reply to post by W3RLIED2
I don't think much people read the entire original post, they just skim through it and make their claims...those are what you call lazy readers.
Those are the ones who don't add 1 and 1 together.
I don't believe this is proof, but a step closer to the truth. Good job putting this together.
[edit on 28-6-2008 by CommanderSinclair]
The Final Nail In The Coffin: Irrefutable Proof the Flight 93 Crash Scene Is a Lie , page 4
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 02:10 PM by SRTkid86
reply to post by IvanZana
NO IT DIDN'T, it's a bunch of biased interviews by people who post their garbage on youtube. it's not a acredited journalist, hell it's not even REAL journalism. it doesn't have any experts in the field weighing in on the subject, hell it doesn't even have a believable eye witness account.
you really need to try again, you are going about it all wrong.
you didn't even make a theory of your own you just posted a bunch of vids with the occasional one liner about or below the videos.
i feel dumber for having watch them, i award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.
NO IT DIDN'T, it's a bunch of biased interviews by people who post their garbage on youtube. it's not a acredited journalist, hell it's not even REAL journalism. it doesn't have any experts in the field weighing in on the subject, hell it doesn't even have a believable eye witness account.
you really need to try again, you are going about it all wrong.
you didn't even make a theory of your own you just posted a bunch of vids with the occasional one liner about or below the videos.
i feel dumber for having watch them, i award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 02:13 PM by IvanZana
Originally posted by IvanZana
Originally posted by SRTkid86
reply to post by IvanZana
loks like an airplane hit there.
Mabey an airplane the size of a cruise missile.
The original post stands where it stands and no one has yet to debunk the information presented. It proved that the crater in Shanksville was not caused by the Flight 93 as we know it.
"No it didnt" is your answer? doesnt make sense. sorry.
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 02:16 PM by SRTkid86
reply to post by W3RLIED2
how could you get a couple hundred bodies from a plane that was carrying 45 people?
45=/=a couple hundred!!!
it's obvious you know what you are talking about
you don't even know how many people were on the plane.
how could you get a couple hundred bodies from a plane that was carrying 45 people?
45=/=a couple hundred!!!
it's obvious you know what you are talking about
you don't even know how many people were on the plane.reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 02:20 PM by SRTkid86
reply to post by IvanZana
yes, you are presenting BS videos with people who have a horrible recollection of the events claiming they saw something specific, to the point of saying what it was made of, and that it was so molded that it had NO rivets.
answer my questions and quit side stepping them and ignoring them.
WHY, didn't they interview more than just that lady? i think it's because everyone else would have said that they saw a sliver p[lane turned upside down, hit the ground at an approx angle of 80 degrees.
how are you presenting this as proogf? you don't have anything to back it up, they are biased interviews from people whom i have never heard of trying to pass their garbage off on youtube (which is the MOST unreliable, and uncredible places to get information like this, mainly because it's filled with people such as yourself, who believe whatever they are told, as long as it doesn't agree with what our evil facist gov't says)
yes, you are presenting BS videos with people who have a horrible recollection of the events claiming they saw something specific, to the point of saying what it was made of, and that it was so molded that it had NO rivets.
answer my questions and quit side stepping them and ignoring them.
WHY, didn't they interview more than just that lady? i think it's because everyone else would have said that they saw a sliver p[lane turned upside down, hit the ground at an approx angle of 80 degrees.
how are you presenting this as proogf? you don't have anything to back it up, they are biased interviews from people whom i have never heard of trying to pass their garbage off on youtube (which is the MOST unreliable, and uncredible places to get information like this, mainly because it's filled with people such as yourself, who believe whatever they are told, as long as it doesn't agree with what our evil facist gov't says)
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 02:35 PM by jprophet420
Originally posted by SRTkid86
reply to post by jprophet420
well if you are going to tell me that the crash never happened, then you surely must have a theory as to WTF happened to all the people that supposedly died in the crash, and you would be able to have a theory as to why all the families of these people are going on national news channels and confirming the things that were stated from the very beginning.
Can you read and understand English? I never told you the crash never happened.
if you can't answer those question you have just another hald way thought out, crack pot conspiracy theory that can get filed in the "this person doesn't know WTF he is talking about drawer"
I simply presented one question, and stated that answering questions one at a time is more effective than answering a question with a question.
how does the Manhattan project, and pearl harbor prove that big conspiracies can happen?
because they were huge events that were covered up successfully.
hell, you people use to at least use the Gulf of Tonkin as an example, diggin deep aren't you
I am glad that you can refer to me as 'you people' for making an intelligent logical post. I would be mildly offended if you were stereotyped in the same category as myself.
try again.
nothing was resolved from the first try, so to repeat would be futile.
