Full Version: Flight 93
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > News, Media & World Events > Conspiracies & Secret Societies
The official fairytale really does not have anything to reply to this with does it.
QUOTE(Q24 @ Sep 5 2007, 08:35 PM) 
The official fairytale really does not have anything to reply to this with does it.
Don't hold your breath waiting. When I brought up the issue of Flt. 93 supposedly being 95% recovered, it turned into a virtual ghost town in here!
QUOTE(turbonium @ Sep 6 2007, 05:42 AM)
Don't hold your breath waiting. When I brought up the issue of Flt. 93 supposedly being 95% recovered, it turned into a virtual ghost town in here!
I see what you mean!
I would just like to say I believe they did recover the majority of Flight 93. Possibly the reason for them not releasing evidence of this in its entirety is that they did not want the missile damage to the airliner made evident.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Nov 26 2007, 04:13 PM)
I know what I think about flight 93. I would be interested in how you think a fourth airliner crashing elsewhere is confirming evidence for your "inside job". Not your theory of what happened to it, but your theory of why.
Following my theory of the aircraft impacting the Towers being drones, there are now a number of people from the original flights who need to be identified as killed in an airliner crash – Flight 93.
Looking at the timeline of the flights on 9/11 (not including Flight 77 which was a different case), Flight 93 at 8:02am was the last scheduled to leave. This would give over 2 hours for all passengers to be put on a single aircraft and flown to the point in Shanksville. I understand there were delays of takeoffs with what were assumed to be the actual flights, but if a switch of aircraft - meaning transponder codes – had taken place, the flights with the passengers may have left as scheduled. As well as the timeline fitting with the scenario, I think it is well known the flights were not full and the total passengers from the three airliners could fit on one Boeing 757.
The above is of course speculation only about what was possible. Not in doubt are the points below suggesting Flight 93 was shot down of which I am interested in opinions: -
- Eyewitness reports confirm there were military aircraft in the immediate vicinity of Flight 93, some of which report hearing the sound of a missile. Various media quoted an air traffic controller as saying an F-16 pilot in pursuit of Flight 93 “must've seen the whole thing”.
- Edward Felt’s call from Flight 93 indicated he believed the plane was going down, he heard an explosion and saw smoke coming from the plane. An FBI gag order was placed on Glen Cramer, the dispatch supervisor who took and reported this call.
- A second debris site, separate from the main body of the plane, was found miles away (the news report linked says 6 miles though I understand it was approximately 2 miles ‘as the crow flies’). This isolated secondary field consisting of small debris would suggest the plane broke up in flight.
- Then Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, during a speech in Iraq in 2004 referred to the people who “shotdown the plane over Pennsylvania”. There was a press release afterwards saying that Rumsfeld simply made a giant misspeak.
QUOTE (Q24 @ Dec 3 2007, 11:47 PM)
Following my theory of the aircraft impacting the Towers being drones, there are now a number of people from the original flights who need to be identified as killed in an airliner crash – Flight 93.
Looking at the timeline of the flights on 9/11 (not including Flight 77 which was a different case), Flight 93 at 8:02am was the last scheduled to leave. This would give over 2 hours for all passengers to be put on a single aircraft and flown to the point in Shanksville. I understand there were delays of takeoffs with what were assumed to be the actual flights, but if a switch of aircraft - meaning transponder codes – had taken place, the flights with the passengers may have left as scheduled. As well as the timeline fitting with the scenario, I think it is well known the flights were not full and the total passengers from the three airliners could fit on one Boeing 757.
Looking at the timeline of the flights on 9/11 (not including Flight 77 which was a different case), Flight 93 at 8:02am was the last scheduled to leave. This would give over 2 hours for all passengers to be put on a single aircraft and flown to the point in Shanksville. I understand there were delays of takeoffs with what were assumed to be the actual flights, but if a switch of aircraft - meaning transponder codes – had taken place, the flights with the passengers may have left as scheduled. As well as the timeline fitting with the scenario, I think it is well known the flights were not full and the total passengers from the three airliners could fit on one Boeing 757.
Got to admit it's good for a laugh.
Neat trick collecting all the passengers seeing as those on the other two aircraft started from Boston and Flight 93 from Newark. How come none of the extra passengers had mobile phones, none reported having to change aircraft?
QUOTE
The above is of course speculation only about what was possible. Not in doubt are the points below suggesting Flight 93 was shot down of which I am interested in opinions: -
- Eyewitness reports confirm there were military aircraft in the immediate vicinity of Flight 93, some of which report hearing the sound of a missile. Various media quoted an air traffic controller as saying an F-16 pilot in pursuit of Flight 93 “must've seen the whole thing”.
- Edward Felt’s call from Flight 93 indicated he believed the plane was going down, he heard an explosion and saw smoke coming from the plane. An FBI gag order was placed on Glen Cramer, the dispatch supervisor who took and reported this call.
- A second debris site, separate from the main body of the plane, was found miles away (the news report linked says 6 miles though I understand it was approximately 2 miles ‘as the crow flies’). This isolated secondary field consisting of small debris would suggest the plane broke up in flight.
- Then Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, during a speech in Iraq in 2004 referred to the people who “shotdown the plane over Pennsylvania”. There was a press release afterwards saying that Rumsfeld simply made a giant misspeak.
Well, looking back over this thread, there are several posts (Frenat, The Doctor) that seem to deal with all those points to my satisfaction. As an aerospace engineer, I can certainly support Frenat's post #46 on the relevance of the impact and debris sites to the possibility of a pre-crash break-up. And according to the official timeline, the aircraft was certainly in a steep dive when Felt made his call.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 10 2007, 05:32 PM)
Neat trick collecting all the passengers seeing as those on the other two aircraft started from Boston and Flight 93 from Newark. How come none of the extra passengers had mobile phones, none reported having to change aircraft?
There was more than enough time for the aircraft to rendezvous at a point between Boston, Newark and Shanksville. There are many ways the passengers could be coerced into boarding one flight without suspecting a serious problem. Of course, exactly how this aspect of the operation was carried out is speculation for now.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 10 2007, 05:32 PM)
Well, looking back over this thread, there are several posts (Frenat, The Doctor) that seem to deal with all those points to my satisfaction. As an aerospace engineer, I can certainly support Frenat's post #46 on the relevance of the impact and debris sites to the possibility of a pre-crash break-up. And according to the official timeline, the aircraft was certainly in a steep dive when Felt made his call.
