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: 96
24
<< 93  94  95    97  98  99 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana


Oh dear Beachnut, I see you are new user here at ATS. Your so full of crap, and your theories are so dumb, no offense.


Thats all you got Ivan? Telling someone they are full of crap? And theories dumb?

Beachnut has as you so eloquently put... "Pwned" you. Your response to the evidence that was provided to you by several of us was that it is "crap".

You refuse to look at the picture YOU posted.

You respond AGAIN by accusing me of editing a post, and then you once AGAIN post your OP.

LEt me ask you....

WHEN are you going to respond to the eyewitnesses? You have been ignoring them since January.

WHEN are you going to address the hundreds of pounds of human remains?

Calling something fraudulent without backing it up doesn't work.

Beachnut, Weedwacker, and Beachnut have showed you FACTS. You ignore them? Your not looking for the truth.


[edit on 16-4-2008 by CaptainObvious]




posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Dear Captain Obvious... I took the bait and asked you some simple questions, your answers were just plain stupid, remember?

Captain Obvious in Quotation

Why was there no fire or evidence of a plane crashing?



Think of this - strike a match and quickly pass your finger through it. Did you get burned? No. Try the same thing with a piece of paper. Or grass.


Put your finger in alcohol or jet fuel then pass it through some flame, and dont bother telling how us much it hurt and burned you.

Are you aware that your trying to compare how a 600Mph, fully fueled comercial airplane crashing into the ground at over 600Mp/h at a 45 degree angle leaving a crater no longer than a full-size chevy car....
with a childhood experience playing with matches?


Do you think ATS members are so naive?



The fuel blew AWAY from where the photog was standing at impact, towards the trees. Remember the 40 degree impact angle? It was angled towards the trees. That's why the grass and trees on that side were burnt in that direction. Simple for most to understand that.


Now your reaching Are you making these theories up as you go along.

"The fuel Blew Away" - Like all your credibility and respect.


As far as your impact crater claim, wrong again. The crater direction and explosion damage on the upper parts of the trees, DO NOT LINE UP with the "official" direction of the plane.

Show some evidence, diagrams , graphs, anything other than just saying so. I wont be expecting anything new, convincing or even realistic. Ive seen it all.


The grass is not untouched. That's what you believe. I do not. Therefore, from my point of view, your q is invalid.


But you also believe that planes "atomize", jet fuel "blows away" , planes "vanish", people who question authority are "nutty" "stupid" "ignorant" so what you believe is just that.



The wings shattered into small pieces upon impact. Only small scattered pieces remained. Or are you suggesting that one would find intact wings?


Of course not. We expect to see a plane crash and we dont.
You have failed to prove one did as we all proved one didn't .

Remember, you shouldn't have to convince anyone that a massive commercial airliner crashed, those are usually self explanatory


Why are you trying so hard to?


The fuel was atomized and formed the fireball, some spread into the trees, catching them on fire.


The pictures ( the high quality ones) show no fire in the forest at all, no burnt grass , bark, etc.(pictures earlier in the thread proves these).



Lack of fire? Did I mention the trees? Do you see them in YOUR photos?


Yes, as it has been discussed and agreed upon that the tree damage was consistant with a high velocity explosion and not a plane crash fuel fire for the grass between the crater all way through to the end of the burn zone. No grass, bark, or branch was BURNED by jet fuel around the the crash site anywhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am happy you(s) finally answered.

Congratulations. You officially destroyed the official account for anyone trying to understand Shanksville/ Flight 93 by trying so manically to uphold it.

Your imaginative twisting of facts rivals that of Arlan Specter's Magic Bullet in the Warren Report. We all know why the impossible magic bullet was invented. You invent theories on how a Boeing 757 and all its fuel 'Atomized' and"de-materialized" on impact without burning any surrounding grass around the small 10x30ft hole, when there has been not one shred of evidence from the crash investigation to support it, and in fact, actual photos of the crash site disprove you.



CONCLUSION: No Boeing 757 crashed in Shanksville on September 11th,2001.
The pseudo crash site was to be used in the terror drill exercises. Some of the exercises included crashing a plane into the Pentagon and the WTC, some of the simulated a terrorist plane crash complete with bodies, ground pigs meat ( to act as body parts), plane parts, raging fire.

Check out this airplane crash..



