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.

 

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

page: 17
12
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana



Can you point us good users at ats the official 911 story especially concerning flight 93?


Where is the expert that says a plane crashed in Shanksville? All I can find is Fox news and other MSM that states flight 93 crashed in Shansville.

Answer my questions please


Here is some interesting reading not from debunking sites or from Fox News:

Pennsylvania Disaster Workers Respond to Flight 93 Tragedy


So far workers have recovered some human remains, pieces of plane seats and seat belts and a few personal items, including checkbooks, clothing and a singed Bible, but investigators said they haven't found anything larger than an ordinary briefcase or telephone book.

www.redcross.org...

I doubt you will read it... but you asked for professionals, experts, etc. here ya go:

The Crash of United Flight 93 in
Shanksville, Pennsylvania


Nancy K. Grant
Center for Emergency Management and
Homeland Security Policy Research
The University of Akron

David H. Hoover
Center for Emergency Management and
Homeland Security Policy Research
The University of Akron

Anne-Marie Scarisbrick-Hauser
Center for Emergency Management and
Homeland Security Policy Research
The University of Akron

Stacy L. Muffet
Center for Emergency Management and
Homeland Security Policy Research
www.colorado.edu...




posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   
ivan i like how you are not backing off but you also need to show some backup to your statements, so far i have only seen a picture of a hole that i never saw until now



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt

So far workers have recovered some human remains, pieces of plane seats and seat belts and a few personal items, including checkbooks, clothing and a singed Bible, but investigators said they haven't found anything larger than an ordinary briefcase or telephone book.

www.redcross.org...


So where are the reports and photos of thes remains, parts, and personal items?

Where are the bigger parts that normally survive a crash?



[edit on 16-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Ultima,

You sound like a broken record. If your mother was on that flight, would you want pictures of her remains splattered all over the internet?

I have posted DMORT and Wally Millers contact information on several occasions. Why don't you contact them?

TY



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
If your mother was on that flight, would you want pictures of her remains splattered all over the internet?


Yes, i would want the truth of what happened that day. So far we have not seen any truth about what hapepned that day since the investigating agencies have not released most of the information.

All we have seen is beleivers going along with what they are being told and making statements and opinions and no facts to support any of thier claims or the official story.



[edit on 16-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
If your mother was on that flight, would you want pictures of her remains splattered all over the internet?


Yes, i would want the truth of what happened that day. So far we have not seen any truth about what hapepned that day since the investigating agencies have not released most of the information.

All we have seen is beleivers going along with what they are being told and making statements and opinions and no facts to support any of thier claims or the official story.





Ultima,

How many airplane accidents have you seen on the internet and on television that offer you photo or video evidence of the bodies of those who perished?

You echo the same thing post after post, inflating your security clearance and your job title.

You stated some time ago you were going to show the mods here your credentials. Well? When are you doing this?



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
How many airplane accidents have you seen on the internet and on television that offer you photo or video evidence of the bodies of those who perished?


Quite a few, like Flight 800 and that Value Jet that crashed in the swamp.

Oh and some of KAL 007.


You stated some time ago you were going to show the mods here your credentials. Well? When are you doing this?


When 1 of the mods contacts me and lets me know what information and documentation they would like for me to post or send them.



[edit on 16-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
Why are you dodging the question?

...

You keep answering my questions with questions.

Back up what you post.

Here's one for you: one of the Flight 93 calls was very strange indeed. I forget who it was but when he called his Mom, he said "Hi Mom, it's < John Doe >, you believe me don't you Mom?".

Who says that to their own parents?! NO ONE. It's weird in the extreme for him to ask his Mom if she believed him, never mind using his full name. That's beyond weird - that's.... well, I don't have a word to describe it.

How do you explain that, TY?

Here's a plausible explanation: voice synthesis software was used when the calls were fabricated. He said the words he did to try and persuade her the voice was her son (not that any mother needs persuading).

Here's another one for you: it was said that the air phones were used because mobiles didn't work. This is partially correct. At high altitude, they don't work. But the jet (allegedly) flew low level for quite a distance, at approx. 7,000ft. They work down there.

In addition to that, it was also reported that mobile base stations get confused when a mobile is used from altitude, and it jams the system, which is why mobile phones on aircraft are banned. BUT... this is complete BS. The real reason mobiles aren't to be used in-flight is because of the possibility of them interfering with the aircraft systems. If anyone actually knew anything about how the mobile telephone system actually worked, they'd realize that the base stations can't "jam" in this way - it's their normal mode of operation!!!

One guy did get a call through to 911 on his mobile. That tape has been buried permanently. 911 calls are public records, but not the tapes from 9/11 (911...9/11 ??).

Please debunk this lot. If you want to know what I'm on about, please search ATS - it's been covered in the past.

I wish you all the best with your future FOIA request for that 911 tape, too.


