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

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by DIDtm
No.No.No.
You see..when the plane crashed, it disintegrated on impact. There was no fire because the plane came in at such a high velocity, the plane must have dumped all of its fuel first. And they did find all kinds of debris. Its just not evidenced in the photos you supplied because you 'picked and chose' what pics to use.
How dare you? They found a drivers license of a FL woman there to Petes Sake. She was on the plane.
How dare you try to pass this off as fact. You should be ashamed of yourself.

(SARCASM) - But thats what your going to hear from others.

Don't foget about the human remains of all the victims last seen alive boarding Flight 93.

(NO SARCASM)

Where is your proof? No plane crashed in Shanksville, Sorry. I tdidn't happen, the OP is correct, you have been wrong on ALL your debunking efforts ON ALL the threads. Sad you are to try and keep the lies going.

Donald Rumsfeld had a Freudian slip and admitted that flight 93 was shot down. The military shot down 93 because three planes had already impacted that day and the forth one was going to have to be collateral damage because they knew they could not save those people on board. My belief is that the intended impact site for flight 93 was going to be WTC 7 not the White House as later thought. Since the plane didn't make it to it's intended target, WTC 7 was later brought down as planned.

I don't believe our military was involved except for flight 93. I do believe that some Gov. officials allowed this to happen though. My thoughts are that Israel was behind it. Ask yourself something. Isn't funny how the US occupies two countries that just so happen to surround Iran, Israel's biggest enemy? The US now occupies the worlds largest poppy growing nation, Afghanistan, that has somehow increased production since we went in. We also occupy Iraq, which so happens to be a oil producing country that a year before 911 switched from using US dollars to Euros to purchase their oil. The US wasn't happy about this switch.

This is what I believe. The Israel connection is speculation on my behalf. Attack me if you will, but I'm only following my research into this.

Of course there wasn't a plane crash in Shanksville. There are currently TWO theories on what happened there. Flight 93 was either SHOT DOWN, or, there just wasn't a plane, period. It could have been diverted, and the crew killed at the hands of the American Army, or bought off by Uncle Sam. Either theory is possible. I just fear we'll never know which one is true. The one thing we can all be sure of is: No plane crashed in Shanksville on September 11th, 2001.

Originally posted by daddio

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by DIDtm
No.No.No.
You see..when the plane crashed, it disintegrated on impact. There was no fire because the plane came in at such a high velocity, the plane must have dumped all of its fuel first. And they did find all kinds of debris. Its just not evidenced in the photos you supplied because you 'picked and chose' what pics to use.
How dare you? They found a drivers license of a FL woman there to Petes Sake. She was on the plane.
How dare you try to pass this off as fact. You should be ashamed of yourself.

(SARCASM) - But thats what your going to hear from others.

Don't foget about the human remains of all the victims last seen alive boarding Flight 93.

(NO SARCASM)

Where is your proof? No plane crashed in Shanksville, Sorry. I tdidn't happen, the OP is correct, you have been wrong on ALL your debunking efforts ON ALL the threads. Sad you are to try and keep the lies going.

They sound one drivers license of a passenger. Kind of like they found one passport of one known terrorist amongst the debris at the WTC? Apparently you've never heard of PLANTING EVIDENCE? Either go back to school and learn some more common sense, or, go back to your government job, and stop trying to feed misinformation on the Internet!

reply to post by moondoggy2

They also found watches, wedding rings, wallets....quite a few personal effects actually. Only someone hellbent on remaining ignorant would deny that Flight 93 crashed there.

reply to post by TheLieWeLive

Isn't funny how the US occupies two countries that just so happen to surround Iran, Israel's biggest enemy?

Its only "funny" if you choose to ignore the 60 years of history that preceeded 9/11.

reply to post by thedman


Uh.. that picture of bones couldnt possibly be the passengers on the plane. When recovering debris from a fresh plane crash, the bones would still have flesh on them. So those bones are from someone, or something who has been dead quite a while I'd say.

