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: 9
30
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


I'm fixing to go over some the flight path / radar trackings in a bit. Thanks, your point is well recieved




posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
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


What you are implying is that the images provided in 2006 for the ZM trial was actually taken in near the crater when it has been proven that the evidence you are providing was most likely staged and fabricated. These images you provided are an insult.



To the casual eye, it looked like solid, consolidated ground but in reality the reclaimed expanse was loose and uncompacted.


Yet this craft allegedly a Boeing 757 struck the ground and did not plow or have wings for nothing resembling a Boeing 757 with the wing span or even wings at all struck the ground as you have been show countless of times. Why do you chose to ignore what has been debunked and proven to be a lie?


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.


All the images provided by the EPA during the excavation proves this statement false. Nothing was found. Just because you are regurgitating false material while ignoring real evidence does not make it true.



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


It has been proven that these images that were released in 2006 was more than likely staged and fabricated to assume that a plane (boeing 757) crashed in Shanksville when one obviously didnt.


Then this next image you provided just ruined your case entirely. Either you are trying to sell BS or you just proved that what caused the crater was not a Boeing 757. The picture you provided is not in context, no source as to where or when it was found. A total fabrication on your part considering that the diameter of the tire you show in the inner rim is much smaller than a real Boeing 757 tire inner width.
as you can see here


So explain how all the aircraft debris came to rest here

Where? When? Maybe it was loaded off a truck. Who knows but one thing is for certain. No Boeing 757 crashed to cause the small crater. Did you not read the 1st post in this thread. Eyewitnesses in which you are not confirms that what caused the crater was NOT a Boeing 757.

Its obvious that 2-5 people out of 100's of members here do not buy the official story line of a Boeing 757 crash in Shanksville on 911. All the eyewitnesses claim what they saw was not a Boeing 757 crash. The witnesses all saw something fly over indian lake prior to the crash which is opposite of the official flight path said by the official claimers.

You can sit here and tag team the thread but what you are doing is pushing more people to discover the truth. Its the official story and the evidence provided that lead people to believe one didnt so why do you bother rehashing previously debunked material, material that has been proven to be fraudulent? This is not jref. or is it?

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



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
I think if you found some family members of someone on flight 93 they would convince you that there were real dead people produced by this downing. I don't believe the passenger list was made up or the passengers lead off to extermination.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



It has been proven that these images that were released in 2006 was more than likely staged


Do you see a problem? If something is "proven" then it is, not more than likely, but is.

So please show me the "proof" that everything in these photos was staged and when and by whom and how or at least just admit that it is your opinion.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
Very good post. Thank you very much for your hard work.


thank you for your kind words.


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.


well i dont know anyone well enough here to speculate on that. it could possibly be the unresearched believing they've figured everything out while missing the most damning evidence ever gathered in regard to this aspect of the operation.




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.


to the north/northwest witnesses reported seeing a commercial airliner approaching the crash site. due to the geography all the witnesses will lose sight of it behind trees and hills. this plane is then heard flying overhead 3 miles southeast of the crash site. in a perfect straight line from where it would be expected to be if it did not crash.

then the small white plane approached and 'boom'. many witnesses see the small white plane circle the site and then fly away.

at that time another, larger, white plane approached the crash site and did a similar manuever and flew off in the opposite direction of the previous white plane.


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.


correct.

and this evidence is evidence enough to warrant a new investigation into this event.


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



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 09:54 PM
link   

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


there is no recognizable 757 debris in any of the overhead shots of the crash site.


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


yeah thats what he told me too.

looking at the blast trajectory into the trees one sees the damage comes to a point like the head of an arrow. take the deepest point of the overhead "v" damage into the woods and draw a line straight out and see how this blast trajectory lines up with the flight path.

the fbi says the plane nose dived into the ground completely contradicting miller's description.

one of them has to be wrong.



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.


this still doesn't take into account hundreds of seats, massive landing gears, and those huge tires.


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


says some foreign media i'm guessing?

so did someone photograph this evidence?


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.


but not the massive landing gears?


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








take one of the overhead photos of the crash site and please cite and illustrate where these pieces were documented or concede they could have been photographed in arlington for all you know.




LMAO!!!!!

YOU'RE MAKING UP EVIDENCE!!!

YOU'RE CAUGHT LYING.


So explain how all the aircraft debris came to rest here


i don't even know where these pieces were photographed so it could be a junk yard for all i know.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
I think if you found some family members of someone on flight 93 they would convince you that there were real dead people produced by this downing. I don't believe the passenger list was made up or the passengers lead off to extermination.


ok, fair enough.

those family members deserve a new investigation because the plane their loved ones were on didn't go down in that field.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Do you see a problem? If something is "proven" then it is, not more than likely, but is.

