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.

 

Flight 93 Did Not Crash In Shanksville or Shot Down.

page: 8
30
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


After his shananigans on the thread, I see your point there
But there is no way I believe that aircraft just "wasn't there" regardless of how little debris that was actually recovered or shown, it was shot down. These guys are even denying Rumsfeld's own words here now. To me, thats desperate to make a claim of no plane!!

[edit on 25-1-2010 by mikelee]




posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by Lillydale
 


After his shananigans on the thread, I see your point there


If an aircraft was destroyed near Shanksville PA on Sept. 11 2001 --
Who was at the controls?



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


Don't know, wasn't there. Do you know?



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


Right on pardoner.
There is not a spook here on ATS that can touch this totally dynamite info. S&F



posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


Talking about the theory in which I don't agree with.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Let's leave other Members alone or Warnings are next

Stay On Topic Please

Thank you

Semper



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:21 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Debris From Flight 93 Was Scattered Far From the Crash Site
The accounts of many eyewitnesses and the shape of the impact crater confirm that Flight 93 plunged into the ground from a nearly vertical trajectory. Yet pieces of plane debris were found far from the crash site, in three separate debris fields.

Primary Debris Field: 2000 Feet Wide:
A crater 10 feet deep marked the center of the primary debris field. A sector of one engine weighing one ton was found 2,000 yards away. This was the single heaviest piece recovered from the crash, and the biggest, apart from a piece of fuselage the size of a dining-room table.
[ Independent, 8/13/02 ]

Indian Lake and New Baltimore: 3 and 8 Miles Away:
Eyewitnesses reported crash debris floating in Indian Lake, several miles from the crash site.
[ Post Gazette, 9/13/01 ]



"A second debris field was around Indian Lake about 3 miles from the crash scene. Some debris was in the lake and some was adjacent to the lake. "More debris from the plane was found in New Baltimore, some 8 miles away from the crash.
[ CNN.com, 9/13/01 ]

Also, according to jurors and others at the ZM trial, the last seconds of the cockpit voice recorder are the loud sounds of wind, hinting at a possible hole somewhere in the fuselage. What caused the smoke and explosion? Why the wind sounds?

The debris trail supports the second possibility: a decompression miles east of the primary crash site suggests the passengers had gained control and reversed direction before being shot down. If 9/11 was an inside job, the landing of Flight 93 may have exposed the plan.

The wind that day was 9 mph, and could not have carried debris from the impact crater to locations 8 miles away.

Regardless of what anyone thinks that it didn;t crash or was not shot down, there is MORE evidence to point to a shoot down than the theory provided in this thread. With that stated, I'm done here because apparently people cannot just talk about the topic.


[edit on 26-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


Do you think there were people in the airceaft you think was shot down?



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


Which parts of the supposed aircraft would borough deeper into the earth--- A 1 ton engine or a body or a seat?



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:15 AM
link   
As stated in the begining of this thread, I posted that this was something I would look into because I did not hear about "no plane at Shanksville" before. I even gave the OP an S & F for his hard work on the thread because I know how much goes into thread development. Even in spite of some attacks on me in this thread I WAS doing research into this and being a fair individual that I am, I have been looking at this video along with others and can state I "see" the possibility of this perhaps being true.

I'm not 100% convinced but I am 95% convinced though.




posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


Going by physics, the 1 ton engine.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


I still have reservations because of something I can't post here due to there is no way to provide any proof or evidence whatsoever. With that I'm going to remain 95% convinced that the topic of this thread is indeed possible.

And with that, we ALL need to be open to other ideas other than our own regardless of what they are or even if they conflict with what we believe or want to believe.


[edit on 26-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


Fair enough.
Are you aware of the FBI paying phone companies to basically seal their records in a fraudulent way?
I am sorry I can't watch the vid I am on dial up.
Do you have information on the folks that have attended memorial services at Shanksville.
There are always far more media than friends and family of the supposed dead.
Strange.

[edit on 26-1-2010 by Donny 4 million]



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by wholetruth

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by wholetruth
 


Or perhaps you cannot handle the "holetruth" either?


yea, ok.

maybe you can name one human being directed involved in some form of 9/11 that you have directly spoken with? can you?

think if you asked your hero donald rumsfeld is the government is lying about shanksville he will tell you that they are?

susan mcelwain will.
viola saylor will.
john fleegle will.
tom spinelli will.

so will others if you actually talked to them instead of being a god damn internet conspiracy theorist.


Where did the plane go then?


after it didn't crash in the field and flew over indian lake?

i dont know thats why i am demanding a new investigation.



Did aliens take it away?


no but perhaps they recovered the 757 you believe crashed somewhere else with no one else noticing?

i mean you believe flight 93 was shot down therefor it had to crash somewhere.

WHERE??????



Did the passengers never exist either?


perhaps they are as real as the college kids going on vacation are that were written about in operation northwoods. couple cia actors go on tv and cry and everyone believes them.

ever consider a possibility like that?



If it wasn't shot down nor crashed then where is the plane & passengers?


if it was shot down where did it crash?

if you say you dont know and thats why you want a new investigation then you dont know that it was shot down.

YOU'RE BANKING ON THE CREDIBILITY OF DONALD RUMSFELD.


Very good post. Thank you very much for your hard work.