Is that to say you are disregarding the airtraffic controllers, eyewitnesses and news reports on the day which all said military aircraft were in the vicinity of Flight 93? That is a lot of evidence to throw away you know, and combined with the Mossad/explosives report you disregard, you are building quite a reputation for turning a blind eye to anything opposing the official fairytale.
Am I understanding your position on Ed Felt’s call and the secondary debris field is that the aircraft did break up in flight? If so, being an aerospace (rather than structural
) engineer, can you describe the sort of forces and extreme manoeuvres required to have this aircraft tear itself apart in the air?Rumsfeld, the then Secretary of Defense, simply misspoke when he said Flight 93 was shotdown? That is an ok opinion, though can you imagine what must have been going through Rumsfeld’s mind to come out and accidentally say that?
QUOTE (Q24 @ Dec 10 2007, 09:24 PM)
There was more than enough time for the aircraft to rendezvous at a point between Boston, Newark and Shanksville. There are many ways the passengers could be coerced into boarding one flight without suspecting a serious problem. Of course, exactly how this aspect of the operation was carried out is speculation for now.
Come on, these days the first response of most people to anything even slightly unusual happening is to get on their mobiles and tell their friends. This is yet another of your fables without any supporting evidence.
QUOTE
Am I understanding your position on Ed Felt’s call and the secondary debris field is that the aircraft did break up in flight? If so, being an aerospace (rather than structural ) engineer, can you describe the sort of forces and extreme manoeuvres required to have this aircraft tear itself apart in the air?
) engineer, can you describe the sort of forces and extreme manoeuvres required to have this aircraft tear itself apart in the air?No, I accept frenat's argument that the evidence does not support a mid-air break up. Incidentally, it is not all that difficult to achieve a break-up if an aircraft is mishandled - see the New York Airbus crash as an example. Civil aircraft are only designed to 2.5 g, plus a 1.5 factor to ultimate load.
QUOTE
Rumsfeld, the then Secretary of Defense, simply misspoke when he said Flight 93 was shotdown? That is an ok opinion, though can you imagine what must have been going through Rumsfeld’s mind to come out and accidentally say that?
He only needed to get one word wrong: "shot" for "brought". He is clearly referring to it as one of a list of terrorist actions, the "people" he mentions are terrorists, not the passengers or the US military.
Do you never pick the wrong word? If not, don't worry, you will do when you get older.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 11 2007, 03:24 PM)
Do you never pick the wrong word? If not, don't worry, you will do when you get older.
look at the debris field....looks to me like it was blown up...is their any US position you dont take in these threads?...
QUOTE (Unlimited @ Dec 11 2007, 03:26 PM)
look at the debris field....looks to me like it was blown up...is their any US position you dont take in these threads?...
Try flying an airliner near-vertically into the ground and see what happens. A resemblance to an explosion is hardly unlikely.
I am not taking a US position, I'm taking an engineering one. For the record, I think the current US administration committed a crime under international law when they invaded Iraq and I think Camp Delta shames a country that claims to uphold freedom.
QUOTE (Colbert Nation @ Dec 7 2006, 04:00 AM)
These links may be helpful. I compiled them a while ago, so some may be broken, but most should work.
At Shanksville, which was by far the smallest of the three crash scenes, over 1,100 people from 74 agencies and organizations were on the scene.
On 9/11 alone, these included:
• 8 Police Departments
• 7 EMS Services
• 8 Fire Departments
• 10 Emergency Management Agencies
• NTSB
• ATF
• FBI
• CISM
• Red Cross
• United Airlines
Some information from, and about, agencies that were on the scene.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73
http://tinyurl.com/efj56
http://tinyurl.com/f83mb
http://tinyurl.com/k3jhx
http://tinyurl.com/jx3u7
ETA: I notice that NONE of the above 5 links are working. The internet is great, but sometimes it's a pain in the tuchas. These all worked two months ago. I reference the first link several times here. It's supposed to be to an EPA pdf report with lots of photos that most people haven't seen. I'll be glad to email it to you if you wish. I had sent our good friend Killtown that link and he's got several of the photos (and many others of the flight 93 scene) here: http://killtown.911review.org/flight93/gallery.html
Then there's the fact that most of the plane was recovered, examined for signs of explosives by the FBI, and turned over to United Airlines (except for the black boxes, which went to the NTSB).
http://tinyurl.com/hmbjm
http://tinyurl.com/z7ume
Remains from every victim were recovered and positively identified.
http://tinyurl.com/4hpaq
Have further questions about victim ID? Why not ask Paul Sledzik, who led the Flight 93 Disaster Mortuary Team, or Dr. Dennis C. Dirkmaat, who was Miller's chief scientific advisor?
http://tinyurl.com/mzkp6
The personal effects of most victims were recovered and returned to the families.
http://tinyurl.com/erazm
The phone calls made from the plane:
http://tinyurl.com/j4zjv
http://tinyurl.com/h4u44
Photo of Airfone from flight 93 crash scene
http://tinyurl.com/qnd8l
The Air Traffic Control recordings and accounts.
http://tinyurl.com/ncwf9
http://tinyurl.com/qg3ht
The Cockpit Voice Recorder recording transcript: http://tinyurl.com/rxe8a
Photo of CVR: http://tinyurl.com/lulmt
The Flight Data Recorder recording.
http://tinyurl.com/myayp
Photo of FDR: http://tinyurl.com/osa7m
The NORAD recordings.
http://tinyurl.com/rc2dn
The numerous witnesses on the ground (these are just a few accounts.)
"There was a great explosion and you could see the flames. It was a massive, massive explosion. Flames and then smoke and then a massive, massive mushroom cloud."
http://tinyurl.com/m347n
Then Peterson said he saw a fireball, heard an explosion and saw a mushroom cloud of smoke rise into the sky.
Peterson rushed to the scene on an all-terrain vehicle and when he arrived he saw bits and pieces of an airliner spread over a large area of an abandoned strip-mine in Stonycreek Township.