So please show me the "proof" that everything in these photos was staged and when and by whom and how or at least just admit that it is your opinion.


i see a problem.

if you believe this have been 'proven' to be in shanksville then please show us 'proof' that these pieces are indeed somewhere near that crater/field.

should be easy.

or just admit that you believe what the government told you and all it took was 3 photographs and a phony 4th.



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by wholetruth

Originally posted by hooper
Do you see a problem? If something is "proven" then it is, not more than likely, but is.

So please show me the "proof" that everything in these photos was staged and when and by whom and how or at least just admit that it is your opinion.


i see a problem.

if you believe this have been 'proven' to be in shanksville then please show us 'proof' that these pieces are indeed somewhere near that crater/field.

should be easy.

or just admit that you believe what the government told you and all it took was 3 photographs and a phony 4th.


They cant prove anything. Their proof is the conspiracy. You would have to be quite stupid to accept their 'evidence' as anything but total fabrication.

The fact that you' Wholetruth' have spoke with the EYEWITNESSES and have deduced that not one of them actually say a Boeing 757 crash but did see smaller craft or missile and of course the Indian lake flyover which the official fairytale says didnt happen. One is left with the fact that whatever was on the official trajectory did not crash in that small hole. Whatever caused that small hole was not Flight 93 the Boeing 757.

Good work Mate. The flight 93 official story has a big hole in it, much larger than the 10x20 foot crater being solicited as a Boeing 757 crash which has been proven not to be.

These trolls who demand evidence that it was not Flight 93 show evidence that proves it was not a Boeing 757. What a head-cuss.

[edit on 27-1-2010 by Shadow Herder]



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
With the USER called 'Thedman' actually using a picture with no relation to Flight 93 or Shanksville so in other words, more fabricated, fraudulent evidence is a violation of some term of use at ATS.

They have yet to provide any sources and or proof that the images they show actually came from the crater site in Shanksville on 9/11. The proof all shows that whatever caused the small crater in Shanksville was not a Boeing 757. Therefore the official Story is a Blatant lie and the evidence was fabricated to sell a story which I might add not too many people believe anyways.



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


If you say UA 93 did not crash near Shanksville can you please let me know how the black boxes came to be recovered from the site ?

If you say the FDR, which places the aircraft at that position, was faked please let me know how you fake an FDR. I haven't heard an explanation as to how you fake something recording several parameters a second.

If you think the CVR was faked why did the FBI play the recording to the relatives of those who died on the plane ? And, in particular, how was it possible to fake a CVR which included communications with Cleveland ATC and which precisely marry up with the ATC tapes ?
www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
All the eyewitnesses claim what they saw was not a Boeing 757 crash. The witnesses all saw something fly over indian lake prior to the crash which is opposite of the official flight path said by the official claimers.


All? No not all. Wholetruth's "witnesses" are the ones you mean and they change from 4 to 6 in number with only 2 telling their story. It is one thing to blindly believe another poster but another to then repeat it as fact. Please demonstrate that every person that was a witness that morning, saw the plane keep going over the lake. Even wholetruth's own witnesses do not say that. The woman that saw the UFO does not know what happened to the plane, just the UFO. There is a reason so many people put him on ignore and lying is a good chunk of that.



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
All? No not all. Wholetruth's "witnesses" are the ones you mean and they change from 4 to 6 in number with only 2 telling their story. It is one thing to blindly believe another poster but another to then repeat it as fact. Please demonstrate that every person that was a witness that morning, saw the plane keep going over the lake.


of course every witness couldn't witness this just like every witness couldn't witness the plane crashing.

its the topography of the land.

there are hills and trees all over the place and it would be very easy to lose track of a low flying object, even a 757.



Even wholetruth's own witnesses do not say that. The woman that saw the UFO does not know what happened to the plane, just the UFO. There is a reason so many people put him on ignore and lying is a good chunk of that.


how could susan mcelwain know what happened to the 757 when it had already flown over the field and was at indian lake before she got near the crash site?


here are the indian lake witnesses :

mayor barry lichty
jim brandt
john fleegle
tom spinelli
carol delasko
chris smith
jim stop

thats 7 witnesses who either saw or heard flight 93 fly over indian lake prior to the explosion.

until you explain what plane flew over indian lake coming from the direction of the crash site prior to the explosion in the field the only logical conclusion is that it has to be flight 93 because that is the ONLY PLANE THAT WAS HEADING IN THAT DIRECTION.

you do know indian lake is the OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF THE BLAST TRAJECTORY, RIGHT?



