The Final Nail In The Coffin: Irrefutable Proof the Flight 93 Crash Scene Is a Lie

Upon viewing the crash site of flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, it has been proved that Flight 93 could not have made the crater for many reasons, here are some of them. covertoperations.blogspot.com...

covertoperations.blogspot.com...

covertoperations.blogspot.com...

covertoperations.blogspot.com...

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.

flight93hoax.blogspot.com...


Here is a diagram, with a plane superimposed onto the crater, using the picture above. (The tail end of the plane is cut off in this diagram because of size.)

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--

flight93hoax.blogspot.com...

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.

flight93hoax.blogspot.com...


The official flight path by the NTSB www.ntsb.gov...


This next video is from an EYEWITNESS to the craft that crashed in Shanksville on 911.

These are some of the videos found on youtube of eyewitnesses and new reports. Some of the contradict eachother.




Mayor of Shanksville admiting there is no plane, amazing rare video




Secretive Organizations Coercing Shanksville MIB Style









[edit on 27-6-2008 by IvanZana]

reply to post by IvanZana


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

And why, pray tell would authorities try to convince the public that flt 93 DID crash at Shanksville and go to the trouble of mocking up a fake crash scene?

It all happened in real time so it had to be pre-meditated. That kind of trashes the idea that the government was trying to cover up that they shot down Flt 93, doesn't it?

Originally posted by darkbluesky
reply to post by IvanZana

 

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

Mabey this....


Eyewitnesses see possible cruise missile too.


Considering there were massive wargames taking place on 911 involving cruise missiles and hijacked aircraft. see next vid.

Amalgam Virgo





[edit on 27-6-2008 by IvanZana]

reply to post by IvanZana



Then why try to convince the public it was Flt 93?

Where is flt 93? Where are the passengers and crew?

reply to post by darkbluesky


Just to play devils advocate:

If the truth is that the government had thousands of civilians killed in other crashes that day, could it be assumed that flight 93 was shot down and 'lets roll', hero story completely fabricated; further propoganda to stear the publics eye away from the truth...

A bit theatric, but if true...it was gobbled up hook, line and sinker by the American public.

Not that I agree with the point (I am still unsure with the entire issue), but it would seem to fit in that version of the truth.

[edit on 6/27/0808 by spines]

The logistics of such an undertaking are such that it would be practically impossible to both execute AND successfully cover up.

As the history of actual conspiracies has shown us - something always leaks.

Pretty persuasive information. At first, I thought that Susan's eyewitness report supported the idea that Flight 93 actually flew in low, banked hard and right and crashed. Subsequent interviews with her supports that what she saw was not a commercial aircraft.

Now, for me, the primary question remains....... what DID happen to flight 93 and the passengers? If it were shot down en route, there would still be bits and pieces scattered somewhere. To me, that would be nearly impossible to cover up, in that recovery of the deceased, the airplane parts, etc. would be widely scattered. That alone remains the primary problem to me in regard to the Flight 93 shootdown scenario.

I'm open to most ideas...... I don't have a dog in this race, unless that dog is named truth.


p.s. thanks IVAN..... well compiled evidence. I think it's a bit away from proof, in that it doesn't tie up the loose ends, but I do believe together, as a whole, this is proof that the official story is not factual.

Now, another p.s. ...... the telephone conversations aboard flight 93 clearly support, at least to me, that an effort was made by the passengers onboard to crash the cockpit and attempt to subdue/kill the hijackers. I not only want to believe that, I think the evidence supports it. Now...... if they were shot down right after that, where is the wreckage from that event?

Thanks much. Good info.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by argentus]

Originally posted by argentus


Now, another p.s. ...... the telephone conversations aboard flight 93 clearly support, at least to me, that an effort was made by the passengers onboard to crash the cockpit and attempt to subdue/kill the hijackers. I not only want to believe that, I think the evidence supports it. Now...... if they were shot down right after that, where is the wreckage from that event?

Thanks much. Good info.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by argentus]

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.

reply to post by IvanZana



Is that the redacted transcript? I understand there are two versions.

reply to post by IvanZana

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.