[edit on 16-7-2008 by mirageofdeceit]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   
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...



Which part of the above statements and diagrams are incorrect?



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana


Which part of the above statements and diagrams are incorrect?



I can give you one example of where the diagram might not be accurate.

You cite (or your source cites) that the airplane was at a certain angle to the ground at impact. My first question is what airplane? If no airplane crashed at Shanksville as you say....where did the information regarding the orientation of the airplane at impact come from? From the spooks with the fake DFDR data I guess?

Let's assume just for a minute, that an airplane really did crash and really did create that crater. The fault... in your argument that the wings could not have made the impressions seen in ground, is that the airplane could have easily been in a 42 degree nose down inverted attitude, but not on a course oriented 42 degrees to the ground. The DFDR would not be able to give any meaningful information regarding the actual vertical component of the course of the airplane during the high speed descent.

All pilots, and anyone with basic aerodynamic understanding will understand this. Aircraft rarely have matching course and heading. The nose is very often pointed in a direction different from the direction the airplane is travelling. This would be especially true during a semi-controlled high speed suicide descent with opposing parties fighting over control of the aircraft.

If the course (the path through the air of the center of mass of the airplane) was only 3-4 degrees greater than the oreintation of the airplane at impact, the marks made by the wings could easily have been where shown on your diagram.

Imagine the airplane in the same 42 degree nose down attitude, but falling straight down....the wing marks would be 20-30 feet further back. This is an absurd exaggeration, but meant only to illustrate the concept.
I dont expect you to respond to this Ivan...it's for everyone else to ponder. You've obviously already made up your mind....But maybe a seriousd researcher like Ultima1 will consider this information.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit

Here's one for you: one of the Flight 93 calls was very strange indeed. I forget who it was but when he called his Mom, he said "Hi Mom, it's < John Doe >, you believe me don't you Mom?".


How do you explain that, TY?

Here's a plausible explanation: voice synthesis software was used when the calls were fabricated. He said the words he did to try and persuade her the voice was her son (not that any mother needs persuading).

Here's another one for you: it was said that the air phones were used because mobiles didn't work. This is partially correct. At high altitude, they don't work. But the jet (allegedly) flew low level for quite a distance, at approx. 7,000ft. They work down there.


911 calls are public records, but not the tapes from 9/11 (

Please debunk this lot. If you want to know what I'm on about, please search ATS - it's been covered in the past.

I wish you all the best with your future FOIA request for that 911 tape, too.

-quote trimmed



Mirage,

Allow me to be perfectly honest. I have always considered you a pretty intelligent person. Seriously! I do not agree with what you believe in, but I always thought you were sincere.

Dude? W-T-F??? This is one of the most disgusting posts I have seen.

Here is some information you may find interesting:

Your John Doe is Mark Bingham. This is a picture of him and his mother (Alice Ann Hoglan) that he spoke with. And a few other ones.








Please check out this website that goes a little into his life and what he meant to his friends, family, and the community.
www.markbingham.org...

To explain his conversation with his mother:


Hoglan: I was staying with my brother Vaughan on the morning of September 11th, and, uh, the phone rang.

Bingham (reconstruction): Mom... Mom, this is Mark Bingham.

Hoglan: Once in a while he would say that. He would call up, and he was, he was a young businessman, and used to, used to introduce himself on phone as Mark Bingham, and he was trying to be, uh, strong, and level-headed, and, and strictly business. "Mom, this is Mark Bingham".


dsc.discovery.com...

So, the people that were in on it... KNEW that Mark Bingham would once and a while say that on the phone?

Mirage...think... REALLY think. You are calling your mother. You know you are going to die. (pretty much) Would you call her all hysterical? No, you would want to be brave for her. Keep her calm. Make certain your last words to her are as ...i don't know ..memorable?

Tell me how these synthesizers carried on conversations...intimate conversations. These people talked to each other. They were REAL.

It makes me ill when people state this crap.

Not all 911 calls on 911 were made public. I for one will not seek an FOIA to hear them. These calls were made from people recording their last minutes of lives.. dying a horrendous death. These calls are not for people to froth at the mouth over.

Do you care? No! you PISS on them. You don't care that this man, at his last minutes of his life, tried his damnedest to save the lives of those on that plane. He and others quite possibly may have saved hundreds if not thousands of lives by flight 93 crashing in shanksville.

What would you like me to debunk? There is NOTHING to debunk. Not ONE family member has described ANY conversation that would make ANYONE think that the calls were fake.

What are you about?? I'm afraid I just found out.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1


Quite a few, like Flight 800 and that Value Jet that crashed in the swamp.

Oh and some of KAL 007.



Please post a link.

I never knew corps photographs were made public from these crashes.

....oh and why don't YOU notify the mods in regards to your credentials.



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Well, if calling my folks late one night after I was involved in a serious car crash wasn't enough to find out how I'd be under pressure, I wouldn't know how I'd respond. But I do....