"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning," Peterson said. Strewn about were pieces of clothing hanging from trees and parts of the Boeing 757, but nothing bigger than a couple of feet long, he said. Many of the items were burning.
http://tinyurl.com/fa75e
"I just watched with my mouth open as this yellow mushroom cloud rose up just like an atomic bomb over the hill where I like to go hunting," said 72- year-old John Walsh. [Say, maybe it was an A-Bomb!]
Barefoot and in his bathrobe, he drove up the dirt road to rescue anyone he could find. There would be nothing he could do.
Debris, including photographs and other papers that survived the fireball, was strewn over a wide area. Residents have spent days collecting it.
http://tinyurl.com/oapxx
"When the plane hit, it sounded like something just fell on the roof. Everybody sort of panicked," she said. "I went to the window and saw all this smoke coming up and I just pointed and screamed."
http://tinyurl.com/rl5qc
Charles Sturtz, 53, who lives just over the hillside from the crash site, said a fireball 200 feet high shot up over the hill. He got to the crash scene even before the firefighters.
http://tinyurl.com/rl5qc
Bob Blair was completing a routine drive to Shade Creek just after 10 a.m. Tuesday, when he saw a huge silver plane fly past him just above the treetops and crash into the woods along Lambertsville Road.
Blair, of Stoystown, a driver with Jim Barron Trucking of Somerset, was traveling in a coal truck along with Doug Miller of Somerset, when they saw the plane spiraling to the ground and then explode on the outskirts of Lambertsville.
“I saw the plane flying upside down overhead and crash into the nearby trees. My buddy, Doug, and I grabbed our fire extinguishers and ran to the scene,” said Blair.
http://tinyurl.com/guct4
The 300 volunteers who collected debris and remains in the final sweep three weeks after the crash.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73
Photos of the crash scene, debris, and personal effects.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73
http://tinyurl.com/p7zzn
http://tinyurl.com/h7ghq
http://911myths.com/html/flight_93_photos.html
http://tinyurl.com/qd4oo
http://tinyurl.com/r5m8t
http://tinyurl.com/m2tnf
http://tinyurl.com/nfy5f
Slideshow of site and debris: http://tinyurl.com/hfqan
Hijacker identification from the crash scene:
http://tinyurl.com/ppknu
http://tinyurl.com/qt3an
http://tinyurl.com/om544
http://tinyurl.com/logjb
http://tinyurl.com/n9zkl
http://tinyurl.com/mrw64
Val McClatchey's photo (certified as authentic by the FBI's examination of her camera's memory card.)
http://tinyurl.com/r577d
The Falcon 20 crew's report.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...rjetnat5p5.asp
The C-130 crew's report
http://tinyurl.com/mg4xh
40 Lives, One Destiny.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...ainstoryp7.asp
*****
Some contact information for flight 93 crash scene responders.
Shanksville Volunteer Fire Co
Shanksville, PA 15560
(814) 267-4737
Terry Schaffer, Fire Chief
Rick King, Assistant Chief
Somerset County Coroner's Office
555 Tayman Avenue, Somerset, PA 15501
(814) 445-6900
Wallace Miller, Coroner
Somerset County Emergency Services
100 East Union Street, Somerset, PA 15501
(814) 445-1515
WESTMORELAND COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
12 Court House Square
Greensburg, PA 15601
724-600-7300
Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency
Harrisburg, PA 17101
(717) 651-2001
Paul Sledzik, Curator Disaster Mortuary Team Main
Armed Forces Institute of Pathology National Museum of Health and Medicine
(He led flight 93 DMORT investigation)
202-782-2204 sledzik@email.afip.osd.mil
Disaster Mortuary Team Main office: 1-800-USA-NDMS, ext. 205
DMORT Region 3 office (includes Pennsylvania) 410-676-4600
Dr. Dennis C. Dirkmaat
Director, Applied Forensic Sciences Department
Mercyhurst College
501 E. 38th St.
Erie, PA 16546
dirkmaat@mercyhurst.edu
(814) 824-2105
At Shanksville, which was by far the smallest of the three crash scenes, over 1,100 people from 74 agencies and organizations were on the scene.
On 9/11 alone, these included:
• 8 Police Departments
• 7 EMS Services
• 8 Fire Departments
• 10 Emergency Management Agencies
• NTSB
• ATF
• FBI
• CISM
• Red Cross
• United Airlines
Some information from, and about, agencies that were on the scene.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73
http://tinyurl.com/efj56
http://tinyurl.com/f83mb
http://tinyurl.com/k3jhx
http://tinyurl.com/jx3u7
ETA: I notice that NONE of the above 5 links are working. The internet is great, but sometimes it's a pain in the tuchas. These all worked two months ago. I reference the first link several times here. It's supposed to be to an EPA pdf report with lots of photos that most people haven't seen. I'll be glad to email it to you if you wish. I had sent our good friend Killtown that link and he's got several of the photos (and many others of the flight 93 scene) here: http://killtown.911review.org/flight93/gallery.html
Then there's the fact that most of the plane was recovered, examined for signs of explosives by the FBI, and turned over to United Airlines (except for the black boxes, which went to the NTSB).
http://tinyurl.com/hmbjm
http://tinyurl.com/z7ume
Remains from every victim were recovered and positively identified.
http://tinyurl.com/4hpaq
Have further questions about victim ID? Why not ask Paul Sledzik, who led the Flight 93 Disaster Mortuary Team, or Dr. Dennis C. Dirkmaat, who was Miller's chief scientific advisor?
http://tinyurl.com/mzkp6
The personal effects of most victims were recovered and returned to the families.
http://tinyurl.com/erazm
The phone calls made from the plane:
http://tinyurl.com/j4zjv
http://tinyurl.com/h4u44
Photo of Airfone from flight 93 crash scene
http://tinyurl.com/qnd8l
The Air Traffic Control recordings and accounts.
http://tinyurl.com/ncwf9
http://tinyurl.com/qg3ht
The Cockpit Voice Recorder recording transcript: http://tinyurl.com/rxe8a
Photo of CVR: http://tinyurl.com/lulmt
The Flight Data Recorder recording.
http://tinyurl.com/myayp
Photo of FDR: http://tinyurl.com/osa7m
The NORAD recordings.
http://tinyurl.com/rc2dn
The numerous witnesses on the ground (these are just a few accounts.)