[edit on 6/28/08 by SRTkid86]
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 02:51 PM by SRTkid86
reply to post by jprophet420
you're right, i apoligize for responding to your post, but i saw what you said as a general not directed at anyone post, so i just clicked reply to give a reference to what i was talking about, it wasn't realyl directed at your and i am sorry for not specifying that before hand.
what my point was, is that if you come out and make such a big theory that it never happened, then you need to be able to have a theory for all the events that transpired, like i said. the reason that the gov't explanation seems more accurate in many cases is because they can give you details and verified and confirmed documentation of the things that happened.
sure it was done hasitly as i already said, but just because they rushed it doesn't mean it was slapped together in a hurry and they didn't bother to verifiy anything, only fabricated stuff to corraborate their assertions.
nothing is done by answering a question with a question. but i never saw the OP ask the questions of whether or not it crashed there. he asserted from the very begninning that it was irrefutable proof that there was a cover up, and people asked. if the plane didn't crash there, what happened to the passengers.
please stop skimming through stuff only to find something that you want to argue about.
you're right, i apoligize for responding to your post, but i saw what you said as a general not directed at anyone post, so i just clicked reply to give a reference to what i was talking about, it wasn't realyl directed at your and i am sorry for not specifying that before hand.
what my point was, is that if you come out and make such a big theory that it never happened, then you need to be able to have a theory for all the events that transpired, like i said. the reason that the gov't explanation seems more accurate in many cases is because they can give you details and verified and confirmed documentation of the things that happened.
sure it was done hasitly as i already said, but just because they rushed it doesn't mean it was slapped together in a hurry and they didn't bother to verifiy anything, only fabricated stuff to corraborate their assertions.
nothing is done by answering a question with a question. but i never saw the OP ask the questions of whether or not it crashed there. he asserted from the very begninning that it was irrefutable proof that there was a cover up, and people asked. if the plane didn't crash there, what happened to the passengers.
please stop skimming through stuff only to find something that you want to argue about.
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 02:52 PM by SRTkid86
reply to post by A life less ordinary
or it's one that's full of holes, and one that he kind of contradicts himself with later on in the thread.
or it's one that's full of holes, and one that he kind of contradicts himself with later on in the thread.
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 03:09 PM by applebiter
Originally posted by SRTkid86
Originally posted by applebiter
reply to post by SRTkid86
No, that's crap. You don't have to have a fully fleshed out alternative theory in order to reach the conclusion that the official story is nonsense.
yes you do, because in order to CONVINCE people that it isn't what they say it is. you need to be able to have a counter point to all the details of the events, just like THEY do.
that is why they are more believable then some of your theories, because they can get into the tiny little details...
anyone can say "the space station is a hugh laser beam pointed at washinton" but unless you can tell people how it got there, who is in control, of it, and why we didn't know about this till now. chances are nobody will believe what you have to say.
Wrong again. The "tiny little details" are what prove the official story is inaccurate. The nose cone was found 8 miles from the "crater". That is a fact. Deal with it.
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 03:13 PM by IvanZana
Notice a wee problem?flight93hoax.blogspot.com...
Even if we assume the whole plane both blew up into tiny pieces or burrowed into the ground (as the official story holds), the fuselage would have had to have make some sort of crater in the ground where it hit. But there is nothing there where the fuselage should have hit.
This crater is bogus.
EDUCATE YOURSELF HERE !!--->flight93hoax.blogspot.com...
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 03:14 PM by Boone 870
reply to post by applebiter
This is the second time that you claimed the nose cone was found 8 miles from the crater. I've never heard that before, can you provide a source?
Wrong again. The "tiny little details" are what prove the official story is inaccurate. The nose cone was found 8 miles from the "crater". That is a fact. Deal with it.
This is the second time that you claimed the nose cone was found 8 miles from the crater. I've never heard that before, can you provide a source?
I dont understand how you guys can honestly believe that a plane crashed there. The hard physical evidence is
lacking!!!! a plane crash leaves a lot of destruction behind it!!!! It doesnt leave a crater in the ground thats about the size of a school bus. It
causes raging fires from jet fuel and throws debris around for a couple miles... sometimes more!!!!!!! More to the point JET ENGINES DONT DISAPEAR!!!
where are they... they found one engine... didn't even fit the plane. Wake up guys. reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 03:50 PM by weedwhacker
reply to post by W3RLIED2
we're lied 2.....human remains mostly just vaporized by the KE. the engines buried deeply, it was fairly soft ground. Did you know that the B757 actually has THREE engines? Well....not really, one on each wing, of course. (BTW, there were two engine options, wither the P/W or the RR....that's Pratt&Whitney, and Rolls Royce. United bought the P/W option).