Maybe not, but there was definitely a struggle to get into the cockpit.

Sandy Dahl (flight attendant and wife of Captain Jason Dahl) had this to say after the end of the Zacharias Moussaoui of trial:

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

She listened to the cockpit voice recordings.

Originally posted by Boone 870
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."

Did you ever think that the statement "In the cockpit If we don't we'll die" meant that they knew they could be shot down if they did not get control of the plane?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Boone 870
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."

Did you ever think that the statement "In the cockpit If we don't we'll die" meant that they knew they could be shot down if they did not get control of the plane?

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.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Not really. Here's why:

Family members told the passengers that other aircraft were hijacked and crashed into buildings. I can't remember any family members telling the passengers that other aircraft were hijacked and shot down by fighters.

reply to post by IvanZana

Or how about everything you heard happened was fabricated?

Or, how about not.

This was part of the wargames.

Wrong.

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

Wrong again.

Can you please provide evidence that is based on reality instead of fabricated evidence made up by conspiracy fantasist?

Slap! Slap! SMACK!!!!!

Hear that sound????? Thats the sound of a dead horse being beaten. All parties concerned should give up because nobody will convince any body of anything.

Its not a matter of fact to some people, its a matter of belief or something... i'm not sure. I dont know how some people can ignore whats blatantly smacking them in the face.... YOUR GOVERNEMENT IS LYING TO YOU FOLKS!!!!!

reply to post by W3RLIED2


Do you have proof of these claims? Be specific please.

What lies did the government tell about Flight 93?

reply to post by IvanZana


Ivana, that 3rd video nails it for me.

The obvious deep darp scar in the videos of the crash scene look like part of the crash, when in fact, they arent, its a landformation prior to 94.

There'fore, flight 93, like the penatgon managed to fit into one small hole, with no other parts.

reply to post by Boone 870


Ummmm... how about the one about a plane crash in shanksville??? you can review my posts in the huge thread thats been on this sight for about the last 5 months. the one where i posted pictures of the crash sight and compared it to a missle impact, or the one where several witnesses claimed to never have seen a plane in the area, or the many other hundreds of posts that have very logical and specific reasons that a plane could not have left a crater that small and that there would have been couple football fields worth of debris and a couple hundred bodies scattered around the scene.

Take your pic Boone, i know your opinion, you know mine. Proof is beside the point with you. It's obvious you have your little heart set on what you believe is the truth, so i'm not going to waste my time going over it more than i have. Find some one else to pick on.

Originally posted by Boone 870
I can't remember any family members telling the passengers that other aircraft were hijacked and shot down by fighters.

Simlpe yes or no question, even for believers.

Do flight attendents know that NORAD will shoot down planes that are off course and not under the pilots control, YES or NO ?

Originally posted by Kulturcidist
The logistics of such an undertaking are such that it would be practically impossible to both execute AND successfully cover up.

As the history of actual conspiracies has shown us - something always leaks.

The logistics and undertaking would indeed seem very complicated and yes darn near impossible to pull off in the U.S. but then again it was done and if you believe the official story then you have to believe that 19 middle eastern men were able to do just that with as much as a half a million dollars barely speaking our language(in some cases) paying for everything in cash(including upwards of tens of thousands of dollars in cash for flight training). All the while not having one single slip up. All this in the post WTC93 bombing and OKC. Ramzi was still fresh in the minds being sentenced in 96 with his bojinka plot. Also, being attacked the entire time by someone Cole, Africa and threats from bin laden saying more attacks are coming for us.
And yet this is the official story we are supposed to believe. So yes at first thought the idea and logistics and the amount of people who would have to keep there mouth shut would seem impossible if even in pre 91101 you were to sit down here in the U.S. and try to organize something like this, even the thought seems utterly ridiculous. But the official story tells us that and not only that but that it all just happened to occur while a giant/multiple war exercise was happening.
Lets just hope these leaks start to really open up once the Bush administration has vacated the White House.

Let us not forget that no one believed that there were massive concentration camps during Hitlers rule. Hitlers people kept there mouth shut for one reason and that was because the Hitler administration was still in power.