Just a simulation, not real. That is just like the plane crash exercise at Shanksville on September 11th, 2001....

Minus the bodies.





You pretend that you havent been debunked. You kids have been debunked by various professionals and eye witnesses.

Why do you persists to come to this "Stupid Conspiracy site" and pass off your lies?



posted on Apr, 16 2008 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana
Dear Captain Obvious... You are right, I have been lying to you and myself. My family must be ashamed. In my delisional state, I have posted some stuff that would make my dog spit up his Alpo. Please forgive me.


The above quote in NOT real. I am showing Ivan how making things up is VERY easy.

Now Ivan, instead of putting all your efforts into trying to discredit me, why don't you respond to the questions presented to you.

1-
How was hundreds of pounds of human remains recovered after your missile hit? Please also explain how the DNA of these remains matched those passengers of flight 93.

2-
Please explain the multiple eyewitness testimonies that I posted in January and then again the other night.

May I ask you again.. to not post your OP again. To NOT post your silly disaster drill pictures. Remember disaster drill are for search and rescue practice.

Until you answer the two questions presented to you in an mature, responsible fashion, you will not be looked at by most in here as sincere.

Thanks once more Ivan,

C.O.



posted on Apr, 18 2008 @ 12:57 PM
link   

An engine buried, almost as fast as a bullet, 93 entered the ground. One second you are 800 feet above the ground, the next second you are the ground. With false information flowing, there is some solid evidence that is over 6 years old as 9/11 truth moves into pure talk, pure hearsay, pure fantasy.

A good reseracher can find the other engine, or can they?

[edit on 18-4-2008 by beachnut]



posted on Apr, 18 2008 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by beachnut
 


Where's the other engine?




posted on Apr, 18 2008 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


Hi Jack,

since Ivan appears to have abandoned this thread, perhaps you can answer the two questions I presented to him?



posted on Apr, 18 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 


Well, I suppose I could give it a shot...



1- How was hundreds of pounds of human remains recovered after your missile hit? Please also explain how the DNA of these remains matched those passengers of flight 93.


Hundreds of pounds of human remains is not exactly a lot. I think they were probably victims who were in the Pentagon during the impact.

As far as linking through DNA, you would have to show that proper Chain of Custody protocols were followed. It's not enough to have a genetic sample in a lab and say, "yup, that was one of the people that were supposed to be on the plane."



2- Please explain the multiple eyewitness testimonies that I posted in January and then again the other night.


I don't recall if I looked at your testimonies specifically, but I have seen evidence that shows that some witnesses lied. There are other anomalies to the eyewitness statements as well, such as people who did not see a plane hit, and saw what appeared to be a very small plane or a missile. There are more irregularities as well, but really at this point, and even in most investigations, witness testimony is far from being the most sound evidence to make a case.

The one thing I always think of whenever someone brings up supposedly credible witness testimony, are the missing tapes. If the testimony was so credible, why are the tapes not released? Not only from the Pentagon, but also the ones confiscated from the highway department and private businesses in the area.



posted on Apr, 18 2008 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to

Hundreds of pounds of human remains is not exactly a lot. I think they were probably victims who were in the Pentagon during the impact.

As far as linking through DNA, you would have to show that proper Chain of Custody protocols were followed. It's not enough to have a genetic sample in a lab and say, "yup, that was one of the people that were supposed to be on the plane."


Hi Jack,

thanks for taking a shot at it. You have done 100% more than what Ivan has done. Not that I agree with what your post says...


True, hundreds of pounds is not a lot. But it was enough to identify the passengers.

Claiming that they used Pentagon remains for the Shanksville crash is silly.

If you are concerned about the chain of custody, you can go back many pages to where I posted quite a bit of the collection and identification process.

In addition, Mr. Millers contact information is available if you have questions regarding the collection process.



I don't recall if I looked at your testimonies specifically, but I have seen evidence that shows that some witnesses lied. There are other anomalies to the eyewitness statements as well, such as people who did not see a plane hit, and saw what appeared to be a very small plane or a missile. There are more irregularities as well, but really at this point, and even in most investigations, witness testimony is far from being the most sound evidence to make a case.

.


Eyewitness testimony is usually pretty weak...agreed. However, if you read some of the witness statements and then look at the FRD, you will see that the witness statements match that of the data from the FRD.

