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.

 

Evidence no plane crashed & buried in Shanksville; piles of dirt, but no piles of plane debris

page: 12
26
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


Here, on the same tactic....pick any OTHER similar airplane crash. That not even YOU will dispute:

USAir 427 (dove almost straight in).
United 585 (dove almost straight in).
PSA 1771 (dove almost straight in).
SwissAir 111 (hit at high speed...actual impact attitude unknown, FDR lost power).

NOW...PROVE where all of the "tons" of debris from any of those crashes was collected. Using only the Internet. Find ALL of the photos that show EVERY piece....so that you can convince a "skeptic" that those crashes actually occurred.

YOUR turn...PROVE IT!!!!! Prove that those flights existed, and crashed where the "Mainstream Media" told us they did!

WHERE is the "debris" from those flights?? Is it in storage?? I want pictures, dammit!! Or else, it's all a lie, didn't happen. I never saw any pictures of the bodies from United 585! Nor USAir 427! Were the airplanes switched en route? The passengers whisked off, to be killed elsewhere??

Were those two crashes, specifically, a CONSPIRACY to discredit Boeing?? They were BOTH a Boeing 737, and BOTH alleged to be the result of a rudder PCU (Power Control Unit) malfunction....pointing the finger of blame directly at Boeing, and its subcontractors, and impugning its quality control and testing.

Perhaps, one of its competitors manufactured all of that, in this conspiracy to drag Boeing's name through the mud?? And make them lose business, pay exorbitant settlements and insurance premiums??

Prove it is NOT a conspiracy against Boeing! PICTURES, or else, I will stick with "conspiracy"....




posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911
 


Where have I ever said that none of the plane embedded at the point of impact?

I have pointed out that the plane was not buried - you should think about your words.

Look who's talking!...



Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911
 



So you are debating something your don't even believe in?!

Buried and embedded are two different things, two different words, two different situations.



Nobody dug a hole, threw in the plane bits and then covered them back up again.

I agree, hooper, I agree!



Oh, now I get - that is what you think happened. Little government gnomes snuck out to the field the night before, dug a hole and then threw in the plane parts.

Got any photos of that?

How can it not be apparent that I don't think anything was buried. My thread even says "Evidence no plane crashed & buried..." for christ sakes! You're not very bright hooper.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by ATH911
 


Here, on the same tactic....pick any OTHER similar airplane crash. That not even YOU will dispute:

USAir 427 (dove almost straight in).
United 585 (dove almost straight in).
PSA 1771 (dove almost straight in).

What do you mean by "straight in"?


SwissAir 111 (hit at high speed...actual impact attitude unknown, FDR lost power).

Were the other planes acting like Divas upon impact?!



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



How can it not be apparent that I don't think anything was buried. My thread even says "Evidence no plane crashed & buried..." for christ sakes! You're not very bright hooper


Oh, so you're taking it up a notch - even though there is photographic evidence of plane wreckage at the site, some of the photos even submitted into a court of law without challenge by all parties, you're saying there is NO evidence of any plane wreckage, whatsoever! Not just an insufficient amount - but none at all! Even though there are photos on the internet (thats the world to you) of a hole with pieces of the plane, you are contending that no wreckage was found at all! And that nothing was embedded in the earth.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 

hooper, hooper, hooper, as I say, you're not too bright. Where did I ever say there was no debris at the entire site?

And love your constant logical fallacy about it meaning something that the defense didn't object to the photos in the Moussaoui trial.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


So you are saying that wreckage of Flight 93 was found at the site?

Are you contending there was nothing AT ALL in the ground? Nothing? Despite photographic evidence, submitted into an American court of law?

Have you ever try to contact anyone involved in the recovery and get their point of view?

I mean, fair is fair, you are calling them all liars, why not give them a chance to defend themselves? I mean we are not talking ancient history here, these folks are still around. Give the FBI a call and see if anyone at the recovery site will give you an interview.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911
 


So you are saying that wreckage of Flight 93 was found at the site?

No hooper. Grow a brain.


Are you contending there was nothing AT ALL in the ground? Nothing? Despite photographic evidence, submitted into an American court of law?

Yes, nothing was buried. Please show me all the photographic evidence of debris that came from in the ground, not lying on the surface of the crater.


Have you ever try to contact anyone involved in the recovery and get their point of view?

Yes, I keep getting voice mail boxes with no return calls. Maybe you can have better luck than me.


