind..



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Love
I just got done watching Loose Change for the first time and the only loose end left for me is what exactly happened to the passengers once they went inside that NASA building at the Cleveland airport? NASA as we all know is under the control of the Vice President. I guess if you're willing to kill thousands, two hundred more aren't going to make a difference. I would just like to hear peoples' speculation about what could have happened in that building?

Peace


Well by the latest evidence we have its pretty much been proven that Flight 93 was shot down.

1. 2 distinct debris fields far from the crash site.

2. Phone call from passenger stating their was a an explosion and smoke and they are going down.



[edit on 22-6-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 05:09 PM
link   
sorry guys i never heard of the movie what exactly is is about.



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 06:17 PM
link   
Loose change ought to be renamed Screw Loose. It's an intellectual game of scrabble to rearrange the facts to fit a bizarre theory.

Unfortunately I have watched Loose change. The so called explosions heard in the buildings were from three phenomena.

(1) Lifts full of frightened people which came crashing down lift shafts after their cables snapped (there is evidence of lifts falling in lift shafts)

(2) Bodies crashing to the ground outside

(3) Windows and beams cracking high in the building

High strength steel loses half it's rated strength after 15 minutes in the temperatures which jet fuel can cause... Apparent mystery solved. Any attempt to make any more of it than that is in my view vexatious.

As for flight 93 making a hole in the ground from which there is no recognisable human remains lets apply Ockham's Razor (common sense)

Are there any examples elsewhere in the world where aircraft have dived nose first into the ground where there was no dispute that there was an aircraft crash ?

Well yes there sure are...

How about the Silk Air 737-300 which dived vertically over Sumatra.

Not enough proof. How about the Valuejet crash into the Everglades ?

Neither of these two crashes left anything much more significant than shredded metal and small craters.

For Flight 93's passengers and crew to have disappeared any other way than by dying in a horrible hijacking requires such a series of cover ups and conspiracies that no Government agency could conceal it indefinitely.

There was a suggestion on Loose Change (aka Screw Loose) that Flight 93 was thought to have landed at Cleavland, but there was huge confusion that day as thousands of planes were grounded everywhere.

Had the actual aircraft been on the ground at Cleavland then it wouldn't have moved for days. You could not keep a whole airliner sitting on the ramp at Cleaveland secret from airport workers, metropolitan police etc.

Show us the aircraft.

[edit on 22-6-2007 by sy.gunson]



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Wait a minute, you are joking, right? Bodies of people hitting the ground causes an explosion? Elevators crashing ( no evidence of this has ever been presented ) can cause explosions? Windows and beams can cause exposions? Those are no doubt the WORST explanations I have ever heard, nothing personal.

Massive explosions that blew apart the sub-levels..massive explosions that hurled sections of steel weighing hundreds of thousands of pounds hundreds of yeards away and embedding in adjoining buildings..What POSSIBLE RELATION could elevators deep within the structure, windows and falling bodies have to do with these phenomenon? Nothing.

Just look at the buildings turning into dust as they EXPLODE out and up ward..scores of firefighters and others hear explosions..the basement levels destroyed by an explosion..your answers are so far from being even remotely possible that I suggest a new approach.

Bodies go " THWACK ". Windows go " POP " and " CRACK " and elevators go " CRASH ", but NONE of them go BOOOOM !! Your replies would be the last attempt that a doubter of the 9-11 truth would try and use...after all others fail the logic test. So far, ALL efforts I have seen to deny the truth of demolition have failed miserably when stacked against the evidence , so don't feel too badly. Hmmmm, maybe it was just all sonic booms from the jets flying around for the multiple exercizes taking place that day.....oh, wait, I forgot, they sent all of the jets far away from NY that day and could not get one aloft in 2 hours...Oh well, back to the old denial drawing board for you guys..



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 06:48 PM
link   
I believe the passengers and crew of that plane all died when an air to air or surface to air missile struck the plane and what was left of the plane crashed into the ground.



