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.

 

Ex-FBI Employee Claims She Saw No Bodies But Many Angels From Flight 93

page: 7
27
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


Because the passengers were going to succeed and take the plane back, and there were no targets that would kill large numbers in the area. So they killed themselves, and everyone on the plane.




posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Originally posted by thegameisup
Planes fall out of the sky at about 90mph.



In what universe? A commercial plane can't even get airborne at 90mph. Even a commercial flight can be doing near mach 1 when it impacts, depending on how it hits. EgyptAir 990 approached mach 1 in its final dive, and that was a Boeing 767. A small plane like a Cessna 182 I can see falling at about 90mph, but a commercial plane? No way in hell.


As I stated, Air France hit the ocean at 90mph.
en.wikipedia.org...

I know this is not about that crash, I just used it as a point of reference.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


The flight data recorder confirms it. As does the man who was an eyewitness to Flight 93's crash.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


AirFrance 447 had frozen pitot tubes. They don't know HOW fast it was going. The amount of air going through the tubes registered in the FDR as 90mph, but that doesn't mean that it really was going 90mph.

Even if it was doing 90 at impact, how does ONE crash prove that "planes fall out of the sky at 90mph"?



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
The angel line is certainly good book selling fodder, would definitely get the god squad interested. Kerching!!

I'm not saying she's lying, like, but where money is a motivation....



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by thegameisup
 


Because the passengers were going to succeed and take the plane back, and there were no targets that would kill large numbers in the area. So they killed themselves, and everyone on the plane.


Is this just a theory or do you have conclusive evidence that a hijacker was at the controls when it crashed into the ground?

It seems we are led to believe that their was a struggle by passengers to take back control of the plane, and if that is true, then they would have also tried to take control of the cockpit.

I am just quoting the OS, I do have my own theory on flight 93, which differes from the OS, but for the time being, if you could show me any evidence that a hijacker was at the controls when it crashed that would be great. I somehow don't think you will have that evidence though?



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by thegameisup
 


The flight data recorder confirms it. As does the man who was an eyewitness to Flight 93's crash.


What does the flight recorder actually say? The flight recorder is a data & audio recorder, it does not record film, so cannot prove who was at the controls when it crashed, neither can an eyewitness!

If you have any solid evidence to conclusively prove who was at the controls, during the struggle that we are told happened, then that would be great.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ColoradoJens
 


of course there arent going to be any bodies, the plane slammed into the ground at close to 500 mph almost vertical. i would be suspicous if bodies were found



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by thegameisup
 


AirFrance 447 had frozen pitot tubes. They don't know HOW fast it was going. The amount of air going through the tubes registered in the FDR as 90mph, but that doesn't mean that it really was going 90mph.

Even if it was doing 90 at impact, how does ONE crash prove that "planes fall out of the sky at 90mph"?


Of course it does not prove the airspeed of flight 93, I used it as an example of what speed a plane falls from the sky. I know how fast a human falls from the sky, and a freefalling plane would be somewhere close to that.

If their was a struggle in the cockpit and no one was at the controls upon impact then it certainly would not be high speed as claimed. No one has or can prove it hit the ground at high speed, no one can even prove that the plane crashed where it did!



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


The CVR. It recorded hijackers in the cockpit, the pilot's that took off weren't heard for a long time prior to impact, and it recorded passengers voices breaking into the cockpit just before impact.

From the CVR transcript:


10:00:06 There is nothing.

10:00:07 Is that it? Shall we finish it off?

10:00:08 No. Not yet.

10:00:09 When they all come, we finish it off.

10:00:11 There is nothing.

911research.wtc7.net...

www.nps.gov...



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


multiple family members all reported the events that were occurring on the plane as they received phone calls from their loved ones who were on the plane. i dont doubt that a hi jacker slammed the plane into the ground and the passengers when they went to storm the cockpit, the hi jacker knew they were coming for him. remember this plane wasnt supposed to crash in the middle of a field in Pennsylvania. wiping out a herd of cows isnt the goal of a terror group



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by thegameisup
 


How does one crash prove to you that a plane will fall out of the sky gently at 90mph? Even if there was no one at the controls, it would have crashed much faster than 90mph. It would have nosed over, and slammed into the ground at high speed, at a high angle. There is no crash that I can think of, involving a commercial airliner that has ever been confirmed to have crashed at 90mph. They've all been relatively high speeds.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


It's worthy of note that while we do not have access to this recording, the family members of the victims did, and have indeed heard this tape.

The transcript however, is publicly available.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup
I know how fast a human falls from the sky, and a freefalling plane would be somewhere close to that.


A human and a plane are so totally different that this has to be the most absurd statement I've heard in awhile. You can't even begin to compare a plane with a max takeoff weight of several hundred thousand pounds, to a human weighing maybe 200.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   
jet fuel was stinging her nose so either high on that
or
psy op test by Al Ciada



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Ofcourse there were no bodies. The jet was shot down by a missle which is why wreckage was spread out for miles. Only an idiot would believe the story they put out. Black box was found 10 miles away so its totally feasable the crew took over the jet, drove it to the ground and the flight data recorder was thrown 10 miles from the impact



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup
Planes fall out of the sky at about 90mph.




This is one of the reasons I love ATS. They allow 5 year olds to post. Because only a 5 year old would make such a statement. 3 year olds don't know that unless a statement is a priori true, some support should be cited. First, at 90 mph, alpha (AOA)would be far past critical. According to the Boeing 757/767 checklist I'm looking at, the aerodynamic stall speed is 166.863 mph (145 knots) at MTOW (maximum takeoff weight.
So where might a 5 year old get such a 90 mph idea. Well, if the vertical component of a 600 knot crash is 8,000 feet/ minute, which is easily achievable for a 757, the vertical component is 90 mph. But the kenetic energy at crash time is still 1/2mv, and the v is 600 knots, and not the vertical component of 90 mph.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by BlackTTC6
 


The black box was found 10 miles away? Source? It was dug out of the hole with the wreckage. The only debris found miles away was light paper and seat cushions, etc.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by BlackTTC6
 


They have incredible remote flying abilities. it would not be hard to fly a plane remote and blow it in such a way nothings is left but the few cadavers Jane and john Does you put on board.

I looked at planes that were crashed and missals destroyed, all had seats and other large intact plane pieces.



posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
I don't see any bodies here either. Just bits. Caution....


FBI agents make a trip to the butcher shop and spread their wares on the street so as to create the illusion of body parts as a result of crashing planes ........blah blah blah.............if these faked meat aprts were actually real then they would have appeared in many many other parts of the city - we would have seen heads, arms, legs etc ect ect ..........WE SEE NONE OF THAT Fake Fake Fake




new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join