"There was a great explosion and you could see the flames. It was a massive, massive explosion. Flames and then smoke and then a massive, massive mushroom cloud."
http://tinyurl.com/m347n
Then Peterson said he saw a fireball, heard an explosion and saw a mushroom cloud of smoke rise into the sky.
Peterson rushed to the scene on an all-terrain vehicle and when he arrived he saw bits and pieces of an airliner spread over a large area of an abandoned strip-mine in Stonycreek Township.
"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning," Peterson said. Strewn about were pieces of clothing hanging from trees and parts of the Boeing 757, but nothing bigger than a couple of feet long, he said. Many of the items were burning.
http://tinyurl.com/fa75e
"I just watched with my mouth open as this yellow mushroom cloud rose up just like an atomic bomb over the hill where I like to go hunting," said 72- year-old John Walsh. [Say, maybe it was an A-Bomb!]
Barefoot and in his bathrobe, he drove up the dirt road to rescue anyone he could find. There would be nothing he could do.
Debris, including photographs and other papers that survived the fireball, was strewn over a wide area. Residents have spent days collecting it.
http://tinyurl.com/oapxx
"When the plane hit, it sounded like something just fell on the roof. Everybody sort of panicked," she said. "I went to the window and saw all this smoke coming up and I just pointed and screamed."
http://tinyurl.com/rl5qc
Charles Sturtz, 53, who lives just over the hillside from the crash site, said a fireball 200 feet high shot up over the hill. He got to the crash scene even before the firefighters.
http://tinyurl.com/rl5qc
Bob Blair was completing a routine drive to Shade Creek just after 10 a.m. Tuesday, when he saw a huge silver plane fly past him just above the treetops and crash into the woods along Lambertsville Road.
Blair, of Stoystown, a driver with Jim Barron Trucking of Somerset, was traveling in a coal truck along with Doug Miller of Somerset, when they saw the plane spiraling to the ground and then explode on the outskirts of Lambertsville.
“I saw the plane flying upside down overhead and crash into the nearby trees. My buddy, Doug, and I grabbed our fire extinguishers and ran to the scene,” said Blair.
http://tinyurl.com/guct4
The 300 volunteers who collected debris and remains in the final sweep three weeks after the crash.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73
Photos of the crash scene, debris, and personal effects.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73
http://tinyurl.com/p7zzn
http://tinyurl.com/h7ghq
http://911myths.com/html/flight_93_photos.html
http://tinyurl.com/qd4oo
http://tinyurl.com/r5m8t
http://tinyurl.com/m2tnf
http://tinyurl.com/nfy5f
Slideshow of site and debris: http://tinyurl.com/hfqan
Hijacker identification from the crash scene:
http://tinyurl.com/ppknu
http://tinyurl.com/qt3an
http://tinyurl.com/om544
http://tinyurl.com/logjb
http://tinyurl.com/n9zkl
http://tinyurl.com/mrw64
Val McClatchey's photo (certified as authentic by the FBI's examination of her camera's memory card.)
http://tinyurl.com/r577d
The Falcon 20 crew's report.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...rjetnat5p5.asp
The C-130 crew's report
http://tinyurl.com/mg4xh
40 Lives, One Destiny.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...ainstoryp7.asp
*****
Some contact information for flight 93 crash scene responders.
Shanksville Volunteer Fire Co
Shanksville, PA 15560
(814) 267-4737
Terry Schaffer, Fire Chief
Rick King, Assistant Chief
Somerset County Coroner's Office
555 Tayman Avenue, Somerset, PA 15501
(814) 445-6900
Wallace Miller, Coroner
Somerset County Emergency Services
100 East Union Street, Somerset, PA 15501
(814) 445-1515
WESTMORELAND COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
12 Court House Square
Greensburg, PA 15601
724-600-7300
Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency
Harrisburg, PA 17101
(717) 651-2001
Paul Sledzik, Curator Disaster Mortuary Team Main
Armed Forces Institute of Pathology National Museum of Health and Medicine
(He led flight 93 DMORT investigation)
202-782-2204 sledzik@email.afip.osd.mil
Disaster Mortuary Team Main office: 1-800-USA-NDMS, ext. 205
DMORT Region 3 office (includes Pennsylvania) 410-676-4600
Dr. Dennis C. Dirkmaat
Director, Applied Forensic Sciences Department
Mercyhurst College
501 E. 38th St.
Erie, PA 16546
dirkmaat@mercyhurst.edu
(814) 824-2105
Smart guy with all these links huh? Got it all covered eh Colbert wanna be? Did you know the link you posted with all the pics is a website that is claiming the pics are not legit, and there are oddities that point to man made set up? Most of the links you have posted show nothing but a paper trail very easy to set up. Your links are also old, and if you look through the picture gallery you posted it shows absolutely no evidence of a downed plane. It looks like a ditch with small debri scattered around it. And please keep in mind one thing, 911 set a record for aviation history. Two planes in the same day to vaporize, one hit the pentagon and the other was flight 93......... and that a fact! Previously there is no record of a plane vaporizing ever!
I want Eric Skeptic, MID and any other resident debunkers to click on this link and TELL WITH ALL HONESTY that this does not put doubt in your mind about the official story. Out of the VAPORIZED PLANES they have found the hijackers info on two different planes and untouched for that matter....... what are the odds???
http://killtown.911review.org/images/fligh...atta_letter.jpg
http://killtown.911review.org/images/fligh...atta_letter.jpg
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 10:06 PM)
Smart guy with all these links huh? Got it all covered eh Colbert wanna be? Did you know the link you posted with all the pics is a website that is claiming the pics are not legit, and there are oddities that point to man made set up? Most of the links you have posted show nothing but a paper trail very easy to set up. Your links are also old, and if you look through the picture gallery you posted it shows absolutely no evidence of a downed plane. It looks like a ditch with small debri scattered around it. And please keep in mind one thing, 911 set a record for aviation history. Two planes in the same day to vaporize, one hit the pentagon and the other was flight 93......... and that a fact! Previously there is no record of a plane vaporizing ever!
Ummmm, that post was from over a year ago, so the links being old is not a great surprise.
