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: 42
24
<< 39  40  41    43  44  45 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Based on some of the discussion, perhaps this needed to be shared at this time:

www.usatoday.com...

"Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld thought a bomb had exploded at the Pentagon, even though the military defense command had been warned 12 minutes before impact that an errant airliner was headed toward Washington.

Cheney was told that six planes had been commandeered, that a helicopter had plunged into the Pentagon, that a car bomb had blown up the State Department, and that a plane had crashed in Ohio. None of that was true.

And even though a World Trade Center tower was on fire, the Pentagon was placed only on "Alpha" alert status, just one level up from normal and two levels down from the "Charlie" threat level the building is now under, Pentagon spokesman Glenn Flood said.

Amid all that confusion, Bush was forced to make what Cheney called "the toughest decision" of the day: whether American pilots should be authorized to shoot down an airliner filled with American citizens.

Fighter jets had taken off from Otis Air National Guard Base in Cape Cod, Mass., and Langley Air Force Base in Virginia, bolting toward New York and Washington.

But, Cheney said on NBC's Meet the Press, "It doesn't do any good to put (up) a combat air patrol if you don't give them instructions to act."

"The president made the decision on my recommendation as well," Cheney said. "If the plane would not divert, if they wouldn't pay any attention to instructions to move away from the city, as a last resort our pilots were authorized to take them out."

Said Bush: "I gave our military the orders necessary to protect Americans. Of course, that was difficult. Never did I dream we would be under attack this way."

The confrontations never happened. The two F-16s that deployed to intercept American Airlines Flight 77 did not get off the ground until just 2 minutes before the plane crashed into the Pentagon. They were about 130 miles from their target. The District of Columbia National Guard maintained fighter planes at Andrews Air Force Base, only about 15 miles from the Pentagon, but those planes were not on alert and not deployed.

When Flight 77 hit, the defense secretary thought it was a bomb.

"I had no idea," Rumsfeld said on ABC's This Week."




posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 03:17 AM
link   

by IvanZana
Real Plane Crash


Do you have any idea how that actually crashed, or are you just posting crashes with no idea of what actually happened? Using that logic, Pan Am 103 didn't crash/get blown up either, since it wasn't crashed on the runway.

As someone already pointed out, apples and oranges.



NoTe: Notice the people in the white and yellow hazmat suits arent even in the hole? nobody in the missle crater? why? nothing there i guess.


Or maybe they can see the obvious wreckage in the crater, but mustn't disturb it? Or they are looking for debris outside the crater?

BTW that missile, to me at least, looks nothing like a plane. Lack of obvious engines, if they were at the tail it would have a T shaped tail, so clearly not an airliner.

And you had an eyewitness account that said they saw a missile come from the east. So why then tell the world the plane came from the west?



[edit on 3-1-2008 by apex]



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana

"Flight 93"






2. Where is the World Trade Center melting fuel fire at the shanksville crater?

3. Do you see unburnt trees and green leaves in the direction of the impact? and how is that possible?

4. Where did the fuel go? and is that answer valid in reality?

5. How come there is unbroken dry grass and ground where the wings are said to have crashed ? Remember, the fuel tanks are in the wings and wing roots.

6. The Usgs map shows a mining scar in roughly the same area. Would it be fair to say that betweem the late 90's to 2001 another scar could of been created either do to strip mining for coal( which the shanksville site is, a surface coal mine) or even a natural coalfire crack which is common in pennsylvania.
(Only mention this because there is dry unburnt, unbroken grass where you said a massive wing ladened with thousands of gallons came crashing down at almost 570 mph.)

We will start with those questions.


The 2 people here that are trying to push the official line that a plane crashed in that plane-less crater have avoided these questions.

I would love to here your looney conspiracy theory on how this was all possible.

Occums Razor- Easiest solution is usually the right one.

Crater looks planeless.

Military running terror drills with mock hijacking with out of service commercial airliners and cruise missiles similating a terror attack similar to what happened to WTC, Pentagon, Flt 93. All on 9/11.

Thanx in advance.

[edit on 3-1-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 3-1-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
No wreckage would imply no plane...


Shanksville Crater... looking for debris...



Morgan Reynolds No More Games

Source

Still Smoking Hole... Notice that the grass show no signs of fire, nor do any of the trees



Crater from the air... Notice the scattered debris... ummmm yeah



Size Comparison... or how to make a huge airplane fit into a small hole



Live coverage of the first investigators.... two guys with hard hats just looking around... TWO GUYS? No fire equipment on site... Well since nothing is burning from all that jet fuel I guess they didn't need them



Source

Oh wait!! Here is the entire emergency response team that arrived on the scene...






