It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Flight 93 was headed for Building 7

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in


posted on May, 18 2012 @ 06:53 AM

Originally posted by SamSantino

I know their are going to be people to come here and comment that i am a liar, or what not. To these people i say this... I do not care what you think of me for speaking the truth. It is way harder KNOWING this information and not being able to do anything about it then it is to sit back and take the easy route of denial.

The trouble with this post is your disclaimer at the beginning "nevermind how you know". We are all supposed to take you at your word? Maybe you like to make up stories and post them on the internet.

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 06:55 AM
reply to post by Wonderer2012

I think that trying to draw conclusions from Alice Hoglan's demeanour in those videos is both tasteless and pointless.

She maybe held herself together in front of the camera but was a mess the rest of the time or maybe the loss hadn't sunk in yet. I can personally attest to the latter happening.

But reverting to facts. There is no doubt that she is Mark Bingham's mother and that Mark Bingham has not been seen or heard of since 9/11. Mark is documented as a passenger on UA 93 and his mother says he called her. Much has been made about him identifying himself as Mark Bingham but his mother says he did that sometimes. Also, please note that the only source for this is Alice Hoglan herself. If it was odd, untypical, and she was in some sort of collusion why mention it at all ?

Another couple of points. Mark Bingham was only on UA 93 because he missed his flight the day before. So how was anyone geared up to fake his voice when he didn't know himsef he would be on the flight until last minute ? And the call was placed to his mother's brother's home where his Aunt Cathy took the call and passed it over to Alice Hoglan. Aunt Cathy too was obviously satisfied it was Mark and how would any faker know his mother would be at her brother's and not home that morning ?

The more you look into supposed fake calls the feebler and feebler it gets.

Your hi-jackers still alive was debunked in prehistory. It arose initially because of people with the same names causing confusion but it was ironed out quickly. The Saudi government years ago acknowledged that 15 of the 19 were their citizens.

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 08:19 AM

Originally posted by brukernavn
reply to post by Wonderer2012

We all may have our own beliefs about 9/11. I believe that what is most important is that we all agree that the 'official story' is a load of lies. You may think one conspiracy, and I may believe another, but what is truly important is that the 'official story' is a lie. I don't know exactly whom is responsible for everything, but it certainly wasn't whom we were told it was. This has all stunk from the very beginning. People, wake up to these lies!!!!

Oh great. So we can come up with as many loopy conspiracy theories as we want so long as we remember only the OS can be wrong.

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 10:09 AM

No Plane Theory, really, is the only refuge for the total and utter deniers who cannot wrap theyr little pea brains around the fact that it was suicidal hijackers who commandeered the aircraft and flew them into the biggest symbols of American power.
reply to post by trebor451

As the debunkers love to cling to that post about the "no plane theory", it's as deluded and out of touch of reality as the OS. There are some here who are still saying 93 nose-dived into the ground, now that's even more deluded.

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 12:02 PM
reply to post by thedman

Really? You keep arguing height. My point is the width of the openings between the buildings are plenty enough for a plane to fit through. They're wider than the twin towers were. Look at the AERIAL photographs I provided. For numbers' sake, the opening between WFC1 and the Deustche Bank building was approximately 500 ft. that is 4x greater than that of the 757-222's wingspan.

And you're excerpt stating the west side of WFC3 was damaged is BS. I'm calling it. The towers were east of that building. It's west side faced away from the collapse. Just read your beloved wikipedia...

Three World Financial Center was severely damaged by the falling debris when the World Trade Center towers collapsed on September 11, 2001. The building's southeast corner took heavy structural damage, though the effects were not enough to create a threat of collapse.

edit on 18-5-2012 by jlm912 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 12:10 PM

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by Cassius666

You might have thought that at least one of them hits it with the wing instead, or at least with the nose off center. But no they were all right on target.

You must be looking at a different WTC than I did.

The second WTC hit barely had both wings on target. The plane was banked quite a bit just to make that.