Early media reports in the immediate aftermath, which seem conveniently forgotten, was that the debris field was scattered over a span of several miles. The evidence they showed on MSM for about a day was IMO, a plane shot down and whatever was left intact is what hit the field.

Here's one example:

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by TheLieWeLive


NO.

Donald Rumsfeld had a Freudian slip and admitted that flight 93 was shot down.

NO. He had NO INFO yet to confirm this....BUT, he knew the order approving use of force had been issued by the Prez.....hence, he spoke that way based on ASSUMPTION.....

Pay very close attention....the Flight Recorder and Voice Recorder, recovered and readable (both) show NO SIGNS OF A SHOOT-DOWN!

When an airplane like a Boeing 757 is shot at, while in mid-flight....badly enough to cause it to plummet out of control and crash....there will be EVIDENCE in the Flight Recorder data. Systems that are constantly monitored will show signs. Electrical disruptions. Hydraulic pressure fluctuations. Engine oil pressure changes. De-pressurization of the cabin (if the pressurized vessel is breached). SOUNDS on the CVR. Take some time to study various airplane accident reports, and see all the various noises that will be picked up by the "CAM" (Cockpit Area Mic) channel....and, in many cases, the "hot" mic if there's a hot intercom in use, between crew-members. On Boeings and Airbuses, when our headsets ("boom" mics) are plugged in, we don't have an "intercom" per se between pilots (because, the cockpit sound levels aren't very loud...unlike most turboprops, where they usually wear the headsets, the "Dave Clark" brand, with big ear cups...then the intercom is in use, to communicate to each other. On jets, since it's quieter, no need for intercom...HOWEVER, FAA requires boom mics below 18,000 feet because when plugged in, what THEY "hear" is being recorded to the CVR. That way, any communication between pilots, or words and sounds uttered by them, is more clearly recorded...in the past it relied solely on the CAM for those sounds.

You see, there isn't an experienced airline pilot who can look at the data, from both Recorders, and THEN claim a "shoot down". That nonsense comes only from the fertile imaginations of "conspiracy theorists".

NOW...back to Rummy....WHEN he was filmed making that press conference, it was still a time of great confusion. What the PUBLIC did not know, at that time, was the fact that Bush had authorized the shooting down of any airplane confirmed to be hijacked....this decision occurred AFTER the Pentagon impact (about 0937 EDT).

Events were in flux, and chaotic. Naturally, Sec Def, Rummy knew of Bush's decision....and, when you look at the timing of that news conference, it is logical to suggest that Rummy thought there was a distinct possibility that UAL 93 HAD been intercepted, and shot down. The final determination of the cause of the crash was still some hours away.

If you had paid further attention lately, you would have heard former Pres. Bush ALSO speaking on it, as he reminisced about many things from his terms. One thing he states is, knowing that HE HAD issued the order, when the first reports came in that UAL 93 was down, his initial thoughts were, "Did we do it?"

He knew his orders weren't likely to be questioned IF it had been a shoot-down...any reasonable person would have agreed it was necessary, given the events previously that morning. AND, he would have taken heat for it, unquestionably. Regardless. I think the administration was ready for that, if it had come to it.

Now, more.....most laypeople who spout this gibberish have NO IDEA of the process involved for a military intercept on a civilian airplane. Even IF a fighter had found UAL 93 while airborne, it WOULD NOT JUST IMMEDIATELY SHOOT!!!

Especially, when you look at where it was, at that moment.....over Pennsylvania.

Not anywhere near, either in distance, OR time, to any likely potential "target". IF found, it would have been followed, and others called in to rendezvous, and engage. The fighter could have been aggressive, as well, at "herding" the airplane....aggressively intimidating, and possibly influencing the hijackers to make turns, to avoid collisions.....and thus, the fighter could have deflected the United jet from its south-easterly course, and away from the D.C. area. Any number of strategies might have been employed. (Keep in mind, in a "regular" military intercept situation, it is assumed the intercepted pilot will COMPLY with directions and commands, whether transmitted via radio, or with hand and other visual signals. The hijackers' response cannot be predicted, but compliance probably wasn't going to be one of them).

