"Flight 93" Eyewitnesses Prove No Boeing 757 Crashed In Shanksville on 911.

Upon reviewing the eyewitness testimonies concerning the alleged crash of a boeing 757 a.k.a Flight 93. Most of the stories not only contradict themselves but most importantly contradicts the official story concerning the Shanksville incident setting aside the obvious proof from the images that the small round crater that was a mere 10 feet deep was caused from a fully fuel commercial airliner as large as the Boeing 757 as you can see in the image below.

"I heard like a boom and the engine sounded funny," she told the Daily News. "I heard two more booms - and then I did not hear anything."

What does Temyer think she heard? "I think the plane was shot down,"
dailynews.philly.com...

Hearing... not really an eyewitness. For all she knows a plane flew over or near by and dropped a bomb.

"It came in low over the trees and started wobbling," said Tim Thornsberg, a resident of Somerset County, who was working near an old strip mine when he saw the plane.

"Then it just rolled over and was flying upside down for a few seconds ... and then it kind of stalled and did a nose dive over the trees. It was just unreal to see something like that."
www.pittsburgh.com...

It stalled.... hmmm, this conflicts the the official narrative and most of the 'eyewitnesses'. Debunkers will try to have you believe that the plane came out of the sky, inverted at a great velocity. This is the fib told to explain the lack of any evidence of a large craft such as a Boeing 757.

NOTE: Nobody ever describes this 'plane' as a commercial airliner as big as the Boeing 757.

"It came in low over the trees and started wobbling," said Tim Thornsberg, a resident of Somerset County, who was working near an old strip mine when he saw the plane.

"Then it just rolled over and was flying upside down for a few seconds ... and then it kind of stalled and did a nose dive over the trees. It was just unreal to see something like that."
www.pittsburgh.com...

Wobbling, cart-wheeling, then nose dive? What kind of craft, wha? I agree, it was unreal..

“I saw the plane flying upside down overhead and crash into the nearby trees. My buddy, Doug, and I grabbed our fire extinguishers and ran to the scene,” said Blair.
www.dailyamerican.com...

What kind of plane? Upside down? crash into the trees? how can they have seen it if the terrain didnt allow them to see it.... another assumption.

Eric Peterson of Lambertsville looked up when he heard the plane. "It was low enough, I thought you could probably count the rivets," Peterson said. "You could see more of the roof of the plane than you could the belly. It was on its side."

"There was a great explosion and you could see the flames. It was a massive, massive explosion. Flames and then smoke and then a massive, massive mushroom cloud."
www.cleveland.com.../xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/news/100028703529429109.xml

O.k, now the plane was 'low enough', "on it's side" A great explosion? after the plane flew over the crash site or was it the "plane"? what kind of plane? So the flames came before the smoke then it turned into a mushroom cloud? Another one who didnt see any Boeing 757 crash.

“Normally I wouldn’t look up, but I just heard on the news that all the planes were grounded and thought this was probably the last one I would see for a while, so I looked up,” she said. “I didn’t see the plane but I heard the plane’s engine. Then I heard a loud thump that echoed off the hills and then I heard the plane’s engine. I heard two more loud thumps and didn’t hear the plane’s engine anymore after that.”
www.dailyamerican.com...

Little did he know there were many aircraft around this alleged crash site. Some military some civilian. 3 thumps, hmmm and they didnt see the plane crash either. Thumps could be a missile or bomb drop for all we know.


cont.....



[edit on 16-2-2010 by Shadow Herder]

[edit on 16-2-2010 by Shadow Herder]

"We didn't hear that plane coming until it was right on top of us," she said. "Then there was a roar." She said the plane appeared to be gliding into the ground. "All at once it just stopped. There was no engine noise, nothing. Someone hollered, Oh my God!' and then there was a real loud thud."
www.cleveland.com.../xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/news/100028703529429109.xml

She claims the plane appears to be "Gliding". Well there goes the official narrative again and another contradiction to the other eyewitnesses. They lost sight of the 'plane' then thud. Yet another eyewitness who didnt see it crash.

Shortly after 10 a.m., workers on farms and scrap yards in Somerset County looked up to see an airliner flying low and erratic at an estimated 450 mph.
www.dailyamerican.com...

Flying low? Not nose diving? not upside down? not rocking or flying erratically? Nice estimation of 450 mph from the scrap yard workers.

Bob Blair of Stoystown was driving a coal truck on state Route 30 when he saw the jet plummet "straight down." Barn windowpanes for half a mile around shattered as the jet dived into a reclaimed strip mine and exploded at 10:10 a. m.
sfgate.com.../c/a/2001/09/17/MN40630.DTL

Plummet straight down? "Dived" wow, how many different "planes" were people seeing that morning. 10:10, well i guess his watch was off a little.

