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.

 

FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

page: 35
24
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 09:27 AM
link   


I have yet seen any title of MD on the coroner/mortician, Mr. Miller. All qualified coroners are medical doctors additionally educated and trained in forensic science. They do not moonlight as coroners and keep their day and evening jobs as morticians


Havent spent much time in rural America have you?




posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by DrZERO
 


The Green line is the approximate location and angle of the wings on Flight 93. The white lines and yellow dots are from my inability to draw a straight line, instead of starting over, I left them on there.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 10:27 AM
link   
THE MYTH OF FLIGHT 93 crashing in Shanksville has been BUSTED!!


Makes you wonder who the 2 or 3 people who believe the plane and all its parts 'Atomized' while a passports and a red bandana survived.

Time for a transfer, your covering up is actually the unconvering. thnx eh.




posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Originally posted by Boone 870




Is this it?



56773028. Permit Renewal, PBS Coals, Inc. (P. O. Box 260, 1576 Stoystown Road, Friedens, PA 15541), commencement, operation and restoration of bituminous strip mine in Stonycreek and Somerset Townships, Somerset County, affecting 1,055.2 acres, receiving stream unnamed tributary to/and Kimberly Run; unnamed tributaries to/and Schrock Run; unnamed tributary to Glades Creek. Application received October 1, 1998.



No. This is a state EPA permit.

For a reclamation you have to have had an NMC number issued by the Bureau of Land Management which will include the section, township, range and meridian.

The reclamation procedure has to comply with the provisions of 43 CFR 3809, before the bond will be returned. These are Federal laws not state laws.

Depending on what state you are in you also have to have a permit from the Environment Protection Agency. They inspect your mine twice a year to see that it is compliance with state and Federal laws that govern mining. These laws include quarterly sampling of not only the pit, product, but the tailings and any water used in the process.

In addition to the above, each County has to comply with the provision of the Clean Air Act of 1963/1990. As you probably know when the Clean Air Act was enacted by Congress in 1963 nobody paid any attention to it so in 1990 they revised the Act to include the provision that if it was not complied with no Federal funds of any type would be issued to the county or the state. That forced all mining operations into filing for permits from the county aand state in addition to their federal permits.

All mines after 1990 had to sample fuel, dust, water, product or anything contributing to contamination and they had to sample it hourly.

In addition to this mines had to certify their personnel in Visible Emission Evaluation Training twice a year by companies such as Carl Koontz Associates.

The Bureau of Land Management oversees the reclamation process and does the final inspections.

There will also be a Federal Mining permit number issued by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (mine is 26-02409) if the mine was ever operational.

The bottom line here is that if any permit which was applied for to continue operation in 1998 it would have been extremely unlikely that the reclamation would have been complete by September 11, 2001 for the simple reason the you don't apply for an EPA permit to close down and reclaim in the next 3 years.

But hey! Nice try.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrZERO

Where did you find information on the type of lens used in the photo? How do you know the distance from which the picture was taken? Common sense would dictate that unbroken grass would not be growing out of a weathered scar which was the supposed impact site of an airliner wing/engine.

[edit on 1-1-2008 by DrZERO]


Nice. You've got your map. But now you're defending your evidence instead of rethinking your position.

Look, I don't know what you think you're seeing in that photo you've doctored up, but the big red circle is hilighting grass that's growing outside the impact area. The stalks start out of frame. There's no 2 ways about that.

The ear on our right is the 1/2 burnt one we talked about earlier, and if you look close, you can see that it's roots are holding onto a clump of dried dirt. So it's been uprooted, set on fire, flung in the air and landed back down in the scar.

The red circle on our left..... I see nothing there, unless you're trying to imply grass that is growing outside the strike area and leaning over above it is coming from inside the scar. Can you be more specific?

Also, there's no scale in that photo. I'd like to see a comparison of wing thickness vs scar width.

Take all this into account, and do you still believe the CT opinion that a missle was delivered into an old naturally occuring erosion trench to make it look like a plane hit there?