Both were banked at almost the same angle and putting both wings within the building givinen the wingspan of the plane is still pretty much dead center. They were very skilled in the portion important to them, unless all it took was feeding the autopilot or the planes were remotely controlled from the ground with systems originally intended to take over highjacked planes or planes with the crew disabled.

posted on May, 18 2012 @ 07:08 PM
This has got to be the thread of the year!

posted on May, 19 2012 @ 02:42 AM

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by boncho

Think about it like this boncho.

Bombs were placed in all three towers.

They needed bombs knowing that planes would never get the job done.

Then they needed planes knowing that Americans would never believe terrorists had that much time to run around placing bombs everywhere.

Then they lose their cover, ie flight 93. Remember rummy slipping up and saying that the plane was shot down?

The bombs however are obviously already on site.

Now what??

Wait till my FBI goes in there and hope you can control all of them?


Blow it?
edit on 5/16/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)

I think you are spopt-on with that. they couldnt let them see the bombs, knowing that the building would have to be inspected by engineers to assertain if it had any damages.

They HAD to bring it down. There was no choice.

posted on May, 19 2012 @ 02:48 AM

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Monkeygod333

I have a feeling one wake-up pilot had the chance to separate the war games from the real life scenario and shot down one of the planes.
Either that or they had some simple little issue like an oil pump failure and had to move to plan B; dumping plane scraps and parts from carglo planes and a missile or two.

Wow, you'll believe all that, plus that WTC7 was rigged with explosives, but for some reason you won't believe someone would hijack a plane.

I believe that somebody would hijack a plane. Sure.
Just not THAT plane!

I also believe that history repeats itself and unfortunately the US's PTB do not have a good track record.

posted on May, 19 2012 @ 03:55 AM
reply to post by Monkeygod333

Yes, it's true that history sometimes seems to repeat itself :-

posted on May, 19 2012 @ 12:11 PM
reply to post by Alfie1

GTFO of here, guy. You mean the four planes that were grounded and cleared of all life before being blown to pieces? Reportedly by Palestinians in protest of tyrannical occupation of their home?

Hardly related aside from being planes that were hijacked, and also quite possibly a false-flag on the part of Israel.

posted on May, 19 2012 @ 12:34 PM

Originally posted by jlm912
reply to post by Alfie1

GTFO of here, guy. You mean the four planes that were grounded and cleared of all life before being blown to pieces? Reportedly by Palestinians in protest of tyrannical occupation of their home?

Hardly related aside from being planes that were hijacked, and also quite possibly a false-flag on the part of Israel.

Ah yes, multiple airliner hi-jackings by Arabs on the same day. Obviously nothing like 9/11.

Thing is I keep reading that a bunch of towel heads living in caves could never manage such a thing. Seems that is delusional thinking.

posted on May, 19 2012 @ 11:13 PM
reply to post by Alfie1

Except most of the known hijackers weren't even Arab?
edit on 19-5-2012 by jlm912 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 19 2012 @ 11:42 PM
reply to post by Alfie1

Also, two different organizations, if you can even define al Qaeda as an "organization." The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine were, I'm presuming, based in Palestinian territory out of houses and such. To even say al Qaeda members are "cave dwellers" is a little dense, IMO, and no, I'm not knocking you; I'm well aware you're being sarcastic. After all, which government was it putting forward the elaborate diagrams of the "cave fortresses?" The same one's who presented the media with the detailed diagrams of the mobile chem-weapons labs of Iraq... which also weren't proven to the public to exist... the same media now pushing a new cartoon rendition of a "nuclear weapons testing cylinder" setup supposedly seen in Iran's "top secret nuclear weapons development facilities" in one of their military bases. My money's on that one not existing either.

posted on May, 21 2012 @ 04:58 PM

Originally posted by SamSantino
I am here to post my first and probably my last time. I have been a long time reader of this forum so much so that i do believe you guys deserve to know the "truth".