I was calm. Did I introduce myself by my full name though?? No. I simply said "Hi - It's me".

I'm not some kind of morbid person, so don't get that idea.

The thing that's strange about the calls from Flight 93 is that they're sequestered. No-one was allowed to listen to the CVR outside the court room. The 911 call has been buried (yet plenty of others are not). Hell - I even know of emergency calls made here in the UK that have been broadcast on national TV!! Why hide this one in particular?

Can't you see how odd that is? What are they hiding?

In the absence of any solid proof of Flight 93 (and I'd imagine it woud be pretty straight forward to prove) then let's see it!

The Pentagon argument could be ended with the release of a few more CCTV tapes from key locations. There are over 80 tapes that have not been released. If they show nothing, why keep them? If they show a 757, why keep them?

One argument for that is because "it's morbid" or "disrespectful", yet the aircraft hitting the WTC are played over and over again.

Don't miss what's right in front of you. Why won't they release the evidence?

It would take only one person with a video camera at the Pentagon that day to (potentially) change history.

[edit on 17-7-2008 by mirageofdeceit]



posted on Jul, 17 2008 @ 10:30 PM
link   
I get so tired of people stating "No plane crashed". Blah Blah Blah....

I don't get it. Just because something doesn't fit your predefined, hollywood enhanced idea of how a plane crash is "supposed" to look, it must be fake.

Well back in 1991, a time in which I believe half of the people on forums weren't even alive, a plane crashed in Colorado Springs. It looked something like this.

www.airdisaster.com...


Lets see. Both were large commercial airliners. Both impacted the ground at a very high rate of speed. Both impacted at a steep angle. And both impact sites look very similar.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
....oh and why don't YOU notify the mods in regards to your credentials.


Why, you will just ingnore it anyway like other believers. Becasue you know if my credentaials are true then what i post is true also.

[edit on 18-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Throat, Dark, Boone, and etc..... You have failed to prove a plane crashed in Shanksville. It doesnt matter how many post you spam these forums with. It still doesnt put a plane in the ground.

Experts, pilots, police and firemen interviewed all agree that no plane crashed in Shanksville. The pictures, evidence, fdr, Cvr, and calls all prove that flight 93 was part of the mock hijacking exercise. Most of the evidence was manufactured to sell the crash.

Boone, throat Yogurt, weedwacker, Seymore Buttz/CptObvious,Dark
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 (Flight 93) 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.

You debunkers are not only ignorant but your methods are transperant now.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 02:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkbluesky

Originally posted by IvanZana


Which part of the above statements and diagrams are incorrect?



If the course (the path through the air of the center of mass of the airplane) was only 3-4 degrees greater than the oreintation of the airplane at impact, the marks made by the wings could easily have been where shown on your diagram.


Ok, I will pretend that you actually used intelligence and experience to answer my questions.

Why is it then that where the wings allegedly hit, the ground has an old depression covered in dry unburnt grass? A: No plane crashed. It is an old weathered earthworks scar.

Remember?


There is no evidence that what caused the round crater in Shanksville was a commerical airliner.

So you see, pretending you have intelligence and experience in this field did not really get us too far did it?


The above picture was provided by the gov. It clearly show that Flight 93 (boeing 757) did not crash in Shanksville on 911.

SHow your friends.

[edit on 18-7-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


you have failed to prove one didn't.

If ignorance is bliss, you must be one happy sob.

Really whats easier if your the government and even if you are behind it all.
Crash a real plane or.... if you say they are lying, then you must believe they did it to the towers also. or do you have a hologram theory as well.

or....
Hide the passengers away from loved ones forever, synthize voices, and call call 9/11 and their loved ones, shoot a missile into the ground, and get the red cross, and every other person involved.
Do you realize how insane that sounds.. Do you realize the odds of making that work?
And you do this for what? to disgrace the memory of a few brave, scared people who went through a hell I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy?

all I can say is wow.

BTW great post Throat Yogurt, Hopefully the people here with any logic and fore thought will take that persons image in there mind before they spout out nonsense like this again. I doubt it though



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 04:07 AM
link   
Whats with all these trolls on this forum.

Cant handle the truth got to the randi place or something.

[edit on 18-7-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 04:25 AM
link   
reply to post by mirageofdeceit
 


mirage,

I am late for work, so I dont have too much time.

you comparing a car crash where you were STILL able to pick up a phone after it as stressful as a plane that is about to crash that you are flying in? One that was hijacked? You're about to storm a cockpit with strangers?

ARE YOU SERIOUS?

Did you read the transcript from the interview with his mother?

the CVR was played for the family members. Thats all that they should have to. I know what happened to that plane, I know what happened to those lost souls. I don't CARE what is on the 911 tapes. I don't have to be shown anything...or hear anything... ELSE.

I have seen all I need to see to know what happened.

I will be back tonight.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join