A witness told WTAE-TV's Paul Van Osdol that she saw the plane overhead. It made a high-pitched, screeching sound. The plane then made a sharp, 90-degree downward turn and crashed.
newsandviews.tripod.com...

Another contradiction. What kind of plane ? never answered or described.

Bob Blair was completing a routine drive to Shade Creek just after 10 a.m. Tuesday, when he saw a huge silver plane fly past him just above the treetops and crash into the woods along Lambertsville Road.
Blair, of Stoystown, a driver with Jim Barron Trucking of Somerset, was traveling in a coal truck along with Doug Miller of Somerset, when they saw the plane spiraling to the ground and then explode on the outskirts of Lambertsville.
“I saw the plane flying upside down overhead and crash into the nearby trees. My buddy, Doug, and I grabbed our fire extinguishers and ran to the scene,” said Blair.
www.dailyamerican.com...

A huge silver plane?... getting closer, no mention that most of the plane was painted blue. It was spiraling? It was upside down? But the bottom of the plane is silver not the top. Which is it, spiraling, cart-wheeling, diving, stalling or gliding?

"(I) heard the engine gun two different times," he said. "(I) heard a loud bang and the windows of the houses all around rattled."
www.pjstar.com...

"Heard" not seen.

[quote[Larry Williams, a former state police trooper who is now a private investigator, was golfing on the 17th green at Oakbrook Golf Course about eight miles away when he heard the engines “roar real loud and shut off.”
www.dailyamerican.com...

"HEARD" not seen. "Roar real loud" well the contradicts other witnesses but he could of heard a plane just pulling up under heavy throttle as to make it look like it crashed behind a tree line.

"People were calling in and reporting pieces of plane falling," a state trooper said. Jim Stop reported he had seen the hijacked Boeing 757 fly over him as he was fishing. He said he could see parts falling from the plane.
I lost this link.. but since the witness name is there I've left it up.

Some witnesses reported that the plane was flying upside down for a time before the crash; others said they heard up to three loud booms before the jetliner went down.
www.post-gazette.com...

Well, "pieces of plane falling" while fishing, that means they were on Indian lake which is no where near the flight path but lends credence to the indian lake flyover after the crash. This guy seems to be the only guy who describes a Boeing 757 and its flying over indian lake, heard 3 booms? hmmm.




[edit on 16-2-2010 by Shadow Herder]

There is a lot of evidence that seems to point that if there was a Boeing 757 in the air over Shanksville on 911, it flew past the crater site and over indian lake and did not crash aside from the obvious 'evidence' presented that proves one didnt. There is a lot of proof that shows the military were in the same area most likely conducting one of many 911 drill and exercises.

[edit on 16-2-2010 by Shadow Herder]

reply to post by Shadow Herder


Just a little side note: The witnesses were interviewed after it was known what kind of plane crashed in Shanksville, hence the use of words like "it" and "the plane". An interview is basically a conversation between two people, the interviewee is assuming during the interview that the interviewer knows what kind of plane crashed there. The purpose of the interview was to gather impressions and experiences, not to conduct a formal fact gathering excersize or military style de-briefing.

Just like to put that in context before you go crazy trying to read things into simple descriptions.

reply to post by hooper


Your little assumptions are just that. Hopeful assumptions does not make it true. Keep dreaming in technicolour.

Some of the eywitnesses claim to NOT see a Boeing 757 but were told that what they say WAS flight 93. Most of the witnesses still stand by their knowledge that what they saw was NOT a Boeing 757.

reply to post by Shadow Herder

Most of the witnesses still stand by their knowledge that what they saw was NOT a Boeing 757.

So, 51% (most) of the witnesses stated unequivocally that what they saw was NOT a Boeing 757? They actually said "the plane was not a Boeing 757"?

Or is this just a little something that you are throwing into the mix, a product of your fevered imagination?

To clear this up:

Please list ALL witnesses and their AFFIRMATIVE statements as to EXACTLY what kind of plane they saw.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Shadow Herder

 

Most of the witnesses still stand by their knowledge that what they saw was NOT a Boeing 757.

You know better than most that not ONE PERSON saw 'it' crash but assume it crashed except for that on Rollock employee, Paul... He said that he watched and heard the plane for 10-20 seconds as it flew upside down "40-feet' above him which is a complete contradiction and an impossibility to the official story.