What i am about to tell you is exactly what happened September 11th 2001.
I know this as fact.
(im not going into small details, just the jist of what happened and why)
If you disagree with anything i type, i really do not care as i have known the facts and the truths since January 9th 2002.
The person who gave me this information has been dead since July 22nd of 2004. Yes, dead because he spoke the truth to only 2 people i am aware of. Me being one of those people. That being said, i feel immense amount of guilt and pain knowing he trusted and cared enough about me to share this information. My friend worked in intelligence and had first hand knowledge of some of the activity that happened on 9/11. I say "some" because this project was very departmentalized.

Here are what i know to be facts.

On Sept 11th 2001 the real "terrorist" used WTC 7 as the headquarters for operations that took place that day. Yes, you heard me right. They sat inside the fortified floors of WTC7 and planned, operated and carried out the entire events that unfolded that day.
This is the reason WTC 2 (the south tower that was hit second) had to, and did collapse FIRST. In order to use the underground transportation to get from the stolen gold from both towers, tower 2 had to fall first, other wise if tower 1 had fallen first, tower 2 would have been cut off from the control center at WTC7.
Understand what im saying?
After WTC 2 fell (even though it was hit second), it left a clear route back to the safe zone. (head quarters, WTC 7)
Ok, Move forward to the point of both towers have fallen. All that was left was to destroy the headquarters of the daily operations. This had been planned of course, just like everything else that day to be hit by a jet (flight 93) that was SUPPOSE to be there immediately after they had set fire to the floors that contained all the evidence of mission head quarters. Everyone notice those nice 'tailored' looking fires that seemed only to have broken out - where in building 7? Yes, your right... the same floor as the reinforced windows, mayors office... ect.
Flight 93 was to be the grand finale for the world to see. Flown directly over the rubble of the other 2 buildings while all the world watched.
This is the very reason the mission was not accomplished. Flight 93 was the only flight NOT controlled from the same building as the rest of the events that day.
Now, to shed some light on flight 93. No, it was not a commercial airliner. (I do not know what they did with the original plane with all the passengers on it, as i said this was very departmentalized).
What i do know is... the plane that was "accidentally " shot down over Pennsylvania was a remote controlled drone that was headed to impact WTC 7. The pilot of the fighter jet went beyond the call of duty and shot it down after failing to be able to identify the drone, nor who was operating it. To the pilot it was already a suspicious situation because instead of "intercepting" a commercial airliner as he thought he was doing, he found a remote controlled drone in the air space he was sent to protect.
He did what any pilot put in that position would do. He terminated the threat.
While America and the world watched in horror the events of 911, what they do not know is because of the actions of one alert pilot that day, they where left a smoking gun... purely by luck.
Well, you pretty much know the rest of the story. No plane for WTC 7 so in order to cover their tracks... they decided to let it burn a while ... assuring the world focused their attention on the massive piles of rubble that had fallen as planned... wtc 1 & 2. Later that day, quietly while MASS SHEEPLE media did fake interviews with fake witnesses.... they "pulled" WTC 7
So, there you have it. Now you know why the Pennsylvania crash site had no bodies nor luggage. Just some big holes and jagged metal. The exact same as the crash in the Pentagon ... big holes and jagged metal, no bodies, no luggage. (nothing that wasnt planted by the CIA after the impact that is).
Who was behind the events that happened that day?
Israel and their Mossad along with some rouge murderers from the White house, and Pentagon and the CIA.

I know their are going to be people to come here and comment that i am a liar, or what not. To these people i say this... I do not care what you think of me for speaking the truth. It is way harder KNOWING this information and not being able to do anything about it then it is to sit back and take the easy route of denial.

I can believe all of that!

posted on May, 21 2012 @ 07:22 PM

Originally posted by DrEugeneFixer

The trouble with this post is your disclaimer at the beginning "nevermind how you know". We are all supposed to take you at your word? Maybe you like to make up stories and post them on the internet.

Like we are supposed to take debunkers and the government on their word?!

You seem to take the OS on it's word, it's their story, their version of events, that they presented to us, and you don't even question it? How odd?

posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 06:51 PM
The link to willylo where the opening poster from this thread based this thread on, was already addressed by me, posted on 19/9/2010 in this thread in my post at its page 7 :
Title : Whistleblower Reveals

Originally posted by LaBTop
See this thread of mine,
WTC 7's compartmented demolition collapse sequence reveals human intervention.
my last post :

Looked again, and suddenly all pieces fell in place for me.