Edit- hey, how are you determining weathered vs unweathered dirt in your photo? By the color? Are you calling the unweathered dirt that because of its darker color? That would imply that it's wetter, yes? Do you think the fire guys standing around in the background had anything to do with that?

[edit on 1-1-2008 by MikeVet]



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Originally posted by Boone 870


Is this it?



56773028. Permit Renewal, PBS Coals, Inc. (P. O. Box 260, 1576 Stoystown Road, Friedens, PA 15541), commencement, operation and restoration of bituminous strip mine in Stonycreek and Somerset Townships, Somerset County, affecting 1,055.2 acres, receiving stream unnamed tributary to/and Kimberly Run; unnamed tributaries to/and Schrock Run; unnamed tributary to Glades Creek. Application received October 1, 1998.


Based on claims made in discussion that backfilling was being done in or around 1999, that EPA permit may be for the purpose of dumping hazardous material to fill in the pits. Materials such as nuclear waste from power plants , foundry slag, etc.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 01:50 PM
link   


Why didn't the "white plane" land at the nearest airport, as ordered to do, before getting as far as Shanksville? Any regional airport will do for landing.


The nearest airport is JOHNSTOWN-CAMBRIA COUNTY airport which is the
regional airport. The aircraft original destination . It is about 30 miles
north of Shanksville. It was descending toward Johnstown when
controllers contacted it to verify if Flight 93 crashed and where. The pilot
has been harassed by truther nuts (sound familar?)



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


All planes were ordered to land prior to the report concerning the reported Pentagon damage. Why did the "white plane" keep on flying anyway? No regional or international airports between take-off and landing, prior to reaching Shanksville area?

Wasn't it a Lear that could land on shorter stretches of runway or any large stretch of unencumbered solid land? Or did the pilot fail to have any contact with the nearest control center or terminal, on the way, at any point from take-off? Did it take off on or shortly after all planes were ordered to land by the FAA? People may not think those details important, but they definitely are.

The C-130 cargo plane has been reported to have taken off from the DC area after all planes were ordered to stay grounded or to land. That order came prior to the reported Pentagon damage, and did not apply to interceptor planes, which were never seen or reported to have taken off, until long after all four incidents had occurred.

Cheney issued a stand down order to all interceptor planes, until after all the reported damage was done. So what were those ordered to land or not take-off planes still doing in the air? They certainly were not interceptor planes ordered to stand down until after all the reported damage was done.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Originally posted by OrionStars



Based on claims made in discussion that backfilling was being done in or around 1999, that EPA permit may be for the purpose of dumping hazardous material to fill in the pits. Materials such as nuclear waste from power plants , foundry slag, etc.



Absolutely not.

No hazardous material in the United States can be dumped anywhere. It has to be shipped to an authorized facility which has a permit to store or dispose like EnviroSolve in Tulsa, OK (OKD987084068) and must be picked up by and certified by an authorized shipper such as Nevada Crime Cleaners who will determine whether or not it meets the provisions of 40 CFR 261.4 or not.

All shipments must be accompanied by a Declaration and Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest EPA form 8700-22 (rev 9-88) that looks like this:



The shipper fills out 4 copies. He keeps one, one goes to EPA and 2 go with the shipment. The receiver facility keeps one copy and signs and dates the 4th copy which goes back to the originator or generator.

If all this isn't complied with in a given amount of time you have an automatic date with the FBI.

No hazardous material has been disposed of on this site claimed to have been the site of the alleged crash of Flight 93.

Nor has there been any paperwork produced that this site was an operational mine at one time and was subsequently reclaimed.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 


With all due respect, John, that may well be the way it is supposed to work. Then there is this:

links.jstor.org...(199801)57%3A1%3C105%3AEGNAAT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-4

www.greenaction.org...

It is not simply nuclear waste. It is all toxic waste, i.e. mercury, foundry slag, hospital hazardous waste (Lake Erie is consistently full of this), any and all toxic chemicals from chemistry and other research labs, etc.. Unless, someone ethical is on site during back-fill, and provided the contractor or sub-contractor is ethical, plus, EPA continues to test and monitor any dump site, once back-fill is done, there is no way to know what is being dumped to fill in strip mine pits. Because the covering looks like any other soil of its same kind.

