Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shotabel
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.


Poeple that believe the official story are like the German people who WOULD NOT believe there were camps. They did not want to know.




posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


The cockpit recorder picks up conversation in the planes cockpit through
a microphone located on the overhead instrument panel and boom mikes worn on pilot headsets. It is possible that loud sound in the passengar cabin could also be detected if the cockpit doors were open.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 06:49 AM
link   


The cockpit recorder picks up conversation in the planes cockpit through
a microphone located on the overhead instrument panel and boom mikes worn on pilot headsets. It is possible that loud sound in the passengar cabin could also be detected if the cockpit doors were open.


Lets see - I'm sitting in living room of my apartment, there are people in
hallway outside, door is closed, yet I can hear them talking clearly from
25 feet away. Through a closed door!

The cockpit microphones could pick up sounds of people in cabin
especially if yelling "In the cockpit or we die"



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Here's a fact that no one can deny: the nose cone of the plane was found 8 miles from the "crater".

That plane was in pieces before it ever hit the ground. Period.

Unless you want to suggest that the nose bounced 8 miles...



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 09:21 AM
link   
what gets me is the phone calls themselves, i may be wrong about this but as i remember, cell phones were inoperable aboard flights until a few years AFTER 911. how then could so many people have made cell phone calls aboard planes that were incapable of allowing cell phone calls to be made?



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by spines
 


ok, but in order for that to happen... you are basically going to have to discredit the man's family.... i mean, why on earth would the family of the man get in on it? surely not over money. i can't think of one American citizen that would agree to go along with something like that.

:dunno:



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana
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.

This is an idea which hadn't occurred to me before, thanks for posting it, not that it makes much difference at this stage of the (war)game.

[edit on 28-6-2008 by Shar_Chi]



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


Where is the proof that 93 did crash there? I have never seen it, but seen more than enough proof it did not. Scenarios like this are very fundamental to understanding the deceit that is being played out.

It's absolutely unfair that we are being lied to like this. We are much brighter than that, I think we deserve a lot more.

When you can see the holes here, you then start to see them in so many other places, many of which you would have never expected, and a lot of times it may not be something you want. That changes though, over time.

Unfortunately things won't change for all of us, until all of us start changing how we perceive things and do things.

[edit on 28-6-2008 by Asmus]



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Grock
 


what was it that made them incapable of making phone calls. i was under the impression you just had to turn that stuff off because it may interfere with the plane's electronics

i don't know. you have a lady saying that somthing dive bombed her van, flew under power lines, then somehow managed to bank up and to the right hard enough to NOT hit trees that are on the other side of a small rural road.

i mean, it's obvious that he recollevtion of the events isn't the most reliable especially since, she is saying that she didn't hear the exposion until two days after it happened (WTF?) that means that she wasn't thinking clear as she said she was "because she was the only eye witness and would have to tell everyone what she saw" im sorry, but she is not trained in doing things like that, IE being able to look at A LOT of details in a short amount of time, because she may have to use it as evidence, much like a police officer is trained to do.

im not saying she is lying, but i think that MAYBE, just MAYBE, she is a bit fuddled over the entire ordeal and can't quite remember EXACTLY what happened, because she is only human. not most people, when something like that happens tend to not think "ok i have to watch everything because i will have to tell someone about this." on top of that i think the interviewers were kind of trying to coerce the answers they wanted out of her. considering they asked the same things over and over, and even showeed her pictures of the planes, i know that in a time like that, i would most likely have a pretty hard time remembering if what i saw was this kind of plane, or that kind of plane.

plain and simple, this doesn't provide definative proof, some people use that term, "definative proof" very loosely at times, what you showed is some intruiging interviews, and the diagrams you showed witht he wings making the scar didn't come to any conclusions IMO.

looks at it like this, if a plane hits the ground upside down, or right side up, no matter how you look at it the wings are still in the same position in relation to the rest of the fuselage, suppose it impacts and crushed up to the wings, then rolled over on it's belly/back (whichever you want to believe) and the tail slammed into the ground.