Later they brought in equipment EXCAVATING EQUIPMENT Here is an aerial view of the "Project" Look at the layout of the area... remember that this 'crash' hit in an old strip mine



Source

Not a scorch mark on the grass... not a tiny piece of debris in the feild... just digging a deep hole in the ground... why? Well official story is the had to go down 45 FEET to find wreckage...


Well there certainly is a bigger hole there now...



Caption:
9/16/2001 - Somerset Crash Site- FBI and other investigators at the scene have excavated the crash site down to a depth of about 45 feet looking for clues. Digging a trench that deep requires special care to avoid cave-ins and constant monitoring to ensure any fumes from soil contaminated with jet fuel and hydraulic fluid do not present a hazard to emergency workers.

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Emergency Response

Crash response photos

So is it normal for the Department of Environmental Protection to respond to plane crashes? and bring excavating equipment rather than rescue equipment?

And look at the first image on the page... the all important task of making RIBBONS FOR THE WORKERS a full day before they sent out the equipment!!! Well I guess there was no rush... after all they were just digging a hole...




Caption
"9/15/2001 - Somerset Crash Site- DEP's Betsy Mallison and Freda Tarbell worked with members of the Red Cross and Salvation Army to make red, white and blue ribbons for emergency workers at the site."

I find it truly amazing.. no SHOCKING actually that ALL Americans are not demanding a full independent investigation, no matter which side you are on...

If you do believe the official story... I would think you would want to settle this once and for all... or are you afraid you might find something you cannot live with?

If you don't believe the official story why are you waiting so long its been 6 years...

You know I bet the Government just LOVES these conspiracy sites... all they have to do is listen to the hard work and investigations we do here... and they have a check list of 'errors' they need to 'correct'

:shk:



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 08:57 AM
link   


Silly when you really look at it.

Pretty impossible.

[edit on 3-1-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana

2. Where is the World Trade Center melting fuel fire at the shanksville crater?

3. Do you see unburnt trees and green leaves in the direction of the impact? and how is that possible?

4. Where did the fuel go? and is that answer valid in reality?

5. How come there is unbroken dry grass and ground where the wings are said to have crashed ? Remember, the fuel tanks are in the wings and wing roots.

6. The Usgs map shows a mining scar in roughly the same area. Would it be fair to say that betweem the late 90's to 2001 another scar could of been created either do to strip mining for coal( which the shanksville site is, a surface coal mine) or even a natural coalfire crack which is common in pennsylvania.
(Only mention this because there is dry unburnt, unbroken grass where you said a massive wing ladened with thousands of gallons came crashing down at almost 570 mph.)

We will start with those questions.

Mike

Thnx in advance.


2. Fire melted steel at the WTC? I thought it just weakened it. Darn that NIST and all of their fancy pants engineering types. Seriously though, what time was your photo taken? Maybe, just maybe, the fire truck sitting in the background had something to do with no fires.???

3. Question one-Yes I do. They are behind the trees that are black and brown and have limbs and leaves missing and burnt.
Question two-I would guess that the trees that are burnt were in the path of the fireball.

4. Question one-Up in smoke. Into the grove of trees that are burnt. According to first responders, some of it was on the ground.
Question two-From reading your post, your definition of reality is quite different than mine.

5. I've already answered that. Once again, our definitions of reality aren't the same.

6. Roughly? How close is roughly? Would you like to show us how close the impact scar and mining scar are? You are insinuating that they could be the same, prove it.
It was not a coal mine.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by billybob
 

something like MULTIPLE drills which exactly mimicked the actual attacks. wow. what a coincidence.
Wow indeed! Do you have any links or is that speculation?



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


Do you honestly believe that one little fire truck was able to douse a fire being fed by thousands of pounds of fuel in a matter of minutes? Oh wait, there wasn't even a fire to start with. The first responders were two guys walking through a field.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 11:46 AM
link   


No official newpaper clipping will change anyones mind.

THe pictures say it all. But if you have been reading the threads there has been lots of video,audio, and written proof that support the Fact that no plane crashed in Shanksville.

Sorry guy, this one is busted.

Covering it up wont work any longer.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


I find it truly amazing that as dry as that grass appears in photos, they did not have a raging grass fire rapidly spreading to the trees and coal residue to help it along. Particularly, with all the comments about fuel being flung away from a crash site capable of scorching trees, but not the immediate site of an alleged crash. Fuel spread all over that grass leading to the trees, and trees that had to be covered in fuel to become scorched as badly as photos are showing. Coal residue has a bad habit of leaching out to the surface of surface coal reserves, particularly when left as residue in human re-filled strip mine pits.

There we have it again. The laws and principles of science suspended by the written word of humans for 9/11/2001 and only for 9/11/2001, and only from between the hours of 8:46am and 10:03 am.