[edit on 18-2-2010 by Shadow Herder]

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Shadow Herder

 

Most of the witnesses still stand by their knowledge that what they saw was NOT a Boeing 757.

You know better than most that not ONE PERSON saw 'it' crash but assume it crashed except for that on Rollock employee, Paul... He said that he watched and heard the plane for 10-20 seconds as it flew upside down "40-feet' above him which is a complete contradiction and an impossibility to the official story.

[edit on 18-2-2010 by Shadow Herder]

But you said that most witnesses definetly ruled out the plane they saw was Boeing Model 757. Can you back that up?

By the way - "well they didn't say it was a Boeing 757" - doesn't count.

Hooper,

I am still wating for you to post actual evidence of the claim that you made that 95% of flight 93 was recovered and is in storage.

you know the stories - well maybe they did multiple planes in shanksville air space, or where there Halograms>>? so the stories would all be different. one thing is for sure, no one was located in a place (that we know of) to see it from start to finish, granted its about a 8 mile radius around the crash site... maybe if we were able to plot the locations of the witnesses maybe we can derive which of these accounts is the correct one... all witnesses are convincing enough to have seen something - it just doesnt add up, if you know what I mean ... so we have additional puzzle pieces tossed in, we need to figure out which one are the wrong ones.

I think of all the testimony Susan McE. appears to have seen some kind of prototype white small not bigger than her van, really low... my intuition says this is what happened to the big boom everyone heard. was done by this aircraft... maybe a predator drone like craft.

and if it was a Predator drone as su lpected at the Pentagon, then there would be radioactive residue like at the Pentagon, I guess they were still missing pieces, is why they lined up for a FOD walk and possible thats why they buried that side of the Pentagon under 3' of topsoil... did they do anything like this at Shanksville...? I dont know, we have asked several people to drive a pipe in the ground at Pentagon and lets test the soil. but
that was DOA... were still looking for a volunteer to get the soil samples.

Off Topic? cross reference: * WTC1 - 2 site, report

reply to post by REMISNE


I never a claimed as to the percentages. United Airlines stores the material at an Iron Mountain storage facility outside of Pittsburgh. The link is right here on ATS unless your too lazy to look it up. Plus you could always just email UAL direct.

Originally posted by hooper
I never a claimed as to the percentages.

So what do you claim?

United Airlines stores the material at an Iron Mountain storage facility outside of Pittsburgh. The link is right here on ATS unless your too lazy to look it up. Plus you could always just email UAL direct.

I do not want the link, i want the evidence that supports your claim/fantasy that the remains of flight 93 are in Iron Mountain.

Either post the evidence asked for or admit you just another troll.



[edit on 21-2-2010 by REMISNE]

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Shadow Herder

 

Most of the witnesses still stand by their knowledge that what they saw was NOT a Boeing 757.

You know better than most that not ONE PERSON saw 'it' crash but assume it crashed except for that on Rollock employee, Paul... He said that he watched and heard the plane for 10-20 seconds as it flew upside down "40-feet' above him which is a complete contradiction and an impossibility to the official story.

[edit on 18-2-2010 by Shadow Herder]

I don't know why you have left out Lee Purbaugh who definitely did say he saw the crash. His words : " suddenly it dipped and dived, nose first, with a huge explosion, into the ground. I knew immediately that no-one could have survived."

I needn't go into most of the other stuff you are ignoring like :- black boxes recovered, dna of passengers and crew identified, aircraft pieces still being recovered today. But another important area you haven't addressed is pilots of other aircraft in the vicinity of UA 93 that day and Air Traffic Control evidence.

This is some dramatic tape from Cleveland ATC. You can hear the hi-jacker pilot on it and also the pilot of Executive 956 who reports seeing UA 93 and the pilot of American 1060 who reports a smoke cloud shortly after.
www.youtube.com...

This is the same old regurgitation of flight 93 CT's. Less ignorant truthers typically stray from threads like these.


There is an overwhelming amount of evidence the proves Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville.Everyone knows eyewitness statements are the least reliable. You need to look at all the physical evidence. For instance, regarding the crash of flight 587:

For Air Crash Detectives, Seeing Isn't Believing

Here is a snippet of the article:

According to the National Transportation Safety Board, which announced this month that it had gathered 349 eyewitness accounts through interviews or written statements, 52 percent said they saw a fire while the plane was in the air. The largest number (22 percent) said the fire was in the fuselage, but a majority cited other locations, including the left engine, the right engine, the left wing, the right wing or an unspecified engine or wing.