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


If you say UA 93 did not crash near Shanksville can you please let me know how the black boxes came to be recovered from the site ?


the fbi told you they were, doesn't make it so.

the government says global warming is real, doesn't make it so.

the government says saddam had ties to al qaeda and wmd's, doesn't make it so.

the government says the mercury in the vaccinations is good for your brain, doesn't make it so.


If you say the FDR, which places the aircraft at that position, was faked please let me know how you fake an FDR. I haven't heard an explanation as to how you fake something recording several parameters a second.


i dont have an answer for how to fake a fdr but since i know that the plane FLEW OVER INDIAN LAKE, i don't have to.

you have to explain how the fdr says it crashed in the field while the data conflicts with the description given by viola saylor and paul muro and then take into account all the people at indian lake.



If you think the CVR was faked why did the FBI play the recording to the relatives of those who died on the plane ? And, in particular, how was it possible to fake a CVR which included communications with Cleveland ATC and which precisely marry up with the ATC tapes ?



i dont know , perhaps you can explain to me how patrick welsh, whose wife debbie was on that flight, listened to the same recording [allegedly] and then went around telling people he believes the plane was most likely shot down and the government is lying and covering up what happened.



www.youtube.com...



this isn't the cvr recording......

personally i don't believe the cvr recording exist. all i've seen is a fbi transcript of what it said and since i know the plane didn't crash i know THE TRANSCRIPT IS A TOTAL FABRICATION.



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
With the USER called 'Thedman' actually using a picture with no relation to Flight 93 or Shanksville so in other words, more fabricated, fraudulent evidence is a violation of some term of use at ATS.


i agree.

this user should be banned immediately for purposely using fabricated evidence to try to support the government. everyone knows that photo is a total fake, including him.



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


What photo is in question??



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by wholetruth



here are the indian lake witnesses :

mayor barry lichty
jim brandt
john fleegle
tom spinelli
carol delasko
chris smith
jim stop

thats 7 witnesses who either saw or heard flight 93 fly over indian lake prior to the explosion.


I just decided to look up your witnesses , and started on the top.

Barry Lichty: US Navy veteran

Didn't SEE Anything............ was watching television with his wife.

Barry Lichty " A loud roar above the house , that sounded like a missle".

www.historycommons.org...



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by wholetruth
 


Is it ANY of the photos in this post here (in reply to above) by chance?

[edit on 27-1-2010 by mikelee]



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by wholetruth
of course every witness couldn't witness this just like every witness couldn't witness the plane crashing.

its the topography of the land.

there are hills and trees all over the place and it would be very easy to lose track of a low flying object, even a 757.

how could susan mcelwain know what happened to the 757 when it had already flown over the field and was at indian lake before she got near the crash site?


Right, so not ALL witnesses say what Shadow Herder said they did. Thank you for accepting my correction for him.



here are the indian lake witnesses :

mayor barry lichty
jim brandt
john fleegle
tom spinelli
carol delasko
chris smith
jim stop

thats 7 witnesses who either saw or heard flight 93 fly over indian lake prior to the explosion.

until you explain what plane flew over indian lake coming from the direction of the crash site prior to the explosion in the field the only logical conclusion is that it has to be flight 93 because that is the ONLY PLANE THAT WAS HEADING IN THAT DIRECTION.

you do know indian lake is the OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF THE BLAST TRAJECTORY, RIGHT?


I could care less. You have 7 people. So the witnesses now number 4,6, and 7. My point is that you tried to claim all witnesses saw 93 keep flying by when that is not the case. Your select few witnesses saw what you say, not ALL.

and just in case you missed Sean48's post above...


I just decided to look up your witnesses , and started on the top.

Barry Lichty: US Navy veteran

Didn't SEE Anything............ was watching television with his wife.

Barry Lichty " A loud roar above the house , that sounded like a missle".


Look, I am not INSISTING anything happened one way or the other. That is the difference. You and Shadow Herder are willfully muddying the waters with halftruths, rumors, and apparently outright lies as seen above. If the plane kept flying over the lake, feel free to demonstrate that. I am all ears. Listening to deliberate lies is something else altogether. I hate putting people on ignore because it adds nothing. Please try to stick to facts, true things you know.

edit to fix the one poster's two different names.

[edit on 1/27/10 by Lillydale]



posted on Jan, 27 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
I see what pic it is now. Never mind.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join