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.

 

No Flight 93 Passengers on 9/11 Compensation List; UA 9/11 Planes Still Flying

page: 6
35
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Finding it difficult to believe ALL of that data could be changed as in some 'plot' to cover-up.


Hey Captain Weedwhacker, long time! When you're factoring the many anomalies of 9/11, the weirdness never ends. Nothing is as it seems.

Have you ever spent any time on the Pilots For 9/11 Truth site?

Just curious if you have any issues with their data or conclusions.



[edit on 31-1-2009 by GoldenFleece]




posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece


Fact: One of your debunker friends on page 1 of this thread posted the exact same information that I had.

Fact: 55% is a far cry from the 99.65% of WTC families who accepted government compensation. AA 11's 51% is even less.

Why do you suppose half the families of the 9/11 flight victims passed on compensation that averaged over two million dollars?






First of all. You are wrong on the SSDI. This, I proved to you. You want to take it further? Google a plane crash in the United States. Search the SSDI. You will find MANY passengers missing from the SSDI list.

Second; Several families decided to pursue their own lawsuits against American Airlines, AMR Corporation, Argenbright, United Airlines, and others. This was in lieu of accepting the funding from the compensation funds.

I believe some lawsuits are still pending.
did a higher percentage accept the funding from the WTC? I don't know. Does it mean some of the passengers are alive? No.

I will tell you, as far as I know, 100% of the victims families have entered into some type of lawsuit to obtain compensation. If you can prove otherwise... feel free.

I will recheck the percentages for flight 11... I got 77%. (i may be wrong)

55% for flight 77

and 70% for flight 175



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
First of all. You are wrong on the SSDI. This, I proved to you. You want to take it further?

Sure. You haven't proved anything. Show me a plane crash where only 13% of victims show up on SSDI.


Second; Several families decided to pursue their own lawsuits against American Airlines, AMR Corporation, Argenbright, United Airlines, and others. This was in lieu of accepting the funding from the compensation funds.

I believe some lawsuits are still pending.

Would that be "several" or half the families of UA 93 and AA 77? Seven years later, lawsuits are still pending? What do you think they're holding out for after passing on $2 million average settlements?


I will tell you, as far as I know, 100% of the victims families have entered into some type of lawsuit to obtain compensation. If you can prove otherwise... feel free.

Now it's up to me to prove your allegations?


I will recheck the percentages for flight 11... I got 77%. (i may be wrong)

I meant Flight 77, not 11. 33 claims out of 64 victims is 51%, no?

BTW, thanks for investigating and posting the actual compensation figures. I'm only interested in the truth, no matter where it leads.



[edit on 31-1-2009 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


DNA



In the late fall of 2001, as Shaler and his colleagues were engaged in the slow work of conducting DNA tests on the thousands of fragments from Ground Zero, pathologists at the Pennsylvania and Pentagon sites were moving much more quickly.


Again, again, again! I was addressing the Towers. NOT the Pentagon, NOT PA.

I still wonder about both of those as well, though. There was very little at the "crash" site in PA at all - let alone "remains." And the Pentagon... Gee... Could anyone have been in charge of planting evidence...or SAYINg they found evidence...?

Oh, I'm sure those that engineered this were not bright enough to put SOMETHING out there to "corroborate" their 19 crazed Arabs (and all the rest of it) story.

And as for the tooth... Gee. If *I* was planting evidence, I might think of such a "clever" place...

[edit on 1/31/2009 by Amaterasu]



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Sure. You haven't proved anything. Show me a plane crash where only 13% of victims show up on SSDI.


Depends on the crash. I can tell you a couple quick ones. (i am not spending Sat night doing death index searches...

I can tell you flight 1420 is missing 20% of the fatalities on the SSDI

Space Shuttle Challenger is 4 of the 7 of the astronauts on the SSDI

Space Shuttle Columbia - 2 of the 5 American Astronauts are not on it.

Station Nightclub Fire in Rhode Island:

I only searched the first 25 (in alphabetical order)

12 were not listed on the index.

What I am showing here, is that the SSDI index can prove you are dead. However , it does not prove that you're alive.






Would that be "several" or half the families of UA 93 and AA 77? Seven years later, lawsuits are still pending? What do you think they're holding out for after passing on $2 million average settlements?


There were several that had a lawsuit that was pending up until 2007 or 2008.

Wrongful death lawsuits take many years to complete.





I meant Flight 77, not 11. 33 claims out of 64 victims is 51%, no?


Agreed


BTW, thanks for investigating and posting the actual compensation figures. I'm only interested in the truth, no matter where it leads.



You're very welcome.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Sure. You haven't proved anything. Show me a plane crash where only 13% of victims show up on SSDI.


Depends on the crash. I can tell you a couple quick ones. (i am not spending Sat night doing death index searches...

I can tell you flight 1420 is missing 20% of the fatalities on the SSDI.


Nonetheless, there's a big difference between missing 20% of the fatalities and comprising 13%.

We could go back and forth on the particulars all night, but the fact is there are WAY too many anomalies that just don't add up in nearly every aspect of 9/11. Unfortunately, the government is either unwilling or incapable of clearing it up.

But I do appreciate the FBI's honesty in acknowledging that "there's no hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden to 9/11."