Also those two flights didn't 'vapourise'. But even if they did I think there is a record of it happening before - this is quite a well know video... link
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 10:20 PM)
I want Eric Skeptic, MID and any other resident debunkers to click on this link and TELL WITH ALL HONESTY that this does not put doubt in your mind about the official story. Out of the VAPORIZED PLANES they have found the hijackers info on two different planes and untouched for that matter....... what are the odds???
http://killtown.911review.org/images/fligh...atta_letter.jpg
http://killtown.911review.org/images/fligh...atta_letter.jpg
Wake up and open your eyes!
QUOTE (ifisurvive @ Dec 11 2007, 10:20 PM)
Ummmm, that post was from over a year ago, so the links being old is not a great surprise.
Also those two flights didn't 'vapourise'. But even if they did I think there is a record of it happening before - this is quite a well know video... link
Also those two flights didn't 'vapourise'. But even if they did I think there is a record of it happening before - this is quite a well know video... link
Four things....
1. The wall it hit was "designed to absorb impact"
2. It was a small plane with no passengers or equipment or luggage.
3. It was a jet powered rocket engine set to hit directly at the wall full blast.
4. The video shows no after math to see what exactly was left from the plane. She says "it looks as if the plane vanishes" At the end of the video you can still see debri left in the back of the plane.
that video proves nothing.
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 10:27 PM)
Four things....
1. The wall it hit was "designed to absorb impact"
2. It was a small plane with no passengers or equipment or luggage.
3. It was a jet powered rocket engine set to hit directly at the wall full blast.
4. The video shows no after math to see what exactly was left from the plane. She says "it looks as if the plane vanishes" At the end of the video you can still see debri left in the back of the plane.
that video proves nothing.
1. The wall it hit was "designed to absorb impact"
2. It was a small plane with no passengers or equipment or luggage.
3. It was a jet powered rocket engine set to hit directly at the wall full blast.
4. The video shows no after math to see what exactly was left from the plane. She says "it looks as if the plane vanishes" At the end of the video you can still see debri left in the back of the plane.
that video proves nothing.
The video was not meant to be some kind of irrefutable proof of anything 911 related. The video and the two 911 crashes are not the same (though not quite a different as you seem to think). But you stated that it was a fact that the two planes vaporised, when they didn't as debris was found and you said "Previously there is no record of a plane vaporizing ever", and the video showed that was wrong.
I'm not really bothered if you have issues with the crashes, but it would be more interesting to hear your views on what you think happened rather than incorrect 'facts' that I can't see anyone having problems with?
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 04:27 PM)
1. The wall it hit was "designed to absorb impact"
Not quite sure what you're getting at there. It was a just a thick concrete wall. At the speeds we're talking about, whether the plane hits a wall, the ground, or a massive building, the end result is going to be a highly-fragmented pile of debris.
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 04:27 PM)
2. It was a small plane with no passengers or equipment or luggage.
It was an F-4 Phantom with a much more ruggedly-built structure than a 757. Neither passengers nor luggage tend to do well in high-speed collisions with immovable objects.
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 04:27 PM)
3. It was a jet powered rocket engine set to hit directly at the wall full blast.
The F-4 hit the wall at about 480 mph -- just slightly slower than the impact speeds for American 77 or United 93.
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 04:27 PM)
4. The video shows no after math to see what exactly was left from the plane. She says "it looks as if the plane vanishes" At the end of the video you can still see debri left in the back of the plane.
For what it's worth, I was there and got to see the aftermath of this test firsthand. There were no large pieces of the aircraft left.
QUOTE (Pericynthion @ Dec 11 2007, 11:51 PM)
Not quite sure what you're getting at there. It was a just a thick concrete wall. At the speeds we're talking about, whether the plane hits a wall, the ground, or a massive building, the end result is going to be a highly-fragmented pile of debris.
It was an F-4 Phantom with a much more ruggedly-built structure than a 757. Neither passengers nor luggage tend to do well in high-speed collisions with immovable objects.
The F-4 hit the wall at about 480 mph -- just slightly slower than the impact speeds for American 77 or United 93.
For what it's worth, I was there and got to see the aftermath of this test firsthand. There were no large pieces of the aircraft left.
It was an F-4 Phantom with a much more ruggedly-built structure than a 757. Neither passengers nor luggage tend to do well in high-speed collisions with immovable objects.
The F-4 hit the wall at about 480 mph -- just slightly slower than the impact speeds for American 77 or United 93.
For what it's worth, I was there and got to see the aftermath of this test firsthand. There were no large pieces of the aircraft left.
wow you were there at that youtube video's crash???? Amazing.... I am sure you can back that up with like a picture or something right?
For what its worth I was at the flight 93 crash site when it happened and there was no plane that hit the ground.
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 10:20 PM)
I want Eric Skeptic, MID and any other resident debunkers to click on this link and TELL WITH ALL HONESTY that this does not put doubt in your mind about the official story. Out of the VAPORIZED PLANES they have found the hijackers info on two different planes and untouched for that matter....... what are the odds???
http://killtown.911review.org/images/fligh...atta_letter.jpg
http://killtown.911review.org/images/fligh...atta_letter.jpg
Due to this link no, it does not put any doubt in my mind.
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93sh...fevidence%2Cman
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 05:20 PM)
I want Eric Skeptic, MID and any other resident debunkers to click on this link and TELL WITH ALL HONESTY that this does not put doubt in your mind about the official story. Out of the VAPORIZED PLANES they have found the hijackers info on two different planes and untouched for that matter....... what are the odds???
http://killtown.911review.org/images/fligh...atta_letter.jpg
http://killtown.911review.org/images/fligh...atta_letter.jpg
No doubt at all.
You obviously have been sucked in the some sort of far, far left conspiracy mindset, and do not realize that it's certainly possible for such pieces of paper to be recovered from a catastrophic impact scene.
The planes weren't vaporized. They were destroyed...big time. Vaporized is used as a dramatic term, but it actually refers to a process which you do not understand...the conversion of a solid or a liquid into a vapor (gas).
...and I'm sure some of that, to a degree did in fact occur with the energy imparted through these impacts, but not to a major extent.
Large scale vaprization did not happen on 9-11...the aircraft were completely destroyed and rendered into mostly small pieces, a typical result of the kinetic energy produced by several hundred thousand pounds of mass slamming into the ground, or a building, at about 800 feet per second...
