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.

 

KT Challenge@Shanksville

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

Originally posted by tezzajw

Notice how CameronFox is using a typical debunker tactic, trying to steer the thread away from the original post.

This is a thread about Killtown's challenge for the alleged crash of the alleged Flight 93. It's got nothing to do with Cameron's other plane crash.

Stay on topic, CameronFox.


Hmmm... Someone posts a video with dance music being played showing pictures of a massive tragedy. During this video it throws out a ridiculous "Challenge." As I posted above, Killtown knows what photographs were made available to the public. He hand waved all of that (Along with all the other evidence) away.

I simply showed that there is not a lot of an aircraft left that crashes at a high speed. If you watched the video of flight 1771 Tezz, you will see the eerily similar reports that almost parallel those of flight 93.

If you feel my posts are off topic, please click the ALERT button at the bottom of my posts. I am sure the MODS will remove them if they feel it is necessary.


Cameron, is it ridiclous to ask for proof of something that has NEVER happened before, a large commercial aircraft burying itself underground? I think it is ridiculous that there is no hard evidence to prove one did.

You say there is not a lot of aircraft left at high speeds, but you earlier said that 95% of Flight 93 was recovered, so which is it?

D.Duck




posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 06:03 AM
link   
I don't want to see body parts,CF.One good time stamped photo of the crane pulling one major airplane part with a magnet from the now excavated hole would definitely not be ignored by me or any honest questioner.They pulled the plane from the bottom of the Ocean fer crying out loud to find the cause of the fuel tank explosion,I saw plenty of those pictures as the plane was reassembled in a hangar.Same with the penta-con hole,no plane.Just one small bit of engine,unscorched by any observation.In both cases,No ID numbers.I liked your merkin mutt picture,BTW.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by D.Duck

Cameron, is it ridiclous to ask for proof of something that has NEVER happened before, a large commercial aircraft burying itself underground? I think it is ridiculous that there is no hard evidence to prove one did.


Has a commercial airliner ever been deliberately crashed into an old strip mine at that speed?

I have shown you a similar high speed aircraft crash. You failed to comment on it.

Tell me, what do you think should have happened to flight 93 if it crashed the way the witnesses and FDR said it did?



You say there is not a lot of aircraft left at high speeds, but you earlier said that 95% of Flight 93 was recovered, so which is it?

D.Duck


Nice try. You know what I meant.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by trueforger
I don't want to see body parts,CF.One good time stamped photo of the crane pulling one major airplane part with a magnet from the now excavated hole would definitely not be ignored by me or any honest questioner.


I am personally satisfied with the abundance of evidence. All I can suggest you do is file a FOIA with the FBI or UA. As I told wonderwoman, I have the contact information to UA. If you would like me to give you that info. U2U me.

Thanks TF

-CF

[edit on 28-3-2009 by CameronFox]



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Speaking of pictures,I saw a u tube a while ago about the crater being extant before the actual perps on that Fateful Day decided to use it as their prop 'set' and can't find it.It shewed a google earth focus on the site and (surprise!) there it was.I wasn't gonna bring it up until I found it,but now would be a good time.Anybody?

[edit on 28-3-2009 by trueforger]



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by trueforger
 


Trueforger....here is the picture. As you can see, the "scar" was not there in 2001 and it does not line up with the scar from flight 93.





posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by CameronFox
 

Uh..Thanks for the picture,Sir.So you're saying the picture with the red square is what the precise crash site looked like back in the 1990's?Because that would agree with the picture I saw allegedly from google earth.And you say the existing scar doesn't line up with the later,purported,crash site?This line of thought disproves the theory that they are somehow (diabolically)connected.Is this an accurate summation of your position?The plane crashed in a spot merely adjacent to a scar,a pre existing hole,which just happened to look a lot like the later alleged crashed airplane hole?And which crash must have obliterated visual evidence of the pre existing hole as it is not visible on the later crime scene photo's?And does this hole at the time of the picture contain airplane parts,etc.?


[edit on 29-3-2009 by trueforger]

[edit on 29-3-2009 by trueforger]



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by trueforger
Uh..Thanks for the picture,Sir.


Uh, your very welcome. You can find the original here:
terraserver-usa.com...



So you're saying the picture with the red square is what the precise crash site looked like back in the 1990's?


1994 to be precise.


Because that would agree with the picture I saw allegedly from google earth.


cool


And you say the existing scar doesn't line up with the later,purported,crash site?


You have seen both photographs. Besides vision impaired people, I don't think anyone will see differently.



This line of thought disproves the theory that they are somehow (diabolically)connected.


Correct


Is this an accurate summation of your position?The plane crashed in a spot merely adjacent to a scar,a pre existing hole,which just happened to look a lot like the later alleged crashed airplane hole?And which crash must have obliterated visual evidence of the pre existing hole as it is not visible on the later crime scene photo's?And does this hole at the time of the picture contain airplane parts,etc.?


The photo was taken in 1994. 7 years prior to flight 93 crashing there. We don't know what that area looked like.



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Hi, everyone this is my first post.
I just want to say I do not believe in the official story, I think the government is hiding the truth about everything, when it comes to 911.
I have not seen any proof that supports the government story on flight 93 as wonderwoman has proved.

I do not believe a plane crashed in that hole in Shanksville. However, I would be more inclined to believe flight 93 was shot down by a military plane that eyewitness saw moments after an explosion.



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 09:07 PM
link   
So OK,Mr.Fox,we are in agreement this is the scar/turned/hole area.(Good whatever it was,hoax or downed airliner,didn't hit the farmhouse just above)I'm not sure where to go from here.We are both looking at the same data and yet seeing two entirely different scenarios.This is where actual dated photos or better,video would come into play.