I mean, fair is fair, you are calling them all liars

Again hooper, stop with the lies. I'm not calling everyone who worked at the scene a liar. The only one I'm calling a liar is the FBI spokesperson. I haven't heard from the diggers that they said a plane was in there, so technically they haven't told a lie if they were in on it.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



Yes, nothing was buried. Please show me all the photographic evidence of debris that came from in the ground, not lying on the surface of the crater.


Uh, exactly what does photographic evidence of something that was buried but now is not buried look like?



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Uh, exactly what does photographic evidence of something that was buried but now is not buried look like?

You were the one who said "Nothing? Despite photographic evidence, submitted into an American court of law?" So you tell me.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


But if I show you the photo of one the data recorders that was buried, it obviously isn't buried anymore. If I show you a picture of the ground and say there is stuff under there, you'll claim you can't see it and if I show the photo of something not in the ground you'll claim the photo doesn't prove it was in the ground.

Whom did you call with regard to their recovery activities at Shanksville?



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 

Post any photo of debris you think came from underground.

The FBI.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


95% was not recovered at all



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


here ya go:

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by surfnow2
reply to post by ATH911
 


95% was not recovered at all

Yeah I know, but the skeptics blindly think that much was.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911
 


here ya go:


That's it? That's supposed to make me believe 23-80% of a 757 was buried?!



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


You ask for me to post a photo of any piece I think came from underground. That's it. Submitted and accepted into evidence in an American Court of Law. Is it or is it not?



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911
 


You ask for me to post a photo of any piece I think came from underground. That's it.

Don't you think that it's just a tad odd that is the ONLY photo showing ONE piece of debris allegedly being unearthed out of the ground when supposedly 23% (your #) to 80% of the plane "embedded"?!

And isn't it quite the coincidence that this one piece of debris just "happens" to fit in the backhoe bucket that's supposedly scooping it out?!


Submitted and accepted into evidence in an American Court of Law. Is it or is it not?

Yeah, so?



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by InfowarriorCarson


Seen it a while ago....slip of the tongue???

There is a lot of good info on the WWW, or worse...the BAD info.
Just want some opinions about the next three You Tubes, and some images!


Are the flight 93 witnesses all lying?
www.youtube.com...

What kind of whispervoice is at the end of CeeCee Lyles phonecall?
The video says; "you did great". I ll go whit the YOU and the GREAT, but between it?
www.youtube.com...

Can someone confirme this.....or is it a bad joke?
www.youtube.com...

This is a PHOTOSHOPPED image!!!


And this is released by FEMA, why would FEMA do this?? (marked with C)
Here is the pile debris in the upper left corner!


Seems to me, that the pile has got legs....now it is on the rightside of the photo?
It is the same pile....watch the small details!


This is the stuff you find on the WWW....some is true, and a lot is BS!
Any way.....just want someones opinion, no more, no less!
edit on 20-12-2010 by FemaF4Fotoshop because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-12-2010 by FemaF4Fotoshop because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by FemaF4Fotoshop
 



Can someone confirme this.....or is it a bad joke?
www.youtube.com...


Person who made that video either not too bright, or deliberately trying to make "truthers" look stupid.

Take your pick.

The "1994" photo shows a dark, long "scar" on the ground, in the same general location....BUT, you will notice, that the UTube video did NOT superimpose the 2001 picture directly over the 1994 picture...lining it up, sizing and rotating to match. The existing "scar" from 1994? Different location than UAL 93 impact point.

This crap video author reveals the same symptom, early on, as so many other crap "truther" nonsense. Over and over, it is seen. The question marks on the text...about "luggage" or "seats". Same stupidity, whether it's due to his/her lack of concept, or deliberate, just to goad.


Take those last two photos, of Ground Zero. Do what I've seen others do (I don't know how, or don't have the software). They take the pictures, and animate them...in a "gif" I think. SO they flip back and forth, to compare easily. See if they really match up, as labeled.

The "pentagon flyover"? YES, it's photoshopped. By a "truther" (or disinfo, and conveniently 'found' by a "truther"....?) Other words it's a lie.

Cee Cee's phone call? More (very old, already covered) junk. I'm guessing the other flight 93 video is the "eyewitness" testimony of the various "planes" that were "nearby and low"?

Garbage. Not that those people lie, it's just that some eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable. IT happens to be a fact of Human nature, well studied in many fields. Check out some law enforcement studies on it....


edit on 20 December 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


WOW, what nonsense. there is irrefutable evidence the plane slammed into the ground.
we have some wackjobs on here
i have worked aircraft crashes before and you have to understand a plane hitting the ground at that speed
is like a missle, debris is going to go everywhere. it explodes up and out.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join