government is telling a story where the plane was inverted before it impacted-- that the plane was upside-down or belly up as it hit the earth.

The tail-mark at the north part of the crater in the aerial picture above supports the upside-down story as well. A tail mark made by a plane going southwards can ONLY be produced at the north side of the crater if the plane was going upside-down when it impacts.

So what does it look like when the plane is going upside-down when it impacts? How would the plane FIT in the crater?

I'm going to use this picture, where the camera is looking down one of the wing scars, to the west. North is to the right and south is to the left. Thus, the plane would come from the right. Notice that the grass is not burnt and the wing scar lookes old and weatherd.

Immediately, you should see there is a problem.

Even if the fuselage impacts at the very north part of the crater, THERE IS NO WAY THE WINGS CAN IMPACT THE GROUND TO PRODUCE THE WING SCARS.

The wings simply do not line up in the right place.

If you move the fuselage so that it impacts the ground further to the left (further southwards), the wing alignment problem is even worse.

Further, it is impossible for the plane to flip backwards as it impacts, to have the wings produce the side scars, particularly when the plane (officially) is going 563 mph.

If anything, the wings are going to slide further southwards as the plane breaks up, and make marks further south of the crater.

I submit this wing alignment problem as rock-solid proof that the official flight 93 crash story is a lie.
-------------------------------------------------------

Curiously, the wings DO LINE UP with the side scars, if the plane is right side up, as shown below--

However, if the plane was in fact right-side up as it impacted, why a) is the government lying about it, and b) what made the "tail" scar on the northern edge of the crater???

I don't know exactly what happened at this crash scene.

I strongly suspect the crater was made artificially, to make it LOOK as though an airplane crashed there, and then plane debris was strewn around the site. Perhaps a bomb or projectile of some sort was used to create the damage.

In any case, the important point is that: THE OFFICIAL FLIGHT 93 CRASH STORY IS A LIE, BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT.

Originally posted by darkbluesky
reply to post by IvanZana

---

If flight 93 did not crash in Shanksville, what did?

Thanks very much. To answer you Q. Here is the transcript from flight 93. As you can tell there was no struggle in the cockpit.

The recording ends with a three-minute crescendo of noise as a passenger apparently just outside the door shouts, "In the cockpit! If we don't, we'll die."

"To know that Jason spent those last terrorizing moments alone in the cockpit with that hijacker, it's been difficult to not talk about, but I understand that (federal prosecutors) were trying to protect their evidence," she said. "But there was a riot of passengers and crew members on that plane. I heard what sounded like at least 20 voices, and I heard determination in their voices - it was like a war cry. But the hijackers were screaming back the same way." infowars.com

Or how about everything you heard happened was fabricated?

This was part of the wargames.

Shanksville was to be the site of the mock shootdown and crash of a fake flight as part of the 911 wargame exercises.