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.

 

Skeptics, what are the official crash details of UA93?

page: 5
2
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



1. Was about 95% of the plane recovered?


Yeah, probably. That is what one FBI spokesman said. United has it all in storage, why don't you ask them if you can inventory the material?


2. Where was most of the plane wreckage before the cleanup started?


All over the place. On the ground. Really don't understand what you are trying to get at. Most by volume? Most by weight? Does most = 51% or do you mean a plurality? Really not a very well crafted interrogatory. Maybe that's why you don't get the answers you somehow think you deserve.


3. Where were most of the passenger remains before the cleanup started?


See the answer to No.2 above


4. Did the front end of the plane break off at impact and land in the woods while the rest of the plane tunneled down into the ground?


If you want answers, you should try and ask questions, not make speculations with question marks at the end.

5. How did the forest get more fire damage than the grass surrounding the crater?


I take it you have some proof of this ever changing "fact" other than your opinion about what the photos look like to you. Is it officially now "more" damage or "no" damage?


6. How did the tail section vanish while only leaving a faint mark in the ground?


First, you think you can see that mark from an aerial photo - couldn't be that faint, second, who said it "vanished"? No one is obligated to explain you hyperbole to you.


7. How could 44 humans be turned into "hamburger meat," resulting into only 8% total mass, and not leave a single drop of blood behind?


Actually we only have one person commenting that he didn't see any blood at the crash site. That is woefully insufficient grounds from which to deduce the fact that there was not a single drop of blood at or near the crash site.




posted on May, 6 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Yeah, probably. That is what one FBI spokesman said. United has it all in storage, why don't you ask them if you can inventory the material?


Why can't you post evidence that United has it in storage?


All over the place. On the ground.


Funny how there are no photos of actual plane parts and debris on the ground.



[edit on 6-5-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 



Why can't you post evidence that United has it in storage?


Sorry, you'll have to actually do some of your own research, you know, the kind where you have to talk to people and ask real questions, etc. Told you who has, where it is, who is storing it, go check.



Funny how there are no photos of actual plane parts and debris on the ground.


Except the ones that all over the internet and were submitted as evidence in a court of law.



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Sorry, you'll have to actually do some of your own research, you know, the kind where you have to talk to people and ask real questions, etc. Told you who has, where it is, who is storing it, go check.


So again you cannot post evidence to support your theory.


Except the ones that all over the internet and were submitted as evidence in a court of law.


Sorry none of those photos show parts matching the plane.



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 


No, I have no way of "posting" you making phone calls, asking questions, writing letters, etc. Kind of like you asking me to "post" you going for a walk.

You asked for photos of plane debris at the crash site. They are on the internet and have been stipulated to in a court of law in the United States of America. The burden is now on you to prove your case of perjury against those that presented them. Good luck with that and please keep me posted!



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
You asked for photos of plane debris at the crash site. They are on the internet and have been stipulated to in a court of law in the United States of America.


And as stated and you keep ignoring, the photos posted do not have sources matching them to the plane.

Please read post before responding.



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
You asked for photos of plane debris at the crash site. They are on the internet and have been stipulated to in a court of law in the United States of America.


And as stated and you keep ignoring, the photos posted do not have sources matching them to the plane.

Please read post before responding.



Sure they do. "As stipulated to in a court of law in the United States of America". Can't get better than that. This is evidence that was presented in a capital criminal case. Both the prosecution and defense stipulated as to the authenticity of the photos. The source is the court.

Case closed.



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Sure they do. "As stipulated to in a court of law in the United States of America". Case closed.


Sorry but as stated and you keep ignoring, there are no official reports matching the parts to the plane.

As stated and proven on this forum many times the FAA has refused to release the serial numbers to the parts through FOIA requests.



posted on May, 6 2010 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 



As stated and proven on this forum many times the FAA has refused to release the serial numbers to the parts through FOIA requests.


I thought I was pretty familiar with this forum, I can't recall any discussion about FOIA request to the Federal Aviation Administration with regard to serial numbers.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
I thought I was pretty familiar with this forum, I can't recall any discussion about FOIA request to the Federal Aviation Administration with regard to serial numbers.


Well i guess not.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 


So I guess the court proceedings in a Federal Court of Law in the United States of America is no longer considered "official"?



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

So I guess the court proceedings in a Federal Court of Law in the United States of America is no longer considered "official"?


Isn't it a marvelous circular and delusional argument he has constructed for himself?

Request info from a guv agency, when he doesn't believe the testimony they've given in court already, to confirm what they've testified to in court.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
So I guess the court proceedings in a Federal Court of Law in the United States of America is no longer considered "official"?


Again the photos posted have no source matching them to the planes. I do not know how much more simpler to make it.

What corut case was about the official story? The only one i know of was about a person not the official story.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
Request info from a guv agency, when he doesn't believe the testimony they've given in court already, to confirm what they've testified to in court.


Well then you should have no problem showing me the FBI official repots that match the photos from the case to the planes.

I WILL BE WAITING FOR THEM.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE
Well then you should have no problem showing me the FBI official repots that match the photos from the case to the planes.

I WILL BE WAITING FOR THEM.


Roger,

You can post over and over the same argument you have been posting for 5 years now. EVERYONE knows that the serial numbers were not recorded.

If you are interested in where the parts of the plane are, why haven't you contacted the owners of aircraft #N591UA? If you would like, I can give you their contact information including their legal representation.

Please U2U me and I will give you all the info you need to contact them.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 



What corut case was about the official story? The only one i know of was about a person not the official story.


Again, for the millionth time, court cases are not "about" persons, they are about "stories". The prosecution presents its "story" and the evidence to support that story. We do not try persons.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 04:17 AM
link   
Skeptics,

Would still like an answer to my OP so we truthers don't have to keep aiming at a moving goal post.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


Its funny how you say you want the actual details of the crash as if the NTSB was writing the response....and then you go overboard in the minutae you want involved. The NTSB doesnt get that in-depth in its reports. "So and so's left ring finger was recovered here...."

And you wonder why people think truthers are nuts.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ATH911
 


Its funny how you say you want the actual details of the crash as if the NTSB was writing the response....and then you go overboard in the minutae you want involved. The NTSB doesnt get that in-depth in its reports.

No, a regular NTSB-styled report will do. Just so we can have a permanent goal post to shoot for. Not a moving one that you skeptics have been giving us for 9 years.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


Does this sound familiar?




how much of the plane and passenger remains were recovered, where was most of the wreckage and passenger remains located, what caused the damage and how to the surrounding elements, etc.


NTSB reports normally do not get into detail about passenger remains, and even if they did, YOU, as a private citizen do not have the right to that information.

And when it comes to goalposts, truther goalposts are mounted on motorized trolleys and rarely stay in place for more than a day or two.

[edit on 29-8-2010 by vipertech0596]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join