We found all sorts of bits and pieces of things, luggage, flight data recorders, wheels, seat cushions, body parts in various sizes and configurations (I beg forgiveness of any of the families who might be looking at this...and hopefully, they're not), at ALL LOCATIONS (including PA, where all aboard were identified through their spurious remains).
What's so unusual about finding letters from terrorist amidst the wreckage? Jesus, they were written for all to see, don't you think they were protected a bit so that they might survive to be read? Stuck in a murdered pilot's flight manual case, stuffed into a galley compartment between plastic food containers or something like that?
Have you ever read the all too typical accounts of miraculous discoveries of someone, virtually unscathed, being found buried in the rubble of an F4 tornado event in a town in the central plains? 150 people killed and a small town obliterated, and here's a baby crying in a closet, which somehow managed to survive, with nothing more than dirt all over it?
I cannot believe the extents to which you 9-11 CT-ers will go to make something phantasmagorical out of something well understood, yet unbelievably tragic and untenable to the human psyche...
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 09:43 PM)
wow you were there at that youtube video's crash???? Amazing.... I am sure you can back that up with like a picture or something right?
For what its worth I was at the flight 93 crash site when it happened and there was no plane that hit the ground.
For what its worth I was at the flight 93 crash site when it happened and there was no plane that hit the ground.
You were at the Flight 93 site, eh? Funny that the other "eye witnesses" claimed to have seen a plane before the impact - and the FBI, NTSB, ATF and FAA - as well as the media, scoured the area for WEEKS to find an eye witness to the actual crash, with no luck.
Oh, and I was at Woodstock, '69 and the fall of the Wall in Berlin... as well as the conception of both Cain and Abel.
Try another story that is more believable. You know, something that is a little harder to disprove.
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 06:43 PM)
wow you were there at that youtube video's crash???? Amazing.... I am sure you can back that up with like a picture or something right?
Yep, I was there, but no, I don't really expect you to trust me. It's not important and I'm just some anonymous guy on the internet. Just thought I'd share a personal observation. Like I said before, take it for what it's worth. As for actual evidence, it's pretty clear from the YouTube clip's narration and from the raw test film and stills at the Sandia National Labs website that the F-4 was completely destroyed in the collision. Didn't really think it was that controversial.
Now, back on topic ...
QUOTE (Enigma wrapped in a puzzle @ Dec 11 2007, 04:20 PM)
I want Eric Skeptic, MID and any other resident debunkers to click on this link and TELL WITH ALL HONESTY that this does not put doubt in your mind about the official story. Out of the VAPORIZED PLANES they have found the hijackers info on two different planes and untouched for that matter....... what are the odds???
http://killtown.911review.org/images/fligh...atta_letter.jpg
http://killtown.911review.org/images/fligh...atta_letter.jpg
No doubt here, either. To add a bit to what MID has already said, I'll present just one poignant photo (to those personally involved, please forgive me for dredging this up, but it seemed appropriate):
This fabric mission patch survived the breakup and utter destruction of the space shuttle Columbia as it reentered the atmosphere. The same accident sequence that literally vaporized metal parts and melted heat-resistant tiles had no effect on this fragile little patch. That's just the way random chance works out sometimes.
QUOTE (Malruhn @ Dec 11 2007, 07:36 PM)
You were at the Flight 93 site, eh?
Nah, Enigma is just giving me a hard time for the comment I made earlier. I don't really think he/she is being serious.
QUOTE (Malruhn @ Dec 12 2007, 01:36 AM)
You were at the Flight 93 site, eh? Funny that the other "eye witnesses" claimed to have seen a plane before the impact - and the FBI, NTSB, ATF and FAA - as well as the media, scoured the area for WEEKS to find an eye witness to the actual crash, with no luck.
Oh, and I was at Woodstock, '69 and the fall of the Wall in Berlin... as well as the conception of both Cain and Abel.
Try another story that is more believable. You know, something that is a little harder to disprove.
Oh, and I was at Woodstock, '69 and the fall of the Wall in Berlin... as well as the conception of both Cain and Abel.
Try another story that is more believable. You know, something that is a little harder to disprove.
its called sarcasm from the other guy I quoted......
Hard for some people to understand it I know
Wow you were at woodstock and the falling of the wall
oh that was sarcasm also
QUOTE (Colbert Nation @ Dec 7 2006, 12:00 PM)
These links may be helpful. I compiled them a while ago, so some may be broken, but most should work.
At Shanksville, which was by far the smallest of the three crash scenes, over 1,100 people from 74 agencies and organizations were on the scene.
On 9/11 alone, these included:
• 8 Police Departments
• 7 EMS Services
• 8 Fire Departments
• 10 Emergency Management Agencies
• NTSB
• ATF
• FBI
• CISM
• Red Cross
• United Airlines
Some information from, and about, agencies that were on the scene.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73
http://tinyurl.com/efj56
http://tinyurl.com/f83mb
http://tinyurl.com/k3jhx
http://tinyurl.com/jx3u7
ETA: I notice that NONE of the above 5 links are working. The internet is great, but sometimes it's a pain in the tuchas. These all worked two months ago. I reference the first link several times here. It's supposed to be to an EPA pdf report with lots of photos that most people haven't seen. I'll be glad to email it to you if you wish. I had sent our good friend Killtown that link and he's got several of the photos (and many others of the flight 93 scene) here: http://killtown.911review.org/flight93/gallery.html
Then there's the fact that most of the plane was recovered, examined for signs of explosives by the FBI, and turned over to United Airlines (except for the black boxes, which went to the NTSB).
http://tinyurl.com/hmbjm
http://tinyurl.com/z7ume
Remains from every victim were recovered and positively identified.
http://tinyurl.com/4hpaq
Have further questions about victim ID? Why not ask Paul Sledzik, who led the Flight 93 Disaster Mortuary Team, or Dr. Dennis C. Dirkmaat, who was Miller's chief scientific advisor?
http://tinyurl.com/mzkp6
The personal effects of most victims were recovered and returned to the families.
http://tinyurl.com/erazm
The phone calls made from the plane:
http://tinyurl.com/j4zjv
http://tinyurl.com/h4u44
Photo of Airfone from flight 93 crash scene
http://tinyurl.com/qnd8l
The Air Traffic Control recordings and accounts.
http://tinyurl.com/ncwf9
http://tinyurl.com/qg3ht
The Cockpit Voice Recorder recording transcript: http://tinyurl.com/rxe8a
Photo of CVR: http://tinyurl.com/lulmt
The Flight Data Recorder recording.
http://tinyurl.com/myayp
Photo of FDR: http://tinyurl.com/osa7m
The NORAD recordings.
http://tinyurl.com/rc2dn
The numerous witnesses on the ground (these are just a few accounts.)
