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.

 

Shanksville Deconstructed - Part One...

page: 10
14
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


'Captain Brice stated that they never found " parts to that airplane" away from the crater. The statement implies that there was no aircraft debris away from the impact point. But, news reports published at the time (and preserved by other Internet researchers, against the destruction of articles — which has already occurred) show that there were two debris fields away from the impact point. One field was 2.5 miles away; the other was eight miles away. I find it hard to believe that the senior crash investigator from the airline would not have known about these debris fields — especially given their unusual nature, and the fact that they were well-publicized in the Shanksville area (and beyond, thanks to the Internet). In fact, news accounts at the time stated that FBI agents were out tagging corn stalks in a farm field to show where debris pieces had landed. The key to the statement, and to the mystery of the crash, is that not all items of debris are "parts to that airplane.''
From www.renewamerica.com...

also www.flight93crash.com...
But I would not believe everything on the internet. I am mainly following my gut feeling. I also called the marina at Indian Lake.




posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
www.flight93crash.com...

more good reading. The crash site is not the whole crash site.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by hooper
 


'Captain Brice stated that they never found " parts to that airplane" away from the crater. The statement implies that there was no aircraft debris away from the impact point. But, news reports published at the time (and preserved by other Internet researchers, against the destruction of articles — which has already occurred) show that there were two debris fields away from the impact point. One field was 2.5 miles away; the other was eight miles away. I find it hard to believe that the senior crash investigator from the airline would not have known about these debris fields — especially given their unusual nature, and the fact that they were well-publicized in the Shanksville area (and beyond, thanks to the Internet). In fact, news accounts at the time stated that FBI agents were out tagging corn stalks in a farm field to show where debris pieces had landed. The key to the statement, and to the mystery of the crash, is that not all items of debris are "parts to that airplane.''
From www.renewamerica.com...

also www.flight93crash.com...
But I would not believe everything on the internet. I am mainly following my gut feeling. I also called the marina at Indian Lake.


What exactly was in these debris fields and where were they? And not 2.5 miles and 8 miles. This sounds like light material that may have blown away from the crash site.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Try the links I posted. I was wrong, the lake is only 6 miles from the "crash site". Melted plastic and bodies don't blow along the ground.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by earthdude
 



Only one child died on 911 from the attacks.


MORE propaganda....how about some FACTS:


American Flight 77 victims at a glance

Lists of victims

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At age 11, Bernard Brown already had style. He dressed sharply and made sure his clothes and accessories were always coordinated. "He was very particular about his looks. He was handsome and had charisma," says Denise Sessoms, assistant principal at Leckie Elementary School in Washington, where Bernard attended sixth grade.

............


Sarah Clark, 65, was a beloved sixth-grade teacher at Backus Middle School in Washington. She was accompanying student Asia Cottom, 11, on the National Geographic Society field trip....

Others on the National Geographic Society field trip included James Debeuneure, 58, of Upper Marlboro, Md., a fifth-grade teacher at Ketcham Elementary School in Washington, and Rodney Dickens, 11, a sixth-grader at Ketcham.


Just a opartial list...."only one child was killed"???? You can't seriously believe that crap???



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale

DO NOT TELL ME WHAT I HAVE CLAIMED BASED ON WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE CLAIMED.

If you want to discuss my claims, then please actually address them. To tell me I am wrong about what I say based on things other people you do not agree with have said is the stupidest attempt at an argument yet.


When you're bickering over how "we don't know how many people are going in and out of the WTC" I necessarily assume you're in the controlled demolitions camp, mainly becuase that claim is the foundation for the controlled deolitions scenario. If that's NOT what you subscribe to, then don't blame me, since you conspiracy people are all but getting into fistfights with each other over what the "secret conspiracy" is supposed to be, and it's easy to lose track. You truthers have more explanations of what "the real truth" is than Baskin Robbins has flavors of ice cream.

All right then, to be fair, if you DON'T believe in the controlled demolitions bit, OR the lasers from outer space bit, OR the nukes in the basement bit, OR the cruise missile at the Pentagon bit, OR the faked crash site at Shanksville bit, then what conspiracy scenario is it that you subscribe to, exactly?