Again...in the Shanksville, PA, area....you are STILL at least 30 minutes form D.C. It makes NO SENSE AT ALL to have "shot down" the airplane there, without attempting many of the tactics I just mentioned, in previous paragraph.

Use your logic, please!!

reply to post by empireoflizards


So explain why that flight data recorders do no support the idea that the plane was shot down? Without using the ridiculous argument that someone "faked" the data.

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by thedman

 

Uh.. that picture of bones couldnt possibly be the passengers on the plane. When recovering debris from a fresh plane crash, the bones would still have flesh on them. So those bones are from someone, or something who has been dead quite a while I'd say.

I don't know that you can say that - it would depend on the nature of the crash, in this case (Flight 93) the idea that all bone fragments found must include connect soft tissue doesn't hold water. That being said, the items in the photo may or may not be human remains, but if you were part of the recovery team and found something that looked like bone tissue wouldn't you collect it anyway? In the field it is very difficult, except in the case of large animals, to distinguish between human and non-human remains.

Well.....i know it for months now, but just google; Lt Col Rick Gibney and Camp David!

There is were flight '93 is crashed, in the vicinity or near CAMP DAVID
The Shanksville crashsite is a fake one, they want YOU to believe it crashed there!
Yeah....and i am not even a American to figure that one out.
The clue i did get was on this site; www.serendipity.li...
Just read the story he is telling....the story about DRONE planes......
ATS has a same dronetopic, i did read it a while ago on this site!

I got a strange feeling after seeing the Jesse Ventura Pentagon video.
And i think Snake....he is got a point, he has a striking average of 25% so far!

Strike 1 by Snake; Pentagon was hit by a missile.....
Strike 2 by Snake; WTC 2 a droneplane...
Strike 3 by Snake; WTC 1 a Global Hawk or a smaller plane as the US government say....
Strike 4 by Snake; the flight of 93......just figure it out yourselves!

A clue perhaps, well at Cleveland happend some weird stuff

reply to post by empireoflizards


Again, the "debris field" extent was an indication of the incredible impact forces, and the way that some material will eject, under those forces, in many unpredictable ways.

Additionally....MUCH of this "debris" was very lightweight material....the kind of stuff that could easily have been lofted from the concussion of the exploding fireball, and then carried for some distance on the winds.

reply to post by vipertech0596


Explain to me exactly what the flight data shows. Does it know when it has been struck by a missile making it crash or does it just sense that it is loosing altitude and crashing?

reply to post by weedwhacker


Yes. That is assumption is called a Freudian Slip. Out of all I posted you only picked with that part. The part where this is video showing him saying it. It doesn't matter when he said it. He said it. I'm only going by what came out of Rumsfelds mouth. He sure didn't get anything else wrong in his statement. Why this particular part?

I would post the video but I'm guessing you've already seen it.

reply to post by TheLieWeLive


The flight data would show:
1. Loss of cabin pressure from a missile hit
2. Loss of engine information from a missile hit
3. Loss of flight control surfaces from a missile hit

Flight 93's flight data shows the engines, fuselage and flight control surfaces were intact and operable up until the impact with the ground.

reply to post by FemaF4Fotoshop


Oh I can't wait to read about "Col. Gibney"....and to expose his lies and/or delusions.

Because:

Strike 1 by Snake; Pentagon was hit by a missile.....

FALSE. Too much evidence points to American 77.

Strike 2 by Snake; WTC 2 a droneplane...

FALSE. UAL 175 was tracked all the way, from its normal flight, up to the point of the hijacking, and thence continually until impact.