"There was a great explosion and you could see the flames. It was a massive, massive explosion. Flames and then smoke and then a massive, massive mushroom cloud."
http://tinyurl.com/m347n
Then Peterson said he saw a fireball, heard an explosion and saw a mushroom cloud of smoke rise into the sky.
Peterson rushed to the scene on an all-terrain vehicle and when he arrived he saw bits and pieces of an airliner spread over a large area of an abandoned strip-mine in Stonycreek Township.
"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning," Peterson said. Strewn about were pieces of clothing hanging from trees and parts of the Boeing 757, but nothing bigger than a couple of feet long, he said. Many of the items were burning.
http://tinyurl.com/fa75e
"I just watched with my mouth open as this yellow mushroom cloud rose up just like an atomic bomb over the hill where I like to go hunting," said 72- year-old John Walsh. [Say, maybe it was an A-Bomb!]
ETC...
At Shanksville, which was by far the smallest of the three crash scenes, over 1,100 people from 74 agencies and organizations were on the scene.
On 9/11 alone, these included:
• 8 Police Departments
• 7 EMS Services
• 8 Fire Departments
• 10 Emergency Management Agencies
• NTSB
• ATF
• FBI
• CISM
• Red Cross
• United Airlines
Some information from, and about, agencies that were on the scene.
http://tinyurl.com/kuv73
http://tinyurl.com/efj56
http://tinyurl.com/f83mb
http://tinyurl.com/k3jhx
http://tinyurl.com/jx3u7
ETA: I notice that NONE of the above 5 links are working. The internet is great, but sometimes it's a pain in the tuchas. These all worked two months ago. I reference the first link several times here. It's supposed to be to an EPA pdf report with lots of photos that most people haven't seen. I'll be glad to email it to you if you wish. I had sent our good friend Killtown that link and he's got several of the photos (and many others of the flight 93 scene) here: http://killtown.911review.org/flight93/gallery.html
Then there's the fact that most of the plane was recovered, examined for signs of explosives by the FBI, and turned over to United Airlines (except for the black boxes, which went to the NTSB).
http://tinyurl.com/hmbjm
http://tinyurl.com/z7ume
Remains from every victim were recovered and positively identified.
http://tinyurl.com/4hpaq
Have further questions about victim ID? Why not ask Paul Sledzik, who led the Flight 93 Disaster Mortuary Team, or Dr. Dennis C. Dirkmaat, who was Miller's chief scientific advisor?
http://tinyurl.com/mzkp6
The personal effects of most victims were recovered and returned to the families.
http://tinyurl.com/erazm
The phone calls made from the plane:
http://tinyurl.com/j4zjv
http://tinyurl.com/h4u44
Photo of Airfone from flight 93 crash scene
http://tinyurl.com/qnd8l
The Air Traffic Control recordings and accounts.
http://tinyurl.com/ncwf9
http://tinyurl.com/qg3ht
The Cockpit Voice Recorder recording transcript: http://tinyurl.com/rxe8a
Photo of CVR: http://tinyurl.com/lulmt
The Flight Data Recorder recording.
http://tinyurl.com/myayp
Photo of FDR: http://tinyurl.com/osa7m
The NORAD recordings.
http://tinyurl.com/rc2dn
The numerous witnesses on the ground (these are just a few accounts.)
"There was a great explosion and you could see the flames. It was a massive, massive explosion. Flames and then smoke and then a massive, massive mushroom cloud."
http://tinyurl.com/m347n
Then Peterson said he saw a fireball, heard an explosion and saw a mushroom cloud of smoke rise into the sky.
Peterson rushed to the scene on an all-terrain vehicle and when he arrived he saw bits and pieces of an airliner spread over a large area of an abandoned strip-mine in Stonycreek Township.
"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning," Peterson said. Strewn about were pieces of clothing hanging from trees and parts of the Boeing 757, but nothing bigger than a couple of feet long, he said. Many of the items were burning.
http://tinyurl.com/fa75e
"I just watched with my mouth open as this yellow mushroom cloud rose up just like an atomic bomb over the hill where I like to go hunting," said 72- year-old John Walsh. [Say, maybe it was an A-Bomb!]
ETC...
as you stated in this thread.
THE THREAD
titled : Flight 93, No bodies/No parts
OP : dmgspycat
From your post numbered : #8
ETA: I notice that NONE of the above 5 links are working. The internet is great, but sometimes it's a pain in the tuchas. These all worked two months ago. I reference the first link several times here. It's supposed to be to an EPA pdf report with lots of photos that most people haven't seen. I'll be glad to email it to you if you wish. I had sent our good friend Killtown that link and he's got several of the photos (and many others of the flight 93 scene)
would you send me an email about this topic.. thanks..
why do people keep refrencing year old posts?..then they wonder why the links dont work..?
QUOTE (Unlimited @ Dec 12 2007, 10:42 PM)
why do people keep refrencing year old posts?..then they wonder why the links dont work..?
that I don't know.. hmm. yeah.. wonder why?
QUOTE (Unlimited @ Dec 11 2007, 10:26 AM)
look at the debris field....looks to me like it was blown up...is their any US position you dont take in these threads?...
That doesn't mean it was. :/
That plane must have took a big hit. When it hit the ground. ><'
QUOTE (MID @ Dec 11 2007, 07:30 PM)
No doubt at all.
You obviously have been sucked in the some sort of far, far left conspiracy mindset, and do not realize that it's certainly possible for such pieces of paper to be recovered from a catastrophic impact scene.
The planes weren't vaporized. They were destroyed...big time. Vaporized is used as a dramatic term, but it actually refers to a process which you do not understand...the conversion of a solid or a liquid into a vapor (gas).
...and I'm sure some of that, to a degree did in fact occur with the energy imparted through these impacts, but not to a major extent.
Large scale vaprization did not happen on 9-11...the aircraft were completely destroyed and rendered into mostly small pieces, a typical result of the kinetic energy produced by several hundred thousand pounds of mass slamming into the ground, or a building, at about 800 feet per second...