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
Wait a minute, you are joking, right? Bodies of people hitting the ground causes an explosion? Elevators crashing ( no evidence of this has ever been presented ) can cause explosions? Windows and beams can cause exposions? Those are no doubt the WORST explanations I have ever heard, nothing personal.


Have you ever watched the Naudet brothers video from that day? They were IN the lobby of the WTC, and you could hear *BANG*BANG*BANG*, someone asked the fire fighters what it was, and they said it was bodies hitting the ground and parts of the building. They do NOT make *THWAK* sounds when they hit the ground from 80+ floors up.

The planes that were supposed to intercept them were NOT sent away on exercises. They are NEVER involved in exercises, they sit on the tarmac waiting to launch when necessary.



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 07:08 PM
link   
If it was the sound of those who jumped hitting the floor, you wouldn't be recording it on equipment over a mile away. You wouldn't have seismic recording of Mag 2.3 and 2.1 respectively, preceding each collapse.

Those buildings were brought down, but not by fires or hijacked aircraft.

[edit on 22-6-2007 by mirageofdeceit]



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 07:21 PM
link   
I didn't say that it was. I was only disputing the fact that he said they make "thwack" sounds and couldn't possibly be mistaken for an explosion. You wouldn't hear them from far away, but some of them from up close sounded a lot like something going off.



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kr0n0s
I believe the passengers and crew of that plane all died when an air to air or surface to air missile struck the plane and what was left of the plane crashed into the ground.


I think thats pretty much what i already stated.



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 07:39 PM
link   
A bunch of extreme muslims took over the plane....

A bunch of good old boys from the USA heard about the twin towers and such and decided to go out with a fight.

Their are recorded cell phone calls from this, actuall living family members who have testified their loved ones last words.

Why speculate when the truth is so blatently obvious?

Sorry folks George Bush didnt send f-15's to blow up this plane cuz he really is friends with osama.

Every day more of this!



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I didn't say that it was. I was only disputing the fact that he said they make "thwack" sounds and couldn't possibly be mistaken for an explosion. You wouldn't hear them from far away, but some of them from up close sounded a lot like something going off.

Ahh - Sorry. I thought you were implying that it wasn't explosions, but the sound of ... well..


To a poster further up regarding melting steel - it ISN'T possible for jet-fuel fed fires to melt steel. There are plenty of other buildings, both before and after 9/11 that had fires raging for hours and hours across multiple floors, and they did not collapse. If the mere weakening of steel (as you suggest) is enough, then WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 would not be the ** ONLY ** buildings to collapse due to fire (as the official story would put it).

As has already been established thoroughly by LaBTop, WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 were not accidents. It was intentional.

The only 3 steel framed structures to ever collapse due to fire, all fell on the same day, and were just blocks away from each other in the same city. What are the odds of that??

[edit on 22-6-2007 by mirageofdeceit]



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Howdy folks...

Why were they even going into a NASA facility ?

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) deals with primarily outer space travel, and sending probes to different planets...

I mean I'm confused here
, what's the angle with even going into a NASA facility ?

Did they shoot them off into outer space to colonize another planet ?

I believe they died while in a plane that impacted the ground at a high rate of speed...



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 07:48 PM
link   
If I may humbly suggest,
perhaps the OP
or someone else with the knowledge
could present to us
the commonly accepted explanation and evidence
that it landed in Cleveland.

Who said that first?

I think debate could move from there in a sensible way-
but now, you presume everyone knows
the "Flight 93 Landed In Cleveland Theory"...
and in fact, many do not...

I lean toward landing somewhere or shot down-
I surely do not believe it was crashed by passengers.

HDF



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Who said that first?

United Airlines did, and it was published in a news article after the fact. UA stated that it confirmed that Flight 93 had landed safely at Cleveland. Google "flight 93 cleveland" and you'll find the article.


Why were they even going into a NASA facility ?

Because it is government controlled, and was conveniently situated next to Cleveland, where Flight 93 allegedly landed.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join