That could be part of the solution why UAL93's transponder signal re-appeared on the radar for a short time, 3 minutes, after the FAA controllers thought it had gone down already.

This author thinks that UAL93 was shot down, and me too.
As opposed to what some in this thread thought.

And that it changed its direction in the last 3 minutes of its flight, straight to Manhattan and WTC 7, which was now unobstructed, because the last obstructing tower, the North one, had also collapsed. That was the moment UAL93's hijackers got word that they could at last set the autopilot for New York, and that illogical waiting period by the hijackers to overtake the plane had ended.
But then they got shot down.

My proposal for the miracle appearance back on the FAA controllers screens of UAL93's transponder signal, for three minutes more than explained in the official story of UAL93, is as follows :

Very early in all 911 research, the first Pilots for Truth members came up with a very intriguing thesis, that all planes were switched for "Operation Northwoods" type shadowing planes, in the same color scheme as the original ones, in spots where the Main radar had dead spots, no coverage at all. They had nice drawings, which explained the dead spots clearly. It was exactly as proposed in the sixties, for the Operation Northwoods false flag event which luckily never happened.

So, when we adhere to such a viable probability, what would have happened, the moment the REMOTE pilots of the shadow plane had switched their radar identification transponder back on, which was an exact copy of that of UAL93, just a few moments before the same signal of UAL93 disappeared, since the "hijackers" had switched it off, as ordered by their CIA?Mossad?NWO?Bankers? backers?
But then suddenly one or more missile(s) out of nowhere shot UAL93 out of the air! And the CIA planners saw it happen, through their drones flying around on their "battlefield". As witnessed by Susan McElwain...!

They panicked, probably, and were discussing fiercely with each other what to do, and then at last decided to shut the shadow plane's transponder off again, and sent it back to its base, as low as possible, or wreck it in the Atlantic.

Thus, are these extra three minutes that ""UAL93"" was still in the air, an indication that they changed all planes in mid air, by flying above or under the original planes, so that their radar image became one, in radar dead spots?
And then the original one dived away, and flew under the main radar back to their individual Bases, with their original transponders off, and the shadow planes flew to their targets with their copy transponders on.

This could also explain Mrs Tailor and her sister, and Mr Peterson's witness reports on video, that they all three saw a VERY low flying plane, about 50 FEET HIGH, looking exactly as UAL93, a decoy plane, over the junction in their little village, just 1.5 miles north of the impact crater of the real UAL93.
But the NTSB data given to the public had the original UAL93 flying about 4,500 meters above that same junction!!!

They saw the decoy plane, which flew so low, to keep it under the radar! And that one flew on, while UAL93 went down just 1.5 miles further. And it flew upside down since some very cocky but full of adrenaline remote pilots were having a field day showing off what they were capable of. Or a list of any other reasons.

Now all pieces fall together for me, and I hope for a few more people.
Pilots, what do you think, is this the solution for all these years bickering over conflicting witness accounts?
And conflicting NTSB data, with stubbornly held witness accounts!

I think so.

Please dive deeper into this scenario, link all the known witness accounts to this new thesis, and see if now, everything fits much better than before. I see in my mind lots of witnesses and OFFICIAL data suddenly fill the space where I could not fit them in before.
Yep, I'm a bit excited. Who not..!?

And then I realized that the scenario for those 2 planes was the other way around, see my next post on the next page.

posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 07:22 PM
I suddenly realized that UAL 93 was already the lowest flying plane using the cover of the mountain ranges at both sides running from north to south and therefore invisible for all the military and other main radars, and the decoy plane was the highest flying plane at 4.500 meters altitude, clearly visible for the military main radars :

Could it have been the other way up or down, a decoy plane, and UAL93?

Could it have been UAL93 already, which was already on its way to home Base again, in a low altitude pattern, when the passengers, who did not know this intention, broke in the cockpit and disturbed the whole planning.
And the plane went down, instead of returning safely. All witnessed by Viola Sailor, her sister and Mr Petersen in Lambertsville.