As it stands,if the Official Story as laid out here is believed,it just adds to the long list of imponderables,unlikelihoods and singular defiances of natural laws that is 9-11.

I don't want to give the NWO crowd ideas but if they had done a bit of CGI they could have shut us all up,here,at the pentagon and twin towers.Must not care is all I can think.They had plenty of time as the warnings went"ignored" and money.

Well at least,thanks for keeping it entertaining,Mr.Fox.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by trueforger
 


I don't understand your reasoning. The markings on the strip mine were caused by water draining. You can clearly see the water in the photo from 1994.

In the 2001 photo post impact, you can see it.

Is there an anomaly here that I am missing?

-CF



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
reply to post by trueforger
 


I don't understand your reasoning. The markings on the strip mine were caused by water draining. You can clearly see the water in the photo from 1994.

In the 2001 photo post impact, you can see it.

Is there an anomaly here that I am missing?

-CF


CF,

haha, yea you missed just about everything.

There is NO PLANE in the hole,lol.

D.Duck



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   

posted by CameronFox
reply to post by trueforger
 


I don't understand your reasoning. The markings on the strip mine were caused by water draining. You can clearly see the water in the photo from 1994.

In the 2001 photo post impact, you can see it.

Is there an anomaly here that I am missing?


posted by D.Duck

haha, yea you missed just about everything.

There is NO PLANE in the hole,lol.


However allegedly there was this rusty old thing taken out of the hole. Methinks maybe that bucket arrived at the hole with that rusty old boneyard piece already sitting in it.



Original Moussaoui Trial exhibit

Dang. Another alleged 9-11 aircraft piece of evidence with only one known photo taken of it. This 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY just gets crazier and crazier. They expect us to believe that alleged 6 ton RB-211 turbofan engine only buried about a foot underground in soft soil at 563 mph?



Yeah!! Right!!



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   
The vid I saw superimposed the alleged crash scene hole on top of the prior hole or scar.It was quite easy to do as there are clear points such as the buildings and roads.It was an exact fit.(Helps when the viewpoints are identical.)

I have been looking for it for two hours now,mostly watching the same oles I have seen already,my head is spinning,but no go yet.Someone will cough it up if it has to be me.There are so many!

I'd like to do the "Clockwork Orange"treatment with all of these Official Story rhetocalizers.Two weeks of the Camera-on-folx!No sleeping!

On the other side,all the evidence purported by the Apologists would make a short movie,one picture from here,a couple from the Pentacon,the cop finding the passport in NYC,etc.Even the buildings fell fast.Tragedy plus time equals comedy?Not enough time has passed for me,I'm even more angry especially after watching all this,especially the LIARS."No one could have..."



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by trueforger
The vid I saw superimposed the alleged crash scene hole on top of the prior hole or scar.It was quite easy to do as there are clear points such as the buildings and roads.It was an exact fit.(Helps when the viewpoints are identical.)


I have never seen it. There are other photographs showing scars prior to 911... no that show a perfect match, however.


I'd like to do the "Clockwork Orange"treatment with all of these Official Story rhetocalizers.Two weeks of the Camera-on-folx!No sleeping!


Not nice to promote violence on ATS sir.



On the other side,all the evidence purported by the Apologists would make a short movie,one picture from here,a couple from the Pentacon,the cop finding the passport in NYC,etc.Even the buildings fell fast.Tragedy plus time equals comedy?Not enough time has passed for me,I'm even more angry especially after watching all this,especially the LIARS."No one could have..."


I hope you are directing your anger in the appropriate direction. Don't be angry with me, I only post the facts. (and an occasional opinion)




posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Found it.It's utube,"The Flight 93 Fraud-Smoking Gun Evidence"by godspeed 2012.
Put that in your smoking gun.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston


Dang. Another alleged 9-11 aircraft piece of evidence with only one known photo taken of it. This 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY just gets crazier and crazier. They expect us to believe that alleged 6 ton RB-211 turbofan engine only buried about a foot underground in soft soil at 563 mph?




1- Please use this thread to post a list of those that are experienced in aircraft accident investigations that agree with you.

2- Then tell me, how you know this piece of an engine was taken from "about a foot underground".

It's interesting how on post you will say you can't see a plane. Then on another you are saying that the parts SHOULD be deeper in the ground. Which is it Spreston?



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by trueforger
Found it.It's utube,"The Flight 93 Fraud-Smoking Gun Evidence"by godspeed 2012.
Put that in your smoking gun.


You think those scars line up??? Dude. this godspeed guy is not being quite honest with you. I showed you the photogrpahs. you see that It does not line up. HE showed you the same one and SPUN the picture and went to a different screen. Really! Watch it again.

THEN... he posts airplane crashed that were from attempted "belly up" crashed. NOT intentional high speed 40 degree crashed. I posted the on from flight 1771 that although not exact... was a high speed crash that had VERY similar consequences. Surprising how this is just hand waved.



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by CameronFox
 

2- Then tell me, how you know this piece of an engine was taken from "about a foot underground".


We do not know, but it could have been taken at some aircraft bone yard for all we know.
No one knows where those pictures where taken, we can only speculate.

Camronfox, where is the plane?



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Judging from those other plane crash photos,I would say they don't drive into the ground like a nail or a straw into a tree in a hurricane,rather they splat as the lighter parts stop and the heavier parts continue on through.And the wings are fuel tanks.There would be all kinds of light weight aluminum skin and insulation all over the ground.And a big fire on either side.And pictures.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join