as far as the wreckage, i can't answer that one, that is the most compelling peice that was brought forward here.

my question in all of this, IF this was faked, how do you explain the family of the man who said "let's Roll" or the rest of the passengers on the plane? they never existed? the flight never happened? what? were they paid by the gov't to play dead and never say anything? (i find that one REALLY hard to believe)

here is a link discussing cell phone calls on planes from 2004, it basically states that you were prohibeted for fear that it would play hell with the planes navigation equipment. and that sometimes they were hard to make because towers are not built to project their signal that high, but if this plane were highjacked then they may not have been at "cruising altitude"

Cel lphones on airplanes

[edit on 6/28/08 by SRTkid86]

[edit on 6/28/08 by SRTkid86]



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I SEE DUMB PEOPLE...

where was flight 93 heading? think about it...
No disrespect to the actual relatives of the victims (if there were any) but that radio transcript sounds SO Hollywood, its corny.

It disgusting to realise there are people who believe everything they are told without doing their own research, a very ugly trait!!



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Kulturcidist
 


I think you are correct but even when the evidence shows something is not right nothing is done about it. The only thing that is done is more info comes out that clouds the whole issue. Has any conspiracy been busted to date concerning Oklahoma, WTC 7, Pentagon CIA drug flights, war on drugs, you get the idea. You could literally have the steering wheel from a crashed alien ship and no one would believe you. You could have video of an alien being tortured and no one would believe you.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:07 PM
link   
i believe that the flight 93 plane was landed at an undisclosed location, the passengers shot, a script acted out, a unmanned missle similar to a plane crashed into a land formation that looked like wings, and tada. population control in its finest form.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Grock
 


There were only two cell phone calls made from flight 93, both of them were made at 9:58 when the aircraft was at around 5000 feet.

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by v4vendetta
 


you know whats even more sad IMO?

people who instead of tryin to educate someone, when they ask a questions or two. they call them dumb and provide no definative proof that there claims are indeed accurate.

here's an idea, from now on, when someone questions you 9/11 truthers, how about you stick to the topic rather than resorting to half witted, and back handed insults.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Asmus
 


Where is the proof that 93 did crash there? I have never seen it, but seen more than enough proof it did not. Scenarios like this are very fundamental to understanding the deceit that is being played out.


What about the black boxes, both of them were found in the crater? The FDR flight path matches the radar data flight path.

What about the flight attendants personal effects being found in the crater?

What about hijacker documentation that was found in the crater?





[edit on 28-6-2008 by Boone 870]



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


let's not forget ALL of the people who witnessed this nightmare with their own eyes, most of them rushing to the scene to help in any way they could.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 

double post.

[edit on 6/28/08 by SRTkid86]



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
reply to post by Asmus
 


What about the black boxes, both of them were found in the crater? The FDR flight path matches the radar data flight path.



Faked


What about the flight attendants personal effects being found in the career?


You make no sense sometimes...lol.... but the answer is.... Fake and incredible.


What about hijacker documentation that was found in the crater?


So in your world, personal effects and hijacker documentation can survive a plane crash but the wings, seats, wiring, tires, rims, landing gear, etc doesnt?

Your take on reality has left most of us with little or no respect for your 'version' of what happened on 911

Besides boone, this thread is not about the cell calls or other fantastical theories you like to debunk. Cant you see it boone? You have failed to suppoort the official story and actually you have destroyed the official story for lurkers to this site with your alice in wonderland take on reality.


No plane crashed in Shanksville as the Original post PROVED.....


Thanx for coming out.


[edit on 28-6-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 28-6-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:22 PM
link   
The lady describing the "plane" coming right towards her said it made no noise.

This missle was probably a new smart bomb, unpowered, that no one of us is even aware of.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


look dude, you are going to have to do a little more then post videos from a lady with a HORRIBLE recollection of what happened, and even at point recalling things that seem god damn impossible for a BIG ass plane like a 747

if you aren't going to back up you claims that they are "faked, and incredible" then you are no better then the rest of the over zealous liars out there.





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join