And the decoy plane flew at 4.500 meters above that Lambertsville streets junction, as seen in the NTSB and FAA and radar reports.

The transponder switch had already taken place,dammit!

UAL93 switched off, and descended, and the decoy plane switched the transponder on and ascended.
I have to find that report back from the early Pilots for Truth forum, and see if UAL93 was in the radar "silence" region, as drawn by the Pilots on a map of the northeastern US.

And the most simple thing was done by the planners :
They just took a piece of the FDR, flight data recorder, from the decoy (with the 4.500 meters altitude), and combined it with the last part from the UAL93 FDR, and combined that altered FDR with the CVR, cockpit voice recorder, from UAL93, as if both originally were recovered from UAL93.

And altered the CVR from UAL93 just a tad bit, to make it all more heroic and patriotically useful, afterwards.
The emergency calls were all genuine, just not the last words of the "hijackers", see the NTSB translation of the CVR.

And the FDR shows that at 09:58 AM the autopilot was switched off, and a new course was set to Manhattan and maintained for more than 3 minutes in a steady course towards New York's Manhattan Island.
And thus on a new course towards the last standing tower, WTC 7.
And then the passengers revolted and started to attack the cockpit door.

Another thing. The F-16 pilot reported by that FAA controller that broke the silence ordered by his superiors, probably flew a few times in circles around the decoy UAL 93 flying at 4.500 meters in the air just for one reason:
He could not believe his eyes when he saw that there were no pilots in the seats, and then decided to do the only possible good thing in that situation, because he surely knew already from the attacks in New York and at the Pentagon.

To shoot that empty drone out of the air in a safest possible, rural part part of the country.

Please read also that whole Whistleblower Reveals thread I quoted my above two posts from.
And read also first the last 2 pages (11 and 12) with my posts from this also quoted by me thread posted in my first post :
Title : WTC 7's compartmented demolition collapse sequence reveals human intervention.

And then read that whole thread to understand my whole reasoning, based on the witness videos from Viola Saylor and Susan McElwain, interviewed by Domenick DiMaggio and friend, Domenick is a member from the CIT team, who I am very grateful that he took the time years ago to interview Susan two times (2 videos online) and Viola one time (1 video online).
I found the witness reports from Mr Peterson who lived 100 meter south from the junction where Viola and her sister saw a 757 fly at tree top level above the oak tree in their back yard, and Mr Peterson said he also saw a very low flying 757 at passing over him near that junction, just 2 km from the crash site.

And the NTSB concluded from the recovered FDR from UAL 93 (must have been tampered with), that UAL 93 flew at 4,500 meters high above that same junction, which is for sure not at tree top level.
All the evidence for that 4,500 meters height above that junction can be extracted from the UAL 93 FDR which is online, and from the NTSB animation online.

I also posted a nice New York newspaper drawing of a map of the wide crash site, where they pointed out a few witnesses who saw UAL 93 MUCH LOWER flying than the NTSB animation placed their UAL 93 plane.
From 500 meters low to 100 meters low, in spots where the NTSB placed its height in the kilometers high still.

posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 07:46 PM
reply to post by LaBTop

If UA 93 was headed for NY why did the pilots have Reagon National VOR tuned into the VOR receiver? Long detour, huh?

How can a digital FDR with some 24 hours of previously recorded flight be faked or modified to show a different altitude than recorded?

Why are there no other aircraft shown on MULTIPLE radar sites in the vicinity of UA 93. F-16's are not stealth aircraft. How did one get close enough to shoot it down and not show up on MULTIPLE radars.

How was DNA recovered and analyzed by the local coroner if it was a drone?

Where's that debunk of my stuff you've been working on?

So many questions, so few answers, truther.

posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 08:35 PM
If a conspiracy was in play.... Then maybe Flight 93 was meant for the Pentagon, the passengers managed to breach the cockpit, control the plane, it is then shot down and so a missile is blasted through the Pentagon? All complete speculation of course lol no evidence to back this up, just an idea

new topics

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in