So where was that raging grass fire spreading to trees, doused with who knows how many gallons of jet fuel, that should have been self-evident, upon rapid response arrival at any alleged jetliner crash scene?

Smoke residue may be what appears in photos, and does not necessarily mean any tree leaves or limbs were actually burnt. If that much smoke is on trees, that has to mean there was a raging carbon based fire to put that much smoke carbon residue on those trees. Which means there had to be enough fuel to make enough smoke to leave that much carbon residue on trees. Plus, it depends on which way the wind was blowing to get the heavy carbon smoke to cover trees. What was the wind direction at 10:03 am on 9/11/2001?



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


I placed a link and excerpt to Amalgam Virgo - only one of the dress rehersals for 9/11/2001. They were placed last night or very early this morning in this discussion, plus, an entire new discussion in this forum. I also cited the many drills done prior to 9/11 from Peter Tiradera's book in one of these discussions on this forum. I also cited that Donald Rumsfeld was involved in one of those rehearsals as far back as 2000 at the behest of the Council of Foreign Relations. He is a member of CFR with prior membership in Trilateral Commission.

www.amazon.com...

FEMA was conveniently sitting in and scheduled to play more "anti-terrorist war games" in Manhattan, on 9/10/2001, scheduled for 9/11/2001. That, too, either has been cited in at least one of these discussions, and/or can easily be found on Google just for the searching. Example of key words and numbers: 9/10 9/11 FEMA NYC.

Wiki is accurate on the following but hardly complete for the necessary biographies of key players:

en.wikipedia.org...

"The Trilateral Commission is a private organization, established to foster closer cooperation between America, Europe and Japan. It was founded in July 1973, at the initiative of David Rockefeller; who was Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations at that time and the Commission is widely seen as a counterpart to the Council on Foreign Relations.[1]"

David Rockefeller is a key player in the actual shadow government running the US and international populations.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 12:13 PM
link   
And to all those delusional conspiracy n-jobs who push " Boeing vanished in small hole in shankville with out fire" also try to cry cry there was a raging fire in the forest.

Busted. There was no fuel fire, burnt grass, nothing, anywhere near the bomb crater. No evidence of a Boeing 757 in shanksville, so therefore no Boeing 757 crashed in Shankville on Sept. 11th,2001.

The damage on the trees where cause by a large non-fuel related explosion, such as a bomb, or missile and not a fully fueled Boeing 757.




[edit on 3-1-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 3-1-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 
Why do you think there was only one fire truck?

"Shanksville Volunteer Fire Company Assistant Fire Chief Rick King and three firefighters were the first responders on the scene with an engine and a tanker. linked from wtc7lies.googlepages.com



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


The Flight 93 crash site was not an abandoned coal mine. I've posted the link already. Did you miss it, or are you ignoring it because it doesn't fit the conspiracy?



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 
Did you notice the date on Amalgam Virgo?

The multi-service exercise tested the defense and response capabilities to a cruise missile attack on Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla., June 1-4, 2001.
So, any military exercise before 9/11 was practiced for 9/11?

Have you been to NORAD's web site lately? Any exercise that they are getting ready to hold is practice for the next False Flag NWO attack on America?



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana


No official newpaper clipping will change anyones mind.

THe pictures say it all. But if you have been reading the threads there has been lots of video,audio, and written proof that support the Fact that no plane crashed in Shanksville.

Sorry guy, this one is busted.

Covering it up wont work any longer.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


Because I only saw one.

Your report states:


Upon arrival, firefighters found small pieces of the plane, spot fires, and a large quantity of fuel scattered across a wide debris field.


It does not explain why the fuel was not burning. "Spot fires" on a field full of jet fuel is illogical.

Your source also claims that ten departments responded, but on page 60 of the Final Report pdf it shows that only two departments logged any hours and that the other responding departments activated "**" volunteers.

Besides all of that, it doesn't really matter if 5000 firefighters responded eventually, there was no fuel fire and the treeline was not even burning when the first firefighters arrived.



[edit on 1/3/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   


I though it was common knowledge why 9/11 couldnt be stopped was due to the terrorist attack actually shadowed the terror training excersises invovling fake and real hijacked airplanes aswell as cruise missiles.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Just out of curiosity, what is the theory that's being pushed in this thread?

Obviously you don't believe that the "Let's roll" contingent crashed a plane in Shanksville, so I guess you believe one of two things:

a)
There was no plane at all.
(Which begs the question: what happened there?)

or

b)
The plane was shot down.
(Which would be complete vindication for the government in conspiracy circles, proving that they were in fact doing their darndest to stop the attacks.)

What do you believe happened?



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Essedarius
 


The only theory that I see is that we are being lied to. The rest of the questions and theories will follow when truth is revealed.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 39  40  41    43  44  45 >>

log in

join