Can you please point out the witness statements that were lies?



posted on Apr, 18 2008 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 



If you are concerned about the chain of custody, you can go back many pages to where I posted quite a bit of the collection and identification process.


To be perfectly honest, I don't think that anyone will be able to provide me enough evidence in that respect to convince me. One quick paper-shuffle could comepletely invalidate everything that was presented as fact. Speaking of the chain of custody that is.

As far as the collection process itself, there should be photographs of every bit of material recovered before it was disturbed or moved. I would have to see those photos to be more skeptical. But of course, there isn't much chance of actually proving that those photos were taken at the scene.

I have actually seen photos of remains, but not the supporting material to identify them. And of course, I don't think this is something that should be posted on the internet, which is why I support a new and thorough investigation by a panel that isn't "pre-loaded."

But I thank you for your information anyhow. I would like to speak directly with some of the investigators invloved, but as I am not a professional "truther" I won't bother to waste their time asking for material to satisfy my own curiosity. I will leave that to people who have the dedication and resources to effectively dissminate such material.



Can you please point out the witness statements that were lies?


The one that jumps to mind immediately, is that of a reporter who was driving to work and claimed to have seen the impact directly. Yet when someone tried to confirm his story, found that there was no direct line of sight from his claimed position on the highway.

There have been others who have changed their stories as well.



posted on Apr, 19 2008 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
To be perfectly honest, I don't think that anyone will be able to provide me enough evidence in that respect to convince me. One quick paper-shuffle could comepletely invalidate everything that was presented as fact. Speaking of the chain of custody that is.


It takes more than a quick paper shuffle to falsify DNA reports. Wall Miller was in charge. He is not a Federal Government worker. Read up on the collection and identification process. For you to refuse to look at evidence proves that you will only listen to evidence that supports your agenda. Since there is zero evidence supporting anything BUT flight 93 crashing in Shanksville, I am curious as to your thought process.


Originally posted by jackinthebox


I have actually seen photos of remains, but not the supporting material to identify them. And of course, I don't think this is something that should be posted on the internet, which is why I support a new and thorough investigation by a panel that isn't "pre-loaded."


Who should have collected the evidence at the scene in Shanksville? You have the local coroner in charge. (non federal govt.) and DMORT (non govt) assisting.




The one that jumps to mind immediately, is that of a reporter who was driving to work and claimed to have seen the impact directly. Yet when someone tried to confirm his story, found that there was no direct line of sight from his claimed position on the highway.

There have been others who have changed their stories as well.


Im not sure who your are talking about. But if oyu find a source, please post it. Witnesses do change their stories. By themselves, witnesses are not a solid form of evidence.



posted on Apr, 19 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 



It takes more than a quick paper shuffle to falsify DNA reports.


If the integrity of the chain of custody is in doubt, the DNA reports don't prove anything.



Who should have collected the evidence at the scene in Shanksville? You have the local coroner in charge.


The same coroner who first said there was nothing there, and nothing for him to do.



But if oyu find a source, please post it.


Here's an interesting piece...





For you to refuse to look at evidence proves that you will only listen to evidence that supports your agenda.


Perhaps I gave you too much credit thinking that perhaps you were prepared to have a civil discussion. I never said that I was not willing to look at evidence.



[edit on 4/19/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Apr, 19 2008 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox


If the integrity of the chain of custody is in doubt, the DNA reports don't prove anything.


IF... there is not one shred of evidence to suggest there was a breach in the chain of cammand with the DNA collection and identification process.







The same coroner who first said there was nothing there, and nothing for him to do.


Thats not what he said.









Perhaps I gave you too much credit thinking that perhaps you were prepared to have a civil discussion. I never said that I was not willing to look at evidence.


thats not what you said. re-read what you posted.



posted on Apr, 19 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptainObvious
 



IF... there is not one shred of evidence to suggest there was a breach in the chain of cammand with the DNA collection and identification process.


Chain of command and chain of custody are two completely different things.

And what evidence would you expect to find that someone had entered fraudulent documents or infiltrated DNA evidence into the loop?



thats not what you said. re-read what you posted.


Correct, that's not what I said. I know exactly what I in fact did say, and it is not synonymous with refusing to look at evidence that is presented to me. I was pointing out that the evidence you were telling me to go hunt down was moot.