Nearly one of five witnesses said they saw the plane make a right turn; an equal number said it was a left turn. Nearly 60 percent said they saw something fall off the plane; of these, 13 percent said it was a wing. (In fact, it was the vertical portion of the tail.)

None of this is surprising, said Dr. Charles R. Honts, a professor of psychology at Boise State University and the editor of the Journal of Credibility Assessment and Witness Psychology. "Eyewitness memory is reconstructive," said Dr. Honts, who is not associated with the safety board. "The biggest mistake you can make is to think about a memory like it's a videotape; there's not a permanent record there."

The problem, he said, is that witnesses instinctively try to match events with their past experiences: "How many plane crashes have you witnessed in real life? Probably none. But in the movies? A lot. In the movies, there's always smoke and there's always fire."

complete article here:

www.nytimes.com...



[edit on 21-2-2010 by ImAPepper]

Originally posted by ImAPepper
There is an overwhelming amount of evidence the proves Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville.Everyone knows eyewitness statements are the least reliable. You need to look at all the physical evidence.:

I am still waiting for anyone to post this so called evidence.

I am talking real evidence, the kind that would hold up in court.

Originally posted by REMISNE

I am still waiting for anyone to post this so called evidence.

I am talking real evidence, the kind that would hold up in court.

Roger, you parrot the same lines over and over and over. You have been told COUNTLESS times that there was a trial. Evidence was used in a court of law pertaining to the hijacking and crash of Flight 93.

Zacarias Moussaoui was tried and convicted in a court of law where evidence that you hand wave away was in fact used by the prosecution.

The following web pages link to all 1,202 exhibits admitted into evidence during the trial of U.S. v. Moussaoui, with the exception of seven that are classified or otherwise remain under seal. This is the first criminal case for which a federal court has provided access to all exhibits online. The exhibits were posted on July 31, 2006.

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

Mr. Moussaoui currently (and permanently) resides at the United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum Facility in Colorado. Perhaps you can phone him to see what he thinks. Be nice though, he may get angry that you were not there to represent him at his trial. Maybe you guys can get together with Richard Reid and Ramzi Yousef? Sit around and play some cards talking about how Islamic Terrorists don't exist.

Anyway...you asked for evidence that would hold up in a court. You got it. I can't wait to see how the goal posts get moved.

Originally posted by ImAPepper
Roger, you parrot the same lines over and over and over. You have been told COUNTLESS times that there was a trial. Evidence was used in a court of law pertaining to the hijacking and crash of Flight 93.

Yes i do parrot it becasue no one has yet to post what i ask for.

We are not talking about the trial exhibts that by the way were not good enough to charge OBL with being behind 9/11 and also probably would not hold up in court again.

I am asking for anyone to past actual evidence such as,

1. Any official reports matching parts to flight 93.

2. Any official reprots or photos of the parts and where they are now.




[edit on 22-2-2010 by REMISNE]

Originally posted by REMISNE


Yes i do parrot it becasue no one has yet to post what i ask for.

We are not talking about the trial exhibts that by the way were not good enough to charge OBL with being behind 9/11 and also probably would not hold up in court again.

I am asking for anyone to past actual evidence such as,

1. Any official reports matching parts to flight 93.

2. Any official reprots or photos of the parts and where they are now.

That's NOT what you posted Roger.... allow me to remind you since you appear to have the Dora Syndrome. (short term memory loss)

Originally posted by REMISNE
I am still waiting for anyone to post this so called evidence.

I am talking real evidence, the kind that would hold up in court.

So, the evidence that was used to convict Zacarias Moussaoui wasn't "real enough" for you? It's evidence, it held up in court.



Oh... you want OTHER evidence that would help convict him. Silly me!

Originally posted by ImAPepper
So, the evidence that was used to convict Zacarias Moussaoui wasn't "real enough" for you? It's evidence, it held up in court.

Well that evidence was meant for THAT trial and was barely enough to convict him, (which we all know he was going to be convicted any way)

Some if that evidence in a new trail would be argued.

Oh... you want OTHER evidence that would help convict him. Silly me!

Please stay on topic we are not talking about convicting him again are we?




[edit on 22-2-2010 by REMISNE]

Originally posted by REMISNE
Well that evidence was meant for THAT trial and was barely enough to convict him, (which we all know he was going to be convicted any way)

Barely enough????



Wow Roger, that's fresh. That's like saying the girl was barely pregnant.

Some if that evidence in a new trail would be argued.

Really? You know this for a fact? You're a fortuneteller now too?

Please stay on topic we are not talking about convicting him again are we?

Just giving you what you are looking for. Par for the course, you hand waved it away.