There seems to be some people on this thread that pretend to be truthers. They want to put you on ignore because you offer evidence that destroys the official story. These same people claim that a plane crashed when there is no evidence for one yet they promote holograms, tv fakery, missiles at the wtc and other nonsensical theories that have been debunked years ago by thruthers. They have also been exposed as being agent provocateurs or fake 911 truthers or debunkers posing as truthers offering up stupid theories just so they can log on as a debunker and debunk themselves or tag their debunker buddy to debunk them gaining false credibility.

So the facts are that Flight 93 did not crash in Shanksville. All the witnesses seem to point at that conclusion. The witnesses all claim to see a craft, some say it was white, others say it was small, others say it was rightside up the others say upside down.

The evidence from the crash site according to the witnesses you interviewed prove the official story false. They all say something flew over indian lake at the time or before the explosions sound.


[edit on 26-1-2010 by Shadow Herder]



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Personally speaking, i believe everyone else in the 911 forum has debunked it several times over. Because I think we all agree an aircraft crashed there, we just ain't sure or agree on how it got there.


Wrong. Only 2-5 people here actually want people to believe a Boeing 757 did when obviously one didnt. It hasnt been debunked at all. Quite a broad false assumption.


You believe it was shot down and left that little 10x20ft crater when that theory has been debunked back in 2001. Thats 8+ years ago. No one seems to support that theory unless it was the missile pod, hologram or tv fakery people.


As you can see in these next images. The possiblility that it was caused by a Boeing 757 is next to NIL. The witnesses claim not to see flight 93 but a'plane' or 'craft' some say it was van-sized others said it was like a missile. Not one person claims it was a commercial airliner especially the size of a Boeing 757.

What is usually mistaken for wings marks is not at all. Those impressions were there before the crater was created.






Dont let the 3-4 resident debunkers here at this site fool you with their double speak and contradicting ignorant lies. Research this yourself. The shootdown theory over Shanksville is disinformation and usually propagated by debunkers posing as 911 truthers to discredit, conquer and divide the movement.


The flyover indian Lake has been proven and fortified by witness statements which completely contradicts the official conspiracy or story.

Edit to add.... I noticed the image in the 1st post on page one is cut off. Here is the full image

As you can see if you read the 1st page post carefully you would see that the official documentation of Flight 93 is false.


[edit on 26-1-2010 by Shadow Herder]



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
reply to post by mikelee
 


Fair enough.
Are you aware of the FBI paying phone companies to basically seal their records in a fraudulent way?
I am sorry I can't watch the vid I am on dial up.
Do you have information on the folks that have attended memorial services at Shanksville.
There are always far more media than friends and family of the supposed dead.
Strange.

[edit on 26-1-2010 by Donny 4 million]


I'm somewhat familiar and have seen where that has happened and I agree, it is strange for sure.

No, I haven't looked at the service attendance but now that you pointed it out, I will!!



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 





As you can see in these next images. The possiblility that it was caused by a Boeing 757 is next to NIL. The witnesses claim not to see flight 93 but a'plane' or 'craft' some say it was van-sized others said it was like a missile. Not one person claims it was a commercial airliner especially the size of a Boeing 757.


So if Flight 93 didnt crash there why is the nearby woods full of debris
from an 757

Wallace Miller, Somerset County Coroner, reported section forward of
wings broke off on impact and sprayed debris into the woods The rest
plowed into the impact crater




To the casual eye, it looked like solid, consolidated ground but in reality the reclaimed expanse was loose and uncompacted. When flight 93 hit the ground, the cockpit and first-class cabin broke off, scattered into millions of fragments that spread and flew like shrapnel into and through the trees 20 metres away.

A section of the engine, weighing almost a tonne, was found on the bed of a catchment pond, 200 metres downhill.

Some of the plane's cargo was found intact � 200 kilograms of mail in the hold, a Bible, its cover scorched but its pages undamaged and later, as the excavation began, the passport of one of the four hijackers.

The rest of the 757 continued its downward passage, the sandy loam closing behind it like the door of a tomb. Eventually these pieces and its human cargo � the heroes and the cowards, as a message left at the nearby temporary memorial put it � came to rest against solid rock, 23 metres below the surface.


Notice all the aircraft debris here - Even painted in United colors









So explain how all the aircraft debris came to rest here



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


Mikelee, you are forgetting one very important fact about Flight 93. What was its flight path? You are posting the map with the locations of the debris fields, and we thank you for it, but you also are not showing us the direction the aircraft was traveling prior to the crash.



The aircraft was traveling from roughly west to east. Had the plane been attacked prior to the crash, we should see debris shed off the aircraft along this route, NOT in Indian Lake or New Baltimore. The flight path never goes over any of these areas prior to the crash.

Now the common misconception about the debris found at both areas is "light debris" and what that means. Light debris, meaning papers, magazines, mail, insulation, shreds of aluminum, basically anything that can be lifted up by the force of the impact and fireball, and then carried aloft by upper winds. The flight path never went over Indian Lake or New Baltimore. And the people who reported the debris said it happened AFTER the crash, not before. This is just using some common sense and logic. I know it seems like it was shot down, but the more you look, the less and less it looks realistic, or logical. It crashed intact after being flipped over by terrorists.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join