I would be highly interested in seeing proof as to whether the Shanksville area was tested for radioactivity related or unrelated to 9/11, including the water supplies for mercury or other toxic contaminents. That is the only way to know for certain what strip mine pits contain below the surface or innocent looking soil.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana
THE MYTH OF FLIGHT 93 crashing in Shanksville has been BUSTED!!





I dont see how waste manifest and copy pasted quotes from the 911 comission changes the fact that Flight 93 did not crash in Shanksville on September 11 at 10:06+-am E.S.T.

I think sometimes thats the classic confuse and obsfucate methods are implied in certain threads.



[edit on 1-1-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Another reason there is no way to know, without testing what was dumped in strip mine pits in the Shanksville area:
query.nytimes.com...

"TOXIC WASTE DUMP FOCUS OF INQUIRY
By KATHERINE BISHOP, SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: April 27, 1989

LEAD: The Solano County district attorney's office is investigating whether the Department of Defense violated environmental laws by auctioning hazardous chemicals to private individuals who subsequently dumped them illegally.

The Solano County district attorney's office is investigating whether the Department of Defense violated environmental laws by auctioning hazardous chemicals to private individuals who subsequently dumped them illegally.

The investigation resulted from the discovery last weekend of 75,000 gallons of explosive and toxic chemicals illegally stockpiled in a large shed near Collingsville in rural Solano County, about 50 miles east of here in the Sacramento River Delta. The dump is described by county officials as the largest assortment of dangerous chemicals ever discovered in California."


I realize that is 1989 - the era of George H. W. Bush presidency. Nothing has changed through 2007.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 



All planes were ordered to land prior to the report concerning the reported Pentagon damage.
No they were not. At 9:25 a.m., the FAA ordered a nationwide ground stop. That means that aircraft could not take off. At 9:45 a.m. the FAA closed US airspace and ordered all civilian aircraft to land, not military aircraft.

09:25 Otis F-15s establish Combat Air Patrol over New York City. The FAA Command Center orders a nationwide
ground stop: no aircraft may take off.
09:45 FAA Command Center closes US airspace for the first time in history, ordering all aircraft to land at the nearest suitable airport. Source




Why did the "white plane" keep on flying anyway? No regional or international airports between take-off and landing, prior to reaching Shanksville area?
Nearest suitable airport. American Airlines didn't get all their domestic flights down until 10:50 a.m.


Wasn't it a Lear that could land on shorter stretches of runway or any large stretch of unencumbered solid land? Or did the pilot fail to have any contact with the nearest control center or terminal, on the way, at any point from take-off? Did it take off on or shortly after all planes were ordered to land by the FAA? People may not think those details important, but they definitely are.
It wasn't a Lear jet, it was a Falcon 20. John Lear may take offense if you keep calling it a Lear Jet.


The C-130 cargo plane has been reported to have taken off from the DC area after all planes were ordered to stay grounded or to land. That order came prior to the reported Pentagon damage, and did not apply to interceptor planes, which were never seen or reported to have taken off, until long after all four incidents had occurred.
See above. The order did not apply to military aircraft. There were fighters over New York before the Pentagon was hit.


Cheney issued a stand down order to all interceptor planes, until after all the reported damage was done. So what were those ordered to land or not take-off planes still doing in the air? They certainly were not interceptor planes ordered to stand down until after all the reported damage was done.
prove it. I'll start a new thread if you'd like.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


I agree the photos plainly indicate the highest probability that a Boeing 757 did not allegedly crash at the location reported. How does one establish proof through use of only photos? I have not and still am disagreeing with you on that point. However, I need more than a photo or three, to substantiate any points of argument I make.

I also need more than "Well, we found these parts and remains scattered in places extending out 8 miles from the indentation." And? What does that actually prove about that indentation?

