FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

Skeptics need to explain why the only trace of Flight 93's tail is a faint impression of its vert stab in the grass that didn't even break through the ground.

Originally posted by IvanZana
No plane crashed in Stoystown/ Shanksville (flight 93) on 911.

I'm sorry Ivan, but, with all your eyewitnesses seeing a plane abruptly turn right, then left, and then nose dive into the ground (even one of your quotes states this) how can you state this unequivecally(sp?)?

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by IvanZana
No plane crashed in Stoystown/ Shanksville (flight 93) on 911.

I'm sorry Ivan, but, with all your eyewitnesses seeing a plane abruptly turn right, then left, and then nose dive into the ground (even one of your quotes states this) how can you state this unequivecally(sp?)?

The point of mentioning the eyewitnesses is that most of them not only contrdict the official story but themselves.

What air carrier is this boeing? What kind of boeing?


Any guesses?

Now view this video and you will see what most people saw 'crash' in shanksville on 911. If you didnt know it was a cruise missile and was told what you saw was Flight 93, you would describe its decent like the above video's cruise missile. Also, the crater and explosion is consistant with a cruise missile and not a boeing loaded with fuel crashing at under a 50 degree angle.

In this next video this nice lady witnesses a hard banking, low flying, van sized craft crash in Shanksville.

reply to post by IvanZana


I see what you are saying now. Thanks.

BTW, this would put Val McClatchey (sp?) off the hook then right?

As her famous picture of the mushroom cloud would have really happened then. So, I hope Killtown starts to leave her alone.

reply to post by zorgon

In the external link to crash site , do I see 2 skulls, 1 in the center of picture and 1 at the bottom of picture, slightly to the left?

In the external link picture to crash site , do I see 2 skulls, 1 in the center of picture and 1 at the bottom of picture, slightly to the left?

Originally posted by IvanZana
In this next video this nice lady witnesses a hard banking, low flying, van sized craft crash in Shanksville.

That's a wild video. I think she really saw what she described. For the first time, I believe there have may have a missile involved in the Flight 93 crash site. Maybe it was used to simulate Flight 93 crashing in that small smoking crater where a 757 absolutely could not have -- just like the Pentagon. Since the Flight 93 wreckage was spread over 8 miles, maybe they needed an actual "crash site," no matter how implausible, to sell the "heroes brought Flight 93 down" story.

Like every other aspect of the 9/11 story, the anomalies are endless and bizarre.

So are you conspiracy theorists saying that there was no plane involved at all or that the plane was shot down before the crash site and a cruise missle was used to simulate that crash?
Either way both theories are ridiculous. Find something better to do with your time. if you are saying there was no plane involved, ask the families of the ones who were on the plane.
The debris field was not 8 miles or whatever. That was the driving distance if you were to take roads from the 2 locations.

I guess I really just dont understand why you think everything is a conspiracy? What would the purpose of the whole thing be? If there were in fact government officials crooked enough to stage something like that do you think they could really pull it off without someone with morals coming forward about the whole thing?

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Except for the facts that plenty of aircraft wreckage was found, not to mention personal effects of the passengers and crew, and oh yes, the remains of said crew and passengers.........your theory might make sense.

I keep seeing these posts and they are cute, almost as if they are true. Where is all that stuff. Do we need to again go over the year that the coronor spent telling people that there was nothing there until finally, after a year, he changed his mind and shut up.

Google Video Link

thread killer.

why would any shanksville researcher want to discuss that 45 minute wally miller interview full of discrepancies and contradictions to the official story?

reply to post by Terrorcell


Why are you bumping your own post with another name Dom?

You already put this out at JREF almost three weeks ago as TC329 (TerrorCell)

Titled:

so who wants to talk bout wally miller anyways?

In that 4 page thread, Beachnut, Uruk, along with others showed you several things that you got wrong. One was how to read a compass.

I won't get into it Dom, but dude...they really gave you a good whoopin over there. You have not been back to post in the thread there since September 9th.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by Terrorcell

 

Why are you bumping your own post with another name Dom?

because for some reason i can't log this name out of this pc to put my real name in so i'm using my old internet name. it's no secret obviously as you didn't have to pull anyones fingernails out or crush their child's testicles to find it out.

You already put this out at JREF almost three weeks ago as TC329 (TerrorCell)

Titled:

so who wants to talk bout wally miller anyways?

you're right i did.

In that 4 page thread, Beachnut, Uruk, along with others showed you several things that you got wrong. One was how to read a compass.

no as i seem to recall i posted pictures all containing smoke from the crash scene against several images taken at later dates and times and then no one said anything else.

I won't get into it Dom, but dude...they really gave you a good whoopin over there. You have not been back to post in the thread there since September 9th.

well for starters at some point it becomes a waste of time arguing in the sewer but because there are so many members and lurkers it is always good to get the new info out and known.

my goal isn't to wake up beachnut or uruk or people like them. its to spread information and make it available to as many people as possible.

why would i bring it to a place like ats then becomes your question i suppose?

while it does disappoint me finding out so many of randi's kids have penetrated this forum, i thought this would be a place to spread this information to a wider audience.

i also saw it as an opportunity to get imput from other truthers.

i could pick this whole interview apart but i'm waiting........

reply to post by Terrorcell


I am curious Dom, you seem very passionate regarding flight 93. Can you please explain to me what your thoughts are on what happened in and around Shanksville and what happened to flight 93?

thank you.


oh... and for the record. You too are one of Randi's kids!

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by Terrorcell

 

I am curious Dom, you seem very passionate regarding flight 93. Can you please explain to me what your thoughts are on what happened in and around Shanksville and what happened to flight 93?

thank you.


oh... and for the record. You too are one of Randi's kids!

while my theory is the united states government is covering up the presence of 2 military aircraft.

1 a very small white plane.

1 a very large white plane.

neither are a falcon20 and neither are a c130.

i've have come to this conclusion speaking with eyewitnesses to both planes.

the little white one approached the crash site on the south side from stoystown and was at the scene the moment of the explosion.

Originally posted by Terrorcell

while my theory is the united states government is covering up the presence of 2 military aircraft.

1 a very small white plane.

1 a very large white plane.

neither are a falcon20 and neither are a c130.

i've have come to this conclusion speaking with eyewitnesses to both planes.

the little white one approached the crash site on the south side from stoystown and was at the scene the moment of the explosion.

Well... post the info. I'd like to read it.

Originally posted by Tiamanicus

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Except for the facts that plenty of aircraft wreckage was found, not to mention personal effects of the passengers and crew, and oh yes, the remains of said crew and passengers.........your theory might make sense.

I keep seeing these posts and they are cute, almost as if they are true. Where is all that stuff. Do we need to again go over the year that the coronor spent telling people that there was nothing there until finally, after a year, he changed his mind and shut up.

Cute? There is very little, if anything, cute about the events of that day. The coroner had his words taken out of context, end of story. And unfortunately for you, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of people that helped recover the wreckage of Flight 93, including the pitifully small amount of human remains that were found.

reply to post by Terrorcell

Prove to be a Falcon 20 by the pilot (you call the pilot a liar) and ATC. The only plane allowed to fly by and see the impact from close up; he was landing nearby.

Refuted by the free press!