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Nonetheless, there's a big difference between missing 20% of the fatalities and comprising 13%.


This is your thread...

"No Flight 93 Passengers on 9/11 Compensation List; UA 9/11 Planes Still Flying"

Both points of your title have been refuted.

I did not do a SSDI search on flight 93, nor do I want to. It is a fact that in tragic events, there are many that do not end up on the list. This you can not deny. Please tell me, with all respect.... what is your point with the 13% of the fatalities listed on the SSDI ?

As far as other anomalies, I would encourage you to start a separate thread for each one. Try not to derail yourself.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
Both points of your title have been refuted.

Hardly. I'll concede that none is incorrect, but there's still something very wrong when 99%+ of WTC victim's families have accepted a settlement while barely 50% of UA 93 and AA 77 families have. Passing up $2 mil for what will likely end up as a big fat goose egg doesn't make sense.

And I'm not convinced Flight 93 wasn't switched around Cleveland, similar to the Operation Northwoods plan. You seem to have missed my questions about the twin tail numbers of pre-flight 93:


On Sept 10th 2001, Flight 0078 (N591UA) arrived in Newark from SFO (San Fransisco) at 6:54 wheel on time. However, Flight 0507, with the same tail number, 591UA departed Boston Logan for ORD (Chicago) at 7:39 wheel off time, as current screenshots show. How is this possible?



Also, Boston does not have records of N591UA arriving at Logan that day and Newark only has it departing once at 19:40 PM EST.



There seems to be a problem here. It had 45 mins from touchdown in San Francisco before it left in another city.



Recently reestablished, the "official Flight 93" began as a scheduled service from EWR (Newark) to SFO on September 5th 2001, but the first Tuesday flight in 2001, was on 9-11; there was no Newark to SF flight before.



On September 11th, BTS shows 591UA for "Flight93" with a Wheels-off Time at 08:28 AM EST, but which tail departed?


And did it really reach Shanksville?



I did not do a SSDI search on flight 93, nor do I want to. It is a fact that in tragic events, there are many that do not end up on the list. This you can not deny. Please tell me, with all respect.... what is your point with the 13% of the fatalities listed on the SSDI?

Just pointing out one of the many aspects of 9/11 that don't add up or make sense.


As far as other anomalies, I would encourage you to start a separate thread for each one. Try not to derail yourself.

Most of them have already been discussed ad nauseum. And I wouldn't want you to repeat your staunch defenses of the official story.




[edit on 31-1-2009 by GoldenFleece]



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Just when I thought I'd heard most of the hundreds of anomalies about 9/11 (maybe it's THOUSANDS of anomalies!)


Flight 93: of the 45 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 6 are listed in the Social Security Death Index (13%.)

Of these 45 people, NONE are on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list:

No one.



Something is odd with the serial numbers of Flight 93 and Flight 175. The serial numbers of the ORIGINAL planes are SAME serial numbers of the planes that ARE STILL FLYING: 591UA and 612UA.

Dulce argues, that even though N-number can be transferred, the manufacturer serial number CANNOT be transferred.

According to some spot-witnesses, Boeing 757-222 SERIAL NUMBER 28142 is flying around Chicago under the alias 594UA.

According to the FAA, N594UA Boeing 757-222 flies now with a DIFFERENT serial number, namely 28145.

Something is fishy.


www.rense.com...

"Fishy" isn't the right word. More like "greatest criminal deception in U.S. history."




Awesome source.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Yeah I don't make a lot of friends laughing at paranoids here, but it sure is fun. Here, let me link to some nonsensical blog, maybe it'll get me props from the other crazies!

www.gullible.net



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
......there's still something very wrong when 99%+ of WTC victim's families have accepted a settlement while barely 50% of UA 93 and AA 77 families have. Passing up $2 mil for what will likely end up as a big fat goose egg doesn't make sense.



Actually:


To date, nearly 3,000 families have agreed to more than $7 billion in private settlements that averaged $2 million each from the federal Victims Compensation Fund. Another 96 families initially held out for trial but have since settled.

visibility911.com...
(Article from the Boston Herald)



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperViking
 

If you think people who seek truth are "paranoid", perhaps you're in the wrong place.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Oh, I'm definitely in the right place.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   
And you're up to 3 points! Nicely done...



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Why would I care about points again? As opposed to say...facts? Seriously, look at your source. Are you kidding? In what world does that equal anything more than someone's blog? And you're using it as the basis of your argument?



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
There's more truth on Rense than the entire MSM combined.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Well, if you believe that, I'm sure you'll find evidence of conspiracies left and right. I wouldn't trust anything, either.



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Keep getting your "news" from the corporate-controlled media and congratulate yourself how informed you are compared to those "paranoids."



posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Keep getting your "news" from the corporate-controlled media and congratulate yourself how informed you are compared to those "paranoids."


I don't get my "news" from the "corporate-controlled media". I mean, other than sports scores and movie reviews and such. I'm an intel analyst for the CSS- I get my news straight from the horse's mouth. I'd say trust me, but I know you won't- anyway the news is much more like what you get on BBC than what you see on rense or infowars. Much, much, much more real.

I'm sorry that it upsets you, but what I want to know is WHY that upsets you? Are you unhappy with life in general and wish it was different? Do you feel out of place and assume it's because the world is being manipulated? What is it?



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join