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by hooper
 


Try the links I posted. I was wrong, the lake is only 6 miles from the "crash site". Melted plastic and bodies don't blow along the ground.


Actually, go take a look at google maps, the lake is only a few thousand feet from the impact point, not miles. The nearest part of the lake may be even closer.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by earthdude
 



I was wrong, the lake is only 6 miles from the "crash site".


You are still wrong. Try again.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by earthdude
 



Only one child died on 911 from the attacks.


MORE propaganda....how about some FACTS:


American Flight 77 victims at a glance

Lists of victims

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At age 11, Bernard Brown already had style. He dressed sharply and made sure his clothes and accessories were always coordinated. "He was very particular about his looks. He was handsome and had charisma," says Denise Sessoms, assistant principal at Leckie Elementary School in Washington, where Bernard attended sixth grade.

............


Sarah Clark, 65, was a beloved sixth-grade teacher at Backus Middle School in Washington. She was accompanying student Asia Cottom, 11, on the National Geographic Society field trip....

Others on the National Geographic Society field trip included James Debeuneure, 58, of Upper Marlboro, Md., a fifth-grade teacher at Ketcham Elementary School in Washington, and Rodney Dickens, 11, a sixth-grader at Ketcham.


Just a opartial list...."only one child was killed"???? You can't seriously believe that crap???




I checked the list of victims. How could it have changed? One kid, he was going on a oceonographic scholarship. Where did this other kid come from? He was not listed 2 years ago. I admit, I could have missed them. Not propaganda, just something I had observed, maybe I was wrong. I guess I researched wrong. thanks for pointing out my mistake so kindly. I sure hope the list didn't change. There was only one child killed in the building attack.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by earthdude]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by hooper
 


Try the links I posted. I was wrong, the lake is only 6 miles from the "crash site". Melted plastic and bodies don't blow along the ground.


Actually, go take a look at google maps, the lake is only a few thousand feet from the impact point, not miles. The nearest part of the lake may be even closer.


Oh god! all of my research has been changed. I really did check it years ago. I swear, I was sure I was right. Indian lake, right? You better not be a disinfo agent and be changing google maps. This has ruined my credibility. I was not trying to decieve anyone. I suspect foul data.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by earthdude
 



How could it have changed? One kid, he was going on a oceonographic scholarship.


the FACTS have not changed....it is the DISINFO that has persisted for the last eight years that has tainted everything...DISINFO put out by unscrupulous brokers who wish to profit off of the tragedies...


On September 11, 2001, 11-year-old Asia Cottom was headed to California.

She had been selected to attend a National Geographic Society ecology conference with other talented young students from around the country. Tragically, terrorists hijacked Cottom's plane and crashed into the Pentagon. No passengers survived.



www.thegrio.com... -
Do more 'research', please.



[edit on 14 October 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by hooper
 


Try the links I posted. I was wrong, the lake is only 6 miles from the "crash site". Melted plastic and bodies don't blow along the ground.


Actually, go take a look at google maps, the lake is only a few thousand feet from the impact point, not miles. The nearest part of the lake may be even closer.


Oh god! all of my research has been changed. I really did check it years ago. I swear, I was sure I was right. Indian lake, right? You better not be a disinfo agent and be changing google maps. This has ruined my credibility. I was not trying to decieve anyone. I suspect foul data.


You don't have to believe google either, go buy a USGS quad and a scale. Go buy any PA map and a scale. They will all tell you the same thing - the impact crater and the lake are not that far apart.

Also, read the reports a little closer. People claimed to have seen debris, so the FBI went and looked. Look in any lake anywhere that is inhabited, surrounded by houses, and you will produce a bag of "debris". Doesn't mean its from the plane, however.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
then what conspiracy scenario is it that you subscribe to, exactly?


Just because someone can recognize the lack of evidence for the official story doesn't mean they subscribe to any particular conspiracy scenario.

I don't pretend to know exactly what happened but I find it odd there are not photos of debris at the crash site...