If you've ever heard of an APU, then you know what it is already. That's the third engine I mentioned.....it is, basically, a smaller jet turbine engine, and is mounted in the rear-most part of the fuselage. Look at the tail of a B757, notice where the fuselage comes to a point, just below the rudder. That is the APU exhaust location. Also, on the right side, just above the horizontal stabilizer, is the APU intake door, it opens first as part of the start sequence, totally automated.
The APU provides electrics and pneumatics, not only for ground ops, but also in flight in an emergency.
we're lied 2.....human remains mostly just vaporized by the KE. the engines buried deeply, it was fairly soft ground. Did you know that the B757 actually has THREE engines? Well....not really, one on each wing, of course. (BTW, there were two engine options, wither the P/W or the RR....that's Pratt&Whitney, and Rolls Royce. United bought the P/W option).
If you've ever heard of an APU, then you know what it is already. That's the third engine I mentioned.....it is, basically, a smaller jet turbine engine, and is mounted in the rear-most part of the fuselage. Look at the tail of a B757, notice where the fuselage comes to a point, just below the rudder. That is the APU exhaust location. Also, on the right side, just above the horizontal stabilizer, is the APU intake door, it opens first as part of the start sequence, totally automated.
The APU provides electrics and pneumatics, not only for ground ops, but also in flight in an emergency.
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 04:00 PM by W3RLIED2
reply to post by weedwhacker
All the more reason that more than one engine should have been recovered. And yes i understand that a lot of people were vaporized on impact, but not all of them. And that still leaves debris and the crater to be accounted for on top of everything else i've stated in this thread and the previous, on that some 100 plus pages long and contains all the exact same crap as this one does. I still hear a dead horse being beaten on. Any one else????
All the more reason that more than one engine should have been recovered. And yes i understand that a lot of people were vaporized on impact, but not all of them. And that still leaves debris and the crater to be accounted for on top of everything else i've stated in this thread and the previous, on that some 100 plus pages long and contains all the exact same crap as this one does. I still hear a dead horse being beaten on. Any one else????
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 04:19 PM by Boone 870
reply to post by W3RLIED2
That's pretty funny coming from someone who doesn't know how many passengers were on the plane and then goes on to state that the crater is too small without actually showing the size of the crater and someone that claims that there should've been football field sized areas of debris when the ''official story'' shows that there was a very large area of debris that would cover several football fields and someone who brings up eyewitnesses that didn't see the plane while ignoring the witnesses that saw the plane.
Are you catching my drift?
Instead of recommending that ATS changes its motto, why don't you follow their motto and learn the details of the official story before you claim that it's a conspiracy?
ATS should change their slogan to "Ignorance must be bliss" because some of you guys gotta walk around with blinders covering your eyes. Do you even bother to watch the videos and read the content on this message board??????
That's pretty funny coming from someone who doesn't know how many passengers were on the plane and then goes on to state that the crater is too small without actually showing the size of the crater and someone that claims that there should've been football field sized areas of debris when the ''official story'' shows that there was a very large area of debris that would cover several football fields and someone who brings up eyewitnesses that didn't see the plane while ignoring the witnesses that saw the plane.
Are you catching my drift?
Instead of recommending that ATS changes its motto, why don't you follow their motto and learn the details of the official story before you claim that it's a conspiracy?
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 04:36 PM by weedwhacker
reply to post by W3RLIED2
Ya know, I am sitting on the fence with this. But I see many who just won't listen.....you say 'blinder', I say 'earplugs'.
I can only bring my expertise and familiarity with the airplanes involved that day to this discussion, and try to 'deny the ignorance' that keeps tending to creep in. Please keep in mind, the term 'ignorance' is not a pejorative.
If you don't have thousands of hours flying the B757/767, as I do, along with all of the ground training and re-current Simulator training, then you are 'ignorant' about flying the B757/767.
It is not a criticsm, it is fact. I'm ignorant of metallurgy, but I know how the engines are put together. I'm not a crash investigator, but since I've been in aviation for over three decades, so I've read a lot of crash investigation reports. Both of the engines may have broken up into a million pieces. This is why we need to separate the wheat from the chaff....and not just videos that are specific to promote a pet 'theory'....all must be brought to the table.
OK, carry on!