Something may or may not have landed at that location in various photos on 9/11. Your photos show something made that indentation, and could not possibly have been a Boeing 757, at some point in time. The question is what. If what can be proved as not being any Boeing 757, that proves that indentation was not made by any Boeing 757. It becomes self-evident at that point. Two physcial objects can never occupy exactly the same space.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


I am going by several reports, including that in the book detailing the Pentagon attack. Per the reports I hve read, the only military planes allowed after order were military interceptors, and they never showed up until after all 4 reported incidents. The person writing that book also flew inceptor planes for the USAF, along with his duties of MD forensic investigation (coroner qualified to also forensically investigate human bodies and remains) found resulting from military aircraft crashes.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Originally posted by OrionStars



It is not simply nuclear waste.


All nuclear waste that is shipped is shipped to Nevada.

Yucca Mountain?

No, Yucca Mountain is a cover, a scam. There are plenty of other places to hide nuclear waste. Yucca Mountain is just a 'show place' to argue about.


It is all toxic waste, i.e. mercury, foundry slag, hospital hazardous waste (Lake Erie is consistently full of this), any and all toxic chemicals from chemistry and other research labs, etc..


This is off topic. We are talking about Flight 93. I said there is no paperwork to prove that the alleged crash site of Flight 93 was ever a mine or was ever reclaimed or reclaimed with soft dirt which is a ridiculous claim by itself.


Unless, someone ethical is on site during back-fill, and provided the contractor or sub-contractor is ethical, plus, EPA continues to test and monitor any dump site, once back-fill is done, there is no way to know what is being dumped to fill in strip mine pits. Because the covering looks like any other soil of its same kind.


You obviously have no idea how a strip mine is reclaimed.


I would be highly interested in seeing proof as to whether the Shanksville area was tested for radioactivity related or unrelated to 9/11, including the water supplies for mercury or other toxic contaminents. That is the only way to know for certain what strip mine pits contain below the surface or innocent looking soil.


Why would Shanksville be tested for radioactivity?

What water supplies should be test?

Why for mercury?

I think you may be drifting off course a little here.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   
The military, including NORAD, had plenty of time to get interceptors into the air out of Dayton as did DC concerning the Pentagon. Yet, there is no documentation stating they did. At the same time, if interceptors are shooting down any alleged civilian flights and not documenting it, the US is is far more trouble than the mass confusion surrounding 9/11. 9/11 is just the tip of the iceberg on the carte blanche powers illegally being wielded by the Bush administation.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 


As far as illegal toxic waste, including nuclear, I have to leave that open considering I have spent years involved in environmental issues.

Reason for testing at Shanksville and WTC? Because high radioactivity levels were found 12 miles out from the Pentagon after the Pentagon was damaged on 9/11/2001. It was tested shortly after 9/11 by independent nuclear physicists for their own information.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 


With all due respect, John, I suppose it depends on whether or not certain details need to be known during any investigation. That hole could be a sink hole happening quite naturally and often in ex-strip mines areas. What lies below the surface for fill, may or may not be important.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   


I am going by several reports, including that in the book detailing the Pentagon attack. Per the reports I hve read, the only military planes allowed after order were military interceptors, and they never showed up until after all 4 reported incidents. The person writing that book also flew inceptor planes for the USAF, along with his duties of MD forensic investigation (coroner qualified to also forensically investigate human bodies and remains) found resulting from military aircraft crashes.


Yes, having never personally been to the site or observed any of the records, he wrote a book........yep thats bound to be accurate....




The military, including NORAD, had plenty of time to get interceptors into the air out of Dayton as did DC concerning the Pentagon. Yet, there is no documentation stating they did. At the same time, if interceptors are shooting down any alleged civilian flights and not documenting it, the US is is far more trouble than the mass confusion surrounding 9/11.


Now you are an expert on the US military? Do you think you can just go in and look at military records any ole time you deem fit? Here's a clue, they did launch interceptors that day, in the confusion, the jets werent give the proper vectors, so they followed the procedures in the book and flew to a holding area just off the coast.




As far as illegal toxic waste, including nuclear, I have to leave that open considering I have spent years involved in environmental issues.


This does explain a few things.


Is it just me, or is anyone else starting to hear the "Twilight Zone" theme when the read the posts in this thread?



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join