A REAL AIRPLANE CRASH! Did you see pieces like this at the Flight 93 crash site?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:35 AM
link   
www.410film.com...

I hope this video works!

This is what we should have seen in Shanksvill.
You can clearly tell a plane crash here.




posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:45 AM
link   
But your supposed to follow blindly and agree with what the government of the USA tells you !

Its the war on terra isn't it ? or was that war for oil ? or was that war for... Oh hell, they wanted a war so they 'wagged the dog'.

Flight 93 was a joke from the very start. When that coroner turned up and said that he stopped being a coroner two minutes after arrival because there were no bodies, not even a drop of blood.

Nice video by the way.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 02:21 AM
link   
Here's what we saw instead -- nothing but a smoking crater:



How gullible are people, anyway?



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 02:33 AM
link   
AHHHHH I am tired of this JUNK! I watched your vid (and I am a lucas fan thanks for a direction on where to go to find more of his work) Now watch mine!




posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 02:34 AM
link   
Hey lets not get carried away with 'proof' & 'physical evidence'.

If your govt tells you a pink elephant crashed there then that must be what happened. Dont believe what your eyes & commonsense tells you.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by cashlink
 


Connie Kalitta may have a few screws loose from his days driving dragsters, but even he wont let his pilots hotdog his aircraft. The pictures you posted were of an aircraft that hit the ground at shallow angle (pretty belly first) at a relatively slow speed (compared to Flight 93). Flight 93 hit the ground in a high speed dive.

Comparing the Kalitta jet accident to Flight 93, is like comparing Grandma's Lumina which hit a tree at 30 MPH to a teenager's Lumina hitting a bridge abutment at 100 MPH. Totally different impact, totally different destruction.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Flight 93 hit the ground in a high speed dive.


Flight 800 hit the water in a high speed dive and the Navy still found enough pieces to do a reconstruction.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by titorite
AHHHHH I am tired of this JUNK! I watched your vid (and I am a lucas fan thanks for a direction on where to go to find more of his work) Now watch mine!



Wow, great stuff!

I freely admit that in the battle of the 'No wreckage from Flight 93" videos, you're the clear winner.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


No it didn't. Flight 800 broke up in midair. So there were large pieces falling down impacting the water. A PIECE of flight 800 hit the water in a high speed dive, but the plane was already in pieces when it hit.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
No it didn't. Flight 800 broke up in midair.


Please do research on Flight 800. Do not make me show the reports again.

Flight 800 broke into 2 large pieces. IT DID NOT BREAK UP IN MIDAIR.

Flight 800 hit the water doing several hundred miles an hour and broke into millions of pieces, yet the Navy found enough to do a reconstruction.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Wait a minute. It broke into two large pieces, but didn't break up in midair???
How does it breaking into two large pieces NOT mean that it broke up in midair????

[edit on 7/10/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Nice post.

Upon viewing all the pictures of the alleged crash site of flight 93, it becomes quite clear that no boeing 757 crashed in Shanksvillle on 911.

Wargames. Exercises. Real world



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 08:08 PM
link   


A REAL AIRPLANE CRASH! Did you see pieces like this at the Flight 93 crash site?



Wow you found some pictures of an aircraft crash. Guess what
not all crashes are alike. A plane hitting at low speed and shallow
angle such as during takeoff/landing accident will leave large pieces
of wreckage.

Flight 93 was not such a crash - it hit at 500 knots (580mph) rolled on
its back with a steep nose down angle . An impact like this will smash
the aircraft in small fragments and leave such pieces scattered over
wide area.

Here are some pictures of Flight 93 wreckage

piece of fuselage





other debris



jet engine



bin of aircraft wreckage from Flight 93



Here is another crash - one which I have first hand knowledge. It crashed
down the street from me. Walked crash scene marking body parts
for coroner.

Hit nose down at 350mph - not much left, biggest part was 2 x 3 ft section
of tail fin, piece of landing gear flew 75 yards and hit parked car



Four people, two crew members and two passengers, were believed by Federal investigators and the police to have been aboard the Lear 35 jet. The police could not confirm the number, or identities, of the victims ''We're dealing with body parts, not bodies,'' Chief Joseph Ranney said. ''Identification will be very difficult.'' Airplane parts were scattered in small pieces throughout the site on Garrett Mountain. Flames Higher Than Treetops




At the site, at Rifle Camp Road and Washington Drive near the Great Notch Reservoir, Federal, police and fire investigators sifted through the remains. The parts of the plane were scattered beneath trees, shrubs and rocks, and the smell of jet fuel permeated the air. The residents of nearby homes and the condomnium complex said the explosion rattled their homes and the flames lighted the early morning sky.


Looked lot like Flight 93 crash scene....



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Partial reconstruction....in an attempt to figure out exactly what knocked Flight 800 out of the air. Far different from Flight 93



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


any photos or video proof how the plane crashed? How you know the
plane was belly up going 580 mph?



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


So, it is "NOT" possible for the Government to stage flight 93 crash scene?

Should We, "believe" everything that we are told by our Government?

Should We believe what our media tell us?

So far the Government has "LIED" to us about 911.

Lied to us in to a war!

FAA was not aloud to invesigate the Crash scene of flight 93, I wonder why.
Maybe because no plane crash in that little hole.

Come on, do you think we are all fools in here.

I dont care how fast , how high, straight down, sideways, backwards,that plane came down, That is not a Crash sight scene that we have been shown in Shanksvillle. Call it what you want BUT NO PLANE CRASH IN THAT HOLE!

I dont watch tv news to hear lies!



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by thedman
 


So, it is "NOT" possible for the Government to stage flight 93 crash scene?

Should We, "believe" everything that we are told by our Government?

Should We believe what our media tell us?

So far the Government has "LIED" to us about 911.

Lied to us in to a war!

FAA was not aloud to invesigate the Crash scene of flight 93, I wonder why.
Maybe because no plane crash in that little hole.

Come on, do you think we are all fools in here.

I dont care how fast , how high, straight down, sideways, backwards,that plane came down, That is not a Crash sight scene that we have been shown in Shanksvillle. Call it what you want BUT NO PLANE CRASH IN THAT HOLE!

I dont watch tv news to hear lies!








Okay, nope, not possible for them to stage it...too many people in the area that saw Flight 93.

Should you believe everything you are told? Sometimes..sometimes not.

The government hasnt lied to you about 9/11. May not have ALL the details yet, but you have the majority of the story.

Nope, we were not lied into a war. You really should go back and find all the speeches made by the President after 9/11. Actually listen or read the whole thing...and do not pay quite so much attention to the WMD parts

The NTSB investigates plane crashes, not the FAA.



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
The government hasnt lied to you about 9/11.

Glad to hear that.

I feel better.


Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Nope, we were not lied into a war... and do not pay quite so much attention to the WMD parts.

Except for the WMD parts, how did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

.

[edit on 11-7-2008 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Wait a minute. It broke into two large pieces, but didn't break up in midair???
How does it breaking into two large pieces NOT mean that it broke up in midair????


You misunderstand, it did not break up into small pieces in mid air as you implied.

It broke into small pieces upon hitting the water at several hundred miles an hour.



posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Partial reconstruction....in an attempt to figure out exactly what knocked Flight 800 out of the air. Far different from Flight 93


Exactly, Flight 800 was investigated as a crime and reconstruction done as part of the investigation. Just like Flight 93 is a crime and reconstruction should have been done as part of the investigation.





top topics
 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join