Ya know, I am sitting on the fence with this. But I see many who just won't listen.....you say 'blinder', I say 'earplugs'.
I can only bring my expertise and familiarity with the airplanes involved that day to this discussion, and try to 'deny the ignorance' that keeps tending to creep in. Please keep in mind, the term 'ignorance' is not a pejorative.
If you don't have thousands of hours flying the B757/767, as I do, along with all of the ground training and re-current Simulator training, then you are 'ignorant' about flying the B757/767.
It is not a criticsm, it is fact. I'm ignorant of metallurgy, but I know how the engines are put together. I'm not a crash investigator, but since I've been in aviation for over three decades, so I've read a lot of crash investigation reports. Both of the engines may have broken up into a million pieces. This is why we need to separate the wheat from the chaff....and not just videos that are specific to promote a pet 'theory'....all must be brought to the table.
OK, carry on!
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 04:38 PM by W3RLIED2
reply to post by Boone 870
Your impossible. I'm about to get censored again and lose another 500 points but are you for real???? Wheres your fuc*king evidence?? Do you do anything but twist people words back on them??? DO YOU HAVE ANY PROOF FOR YOUR CLAIMS??? Right now it seems to me that your pretty good at back talking but not so good at proving a point. Like i said 3 times now, i'm not taking any more hours up reposting the same crap that I and several hundred other people have posted already. If the 100 or so pages from the previous HUGE flight 93 thread didnt convince you there was no crash, then i'm sure as hell not going to do it this thread, which seems to be going over all the same $hit.
Until you have something more sonstructive to say, like some vids or docs that we havn't seen 100 effing times, i'm through with this crap.
Your impossible. I'm about to get censored again and lose another 500 points but are you for real???? Wheres your fuc*king evidence?? Do you do anything but twist people words back on them??? DO YOU HAVE ANY PROOF FOR YOUR CLAIMS??? Right now it seems to me that your pretty good at back talking but not so good at proving a point. Like i said 3 times now, i'm not taking any more hours up reposting the same crap that I and several hundred other people have posted already. If the 100 or so pages from the previous HUGE flight 93 thread didnt convince you there was no crash, then i'm sure as hell not going to do it this thread, which seems to be going over all the same $hit.
Until you have something more sonstructive to say, like some vids or docs that we havn't seen 100 effing times, i'm through with this crap.
reply posted on 28-6-2008 @ 04:43 PM by W3RLIED2
reply to post by weedwhacker
Good post, its true i dont have any experience with flying planes... i'm a carpenter not a pilot. I just dont see how such huge engines just disapear... Any way, blinders or ear plugs take your pick. Its impossible to change people minds when they are already made up about something. I base my beliefs upon looking at both sides objectively before i make up my mind. Some people dont look at it the same way.
Good post, its true i dont have any experience with flying planes... i'm a carpenter not a pilot. I just dont see how such huge engines just disapear... Any way, blinders or ear plugs take your pick. Its impossible to change people minds when they are already made up about something. I base my beliefs upon looking at both sides objectively before i make up my mind. Some people dont look at it the same way.
9/11: Criminal Incompetence and Ass-Covering by the Bush Administration
Posted 14 days ago with 12 member flags
Posted 14 days ago with 12 member flags
The 9/11 Hijackers: Fraud in Official Video Exhibits Uncovered
Posted 1 days ago with 7 member flags
Posted 1 days ago with 7 member flags
Ultimately the question of the origin of the funds is of little practical significance.
Posted 2 days ago with 5 member flags
Posted 2 days ago with 5 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
Madness in its sweetest form- The suppressed human mind- By MyKE K
Philosophy and Metaphysics: 31 minutes ago
Philosophy and Metaphysics: 31 minutes ago
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
UK planned war on Syria before unrest began: French ex-foreign minister
Breaking Alternative News: 11 hours ago, 16 flags
Breaking Alternative News: 11 hours ago, 16 flags
America's oldest cave paintings found, dating back 6K years
Ancient & Lost Civilizations: 9 hours ago, 16 flags
Ancient & Lost Civilizations: 9 hours ago, 16 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
If the Greys aren't real, where did the idea of them come from?
Aliens and UFOs: 13 hours ago, 93 replies
Aliens and UFOs: 13 hours ago, 93 replies
UK planned war on Syria before unrest began: French ex-foreign minister
Breaking Alternative News: 11 hours ago, 54 replies
Breaking Alternative News: 11 hours ago, 54 replies
Americans here your views on Australians posting on ATS A few Questions:
Rant: 15 hours ago, 38 replies
Rant: 15 hours ago, 38 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.325 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.325 seconds