Strike 3 by Snake; WTC 1 a Global Hawk or a smaller plane as the US government say....

FALSE. There is film of American 11 impacting, it is very clear.

Strike 4 by Snake; the flight of 93......just figure it out yourselves!

Exactly as I've described, just above, and in many other threads.

A clue perhaps, well at Cleveland happend some weird stuff ...

Nothing "weird" happened in CLE. The ONLY thing was the case of Delta 1989. After the order to land all airplanes was issued, DAL 1989 was being vectored to CLE. At one point they missed an ATC frequency change (a VERY common occurrence, happens every day). Tensions were highlighted, though of course....and suspicious eyes were trained on that flight, as to whether IT HAD BEEN COMPROMISED.

The controllers who handled the jet became VERY "By-the-book", and were "testing" as well....issuing instructions to see if the flight complied properly. The crew were baffled....unaware that they had been labelled a "potential hostile". Somewhere along the line the rumor spread (at ATC) of a possible bomb on board. As I said, tensions were high, and after the lapse in communications (briefly) attention was heightened.

After landing (because of the "bomb" rumor the airplane was directed to a remote location, and stayed there until inspected by the FBI. It was a mistake, and an over-reaction. BUT, under the circumstances, not hard to understand.

You should also look into the Korean Air flight on the West coast, that morning. Original destination was LA, I think....they were over the Pacific Ocean, and told they couldn't land in the U.S. Language barrier, they misunderstood it to mean that there was a problem in LA, so they thought "SFO" as alternate. They could not understand, due to poor English comprehension. What's worse, ATC confused them even more, talking about "hijackings"...and the Korean flight crew re-set their transponder to the "HIJACK" code! Thinking that was what ATC told them to do!!!

(There is "code speak" that I won't go into....but, that is how it happened. An American, or fluent English-speaking pilot would not have made the mistake the Koreans did). In all, a comedy of errors, but still just another indication of the stress of that day.

reply to post by TheLieWeLive


The "Freudian slip" of Rummy came from (as I said, above) his knowledge (but not yet public knowledge) of the issued 'blanket' shoot-down authorization. He assumed, absent the full information.

Explain to me exactly what the flight data shows.

Have you not read the NTSB report that contains it?

www.ntsb.gov...

It combines both AAL 77 and UAL 93.

In the PDF page numbering scheme, the graphic depiction of the DFDR is on page "10", ("Figure 2"), and is oriented sideways ("landscape").

Let me know if you need help interpreting it......

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Also, if you're adventurous, this link to Mr. Warren Stutt's compilaiton of the "raw" data:

www.orbitfiles.com...

Also, this NTSB video re-creation....this is the "long" version, from an Italian source:

Google Video Link

You may wish to skip to near the end.

A UTube short version (i think from the same video, above) of last ~7 minutes:



Starting at about 1:00, you can see the manipulation of the control wheel, and read the CVR transcript that is timed to it. Notice, also, in that (those) videos....the "autopilot" symbols. There are three (3) A/Ps, engaged by pushing the respective button. You can see that the "center" A/P is engaged, both in the NTSB charted graph info. and in the video....even while the controls are being aggressively handled (to toss the passengers around, as they attempted to storm the cockpit).

The A/P remained engaged in what's called "control wheel steering"...a "basic" mode, it allows the controls to be moved, and will (when controls released) keep the last attitude "commanded" by the controls. It disconnects, eventually, due to the aggressive use of PITCH, at about 10:00.....

There is a great deal of corroborating evidence that is obvious to pilots....maybe not so obvious to laypeople.....

German video of the Mayor of Shanksville Ernie Stull saying he was first on the scene saying there was no airplane.
When you consider other airplane crash sites is does make you wonder.

reply to post by vipertech0596


Alright, well just something for you to chew on.
My old thread
There was debris, but nothing big as you will see...
If it went under the ground where did all this stuff come from?