[edit on 4/19/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   







As you can see after 90+ pages in this thread, NOT ONE PERSON OR GROUP has been able to prove that flight 93 crashed in Shanksville.

Actually, all the evidence has proven the FLIGHT 93 DID NOT CRASH IN SHANKSVILLE ON 911.

Look at the above pictue again. The photographer is standing where the fuel ladened wings is said to have 'penetrated' the ground. As you can see there is NO SIGN of anything resembling a plane or anything being loaded with 10,000's of liters of highly flammable JET FUEL crashing into that pre-exsiting ground scar (from Strip mine reclaimation).

What caused the crater was most likely a cruise missile acting as a hijack aircraft surrogate participating in the 5 or so amalagmated, overlapped war games/ drill/ exercises planned for September 11th. 2001.

It has also been documented that Lear jets were being used as cruise missile surrogates in the wargamess of 911.









[edit on 21-4-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


When are you going to answer the questions presented to you? Ivan? They won't go away.



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana







As you can see after 90+ pages in this thread, NOT ONE PERSON OR GROUP has been able to prove that flight 93 crashed in Shanksville.

Actually, all the evidence has proven the FLIGHT 93 DID NOT CRASH IN SHANKSVILLE ON 911.

Look at the above pictue again. The photographer is standing where the fuel ladened wings is said to have 'penetrated' the ground. As you can see there is NO SIGN of anything resembling a plane or anything being loaded with 10,000's of liters of highly flammable JET FUEL crashing into that pre-exsiting ground scar (from Strip mine reclaimation).

What caused the crater was most likely a cruise missile acting as a hijack aircraft surrogate participating in the 5 or so amalagmated, overlapped war games/ drill/ exercises planned for September 11th. 2001.

It has also been documented that Lear jets were being used as cruise missile surrogates in the wargamess of 911.









[edit on 21-4-2008 by IvanZana]


Ivan, so NOW you are asserting that the 'hole' in your 'out-of-context' pictures was caused by a 'LearJet'???!!!??

Don't you know that a LearJet was fueled by the same Jet-A as UAL93???

Come on!!!

So a LearJet made the hole, but while fueled with the same Jet-A as UAL93, no fire?

BTW, you forgot to answer my question, many pages ago, about the USAir 427 crash, ten years ago, just so happens to be in Pennsylvania....NO FIRE!!!!

USAir 427, outside Pittsburgh....similar terrain....of course, not at the same impact forces, since the speed of USA427 was not as great as UAL93....but, still....NO FIRE!!!!

Ivan, look it up, and prove me wrong.

WW

[edit to change....USAir 427 was September 1994....so, it was MORE THAN ten years ago....to be specific, it was 8 Sep 1994]

[edit on 4/21/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Ivan, so NOW you are asserting that the 'hole' in your 'out-of-context' pictures was caused by a 'LearJet'???!!!??

If you read the thread, weedwhacker, you'll see that Ivan does not state that a Lear Jet caused the smoking crater.

He stated that a Lear Jet may have been used as part of the wargames that day. This may account for some witness sightings of a plane in the sky.



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


tezzajw.....

Nice of you to jump in....care to read all of the posts?

There are so many theories, all on this one thread!!!

A missile impacted in Shansville, yet DNA was recovered.

UAL93 was 'shot-down', yet there is no sign of a huge debris pattern that would support that notiion.

The B757 was 'lawn-darted' into the soft soil outside Shanksville...and the DVR was recovered, and was able to be read.....hmmmmmm

A USAir B737 did a 'lawn-dart' into soft soil in 1997....Septermber 8, near Pittsburgh....while on 'downwind' being vectored for the ILS to land.

Of course, USAir 427 wasn't going 500 KIAS at impact....but there was still no fire...and no survivors.....hmmmmmmmmm.



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
tezzajw.....
Nice of you to jump in....care to read all of the posts?

No worries, weedwhacker. I have read all of the posts, from the start of the thread. That's how I know that Ivan is not claiming that a Lear Jet crashed. If you read his posts, you'll see that he claims over and over that no plane crashed in Shanksville.



posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 




... yet DNA was recovered.


Allegedly. I still haven't seen anyone post the chain of custody report.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 93  94  95    97  98  99 >>

log in

join