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


You keep saying that as if you say it enough eventually it will be true. There are photos of wreckage at the site. Unless, of course, it happened to be raining shredded aluminum that day. Is every photo taken at the site during the investigation online - no. But there is more then enough to prove something large and metallic (like a plane) exploded, disintegrated, deconstructed, whatever at the site on 9/11. Any photos that were taken that may included the remains of the victims will never be published. As is appropriate.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Originally posted by thedman



Reason grass around FRONT of the crater is not burned (as shown in your
pictures) is that the fuel load would have been projected forward of
the impact point before igniting in massive fireball


Like this?.



Reasons jet fuel did not propel forward on WTC2.

1). The plane went into reverse gear upon impact.

2). The South face was constructed from rubber.

3). It ricocheted off the centre core.

4). Another plane hit the North face of the South tower at an identical time.

5). It was not an explosion but a reflection from the North tower of the North face explosion.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Hey- you forgot

6) Things that explode inside a box behave differently than things that explode not inside a box.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Lillydale

DO NOT TELL ME WHAT I HAVE CLAIMED BASED ON WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE CLAIMED.

If you want to discuss my claims, then please actually address them. To tell me I am wrong about what I say based on things other people you do not agree with have said is the stupidest attempt at an argument yet.


When you're bickering over how "we don't know how many people are going in and out of the WTC" I necessarily assume you're in the controlled demolitions camp, mainly becuase that claim is the foundation for the controlled deolitions scenario. If that's NOT what you subscribe to, then don't blame me, since you conspiracy people are all but getting into fistfights with each other over what the "secret conspiracy" is supposed to be, and it's easy to lose track. You truthers have more explanations of what "the real truth" is than Baskin Robbins has flavors of ice cream



Why do I feel like I am teaching English in a third world country??????????????????

Of course I am in the CD camp. I must be part of a camp, right? There is no way that I have my own thoughts is there? If I did, how would I ever indicate that to you?

How about you stop being such an ignorant fool and quit worrying about what category to put people in so you know which pool of premade talking point insults to pull from? I say what it is that I think and I only represent myself and no one else represents me in any way. If you have something to say to me about something I have said, please give it a try. If you cannot manage to pull it off this third time, I am not reading a fourth post from you.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
THE DEBRIS FIELDS

Pond where port engine fan was found.

Distance to center:1060 ft



Indian Lake

Distance to nearest edge: 1.59 miles



Indian lake Marina where whitnesses reported light debris - paper ,honeycomb /carbon fiber - ect.

Distance to marina: 2,33 miles



Close up of marina.



Church in New Baltimore Farthest report of debris: Page from inflight magazine and some canceled checks. Note marina and church are located directly down wind of the crash site. The line from the crash site to New Baltimore is the precise wind direction for that day.

Distance to church: 8.24 miles



Close up of church






[edit on 14-10-2009 by waypastvne]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Seventh
 


Hey- you forgot

6) Things that explode inside a box behave differently than things that explode not inside a box.


Tru story dat.......




posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by LaughingMan1121




Whats even more unnerving is that PDEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) took soil samples from the crash site a few days after and found no evidence of a large volume of jet fuel at the crash site. The PDEP Secretary David E. Hess stated that the the reason for lack of fuel in the soil was probably due to the consumption of the fuels by the crashs hazardous fire. There wasn't a very large fire though, at least not one that looked like it had consumed the amount of fuel clamied to be present.


I doubt you are using correct photos for your analysis. For one thing, all the photos I've seen were after they dug up every single piece of wreckage, bone, and suitcase, so any signs of scorching would have obviously been disturbed.


Scorching? Bones? You said that they wouldn't release photos of burned human remains. Also there are unscorched portions of the crash (the point the OP is trying to illustrate) like the tuft of grass growing on the side of the crater. Thats seems to me it would be a clear sign that there was a lack of any drastically large fire that should have taken place with the large amount spilled fuel. Granted the situations are different, but with the pentagon crash the fires were so hot they supposedly burned most of the planes, including the titanium engines. Why are suitcases, bones, and other objects that have a lot less resistance to heat still some what unaffected by the imense heat? Im not saying whether I think it was shot down, blown up, faked or anything else. Im making a more modest claim of suspicion. With the force and fuel remaining on board I feel that this crash site should look a lot more drastic then it does.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by LaughingMan1121]



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join