We found all sorts of bits and pieces of things, luggage, flight data recorders, wheels, seat cushions, body parts in various sizes and configurations (I beg forgiveness of any of the families who might be looking at this...and hopefully, they're not), at ALL LOCATIONS (including PA, where all aboard were identified through their spurious remains).
What's so unusual about finding letters from terrorist amidst the wreckage? Jesus, they were written for all to see, don't you think they were protected a bit so that they might survive to be read? Stuck in a murdered pilot's flight manual case, stuffed into a galley compartment between plastic food containers or something like that?
Have you ever read the all too typical accounts of miraculous discoveries of someone, virtually unscathed, being found buried in the rubble of an F4 tornado event in a town in the central plains? 150 people killed and a small town obliterated, and here's a baby crying in a closet, which somehow managed to survive, with nothing more than dirt all over it?
I cannot believe the extents to which you 9-11 CT-ers will go to make something phantasmagorical out of something well understood, yet unbelievably tragic and untenable to the human psyche...
You obviously have been sucked in the some sort of far, far left conspiracy mindset, and do not realize that it's certainly possible for such pieces of paper to be recovered from a catastrophic impact scene.
The planes weren't vaporized. They were destroyed...big time. Vaporized is used as a dramatic term, but it actually refers to a process which you do not understand...the conversion of a solid or a liquid into a vapor (gas).
...and I'm sure some of that, to a degree did in fact occur with the energy imparted through these impacts, but not to a major extent.
Large scale vaprization did not happen on 9-11...the aircraft were completely destroyed and rendered into mostly small pieces, a typical result of the kinetic energy produced by several hundred thousand pounds of mass slamming into the ground, or a building, at about 800 feet per second...
We found all sorts of bits and pieces of things, luggage, flight data recorders, wheels, seat cushions, body parts in various sizes and configurations (I beg forgiveness of any of the families who might be looking at this...and hopefully, they're not), at ALL LOCATIONS (including PA, where all aboard were identified through their spurious remains).
What's so unusual about finding letters from terrorist amidst the wreckage? Jesus, they were written for all to see, don't you think they were protected a bit so that they might survive to be read? Stuck in a murdered pilot's flight manual case, stuffed into a galley compartment between plastic food containers or something like that?
Have you ever read the all too typical accounts of miraculous discoveries of someone, virtually unscathed, being found buried in the rubble of an F4 tornado event in a town in the central plains? 150 people killed and a small town obliterated, and here's a baby crying in a closet, which somehow managed to survive, with nothing more than dirt all over it?
I cannot believe the extents to which you 9-11 CT-ers will go to make something phantasmagorical out of something well understood, yet unbelievably tragic and untenable to the human psyche...
No doubt here.
Just some lack of understanding of the CT's mind.
QUOTE (Pericynthion @ Dec 11 2007, 10:57 PM)
No doubt here, either. To add a bit to what MID has already said, I'll present just one poignant photo (to those personally involved, please forgive me for dredging this up, but it seemed appropriate):
This fabric mission patch survived the breakup and utter destruction of the space shuttle Columbia as it reentered the atmosphere. The same accident sequence that literally vaporized metal parts and melted heat-resistant tiles had no effect on this fragile little patch. That's just the way random chance works out sometimes.
This fabric mission patch survived the breakup and utter destruction of the space shuttle Columbia as it reentered the atmosphere. The same accident sequence that literally vaporized metal parts and melted heat-resistant tiles had no effect on this fragile little patch. That's just the way random chance works out sometimes.
Hey, that's no problem Peri.
You're right, that is a poignant shot...
It does rather help illustrate the point, in an environment that did involve some actual vaporization.
I remember a photo of a helmet lying on the ground in the aftermath of STS-107. It was (or at least should've been) attached to a suit, and on someone's head, yet, there it was, intact, laying on the ground about 40 miles below and likely dozens of miles ahead of where the catastrophe occurred...
Strange things happen in horrendously dynamic of events like this.
Flyingswan, you did not answer my question about airtraffic controller, news report and eyewitness accounts of military aircraft in the vicinity of Flight 93. Are you disregarding them all?
If there was no in-flight break up of the airliner how is the separate debris field explained? Bear in mind this debris field was not a continuous trail from the epicentre of the crash leading outwards; it was localised at a site approximately 2 miles away.
Also this would be neglecting the call of Edward Felt, incidentally the only single call made to emergency services, who described an explosion and smoke which you have left unexplained.
Of course, but the fact is Donald Rumsfeld said “shot” and not “brought”. Of all the many ways it could be described ‘wrongly’ it is this phrase “shotdown” that came out.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 11 2007, 03:24 PM)
No, I accept frenat's argument that the evidence does not support a mid-air break up.
If there was no in-flight break up of the airliner how is the separate debris field explained? Bear in mind this debris field was not a continuous trail from the epicentre of the crash leading outwards; it was localised at a site approximately 2 miles away.
Also this would be neglecting the call of Edward Felt, incidentally the only single call made to emergency services, who described an explosion and smoke which you have left unexplained.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 11 2007, 03:24 PM)
He only needed to get one word wrong: "shot" for "brought". He is clearly referring to it as one of a list of terrorist actions, the "people" he mentions are terrorists, not the passengers or the US military.
Of course, but the fact is Donald Rumsfeld said “shot” and not “brought”. Of all the many ways it could be described ‘wrongly’ it is this phrase “shotdown” that came out.
Yeah, and politicos never misspeak. "OB/GYN's can't practice their love for women," anyone?? Especially considering the level of stress and crazy news at the time...
QUOTE (Q24 @ Dec 13 2007, 05:02 AM)
.
Of course, but the fact is Donald Rumsfeld said “shot” and not “brought”. Of all the many ways it could be described ‘wrongly’ it is this phrase “shotdown” that came out.
Of course, but the fact is Donald Rumsfeld said “shot” and not “brought”. Of all the many ways it could be described ‘wrongly’ it is this phrase “shotdown” that came out.
the real reason they arent giving the full story on this is; WHO shot it down....it wasnt the airforce...it was a triangular ship..
QUOTE (Q24 @ Dec 13 2007, 05:02 AM)
Flyingswan, you did not answer my question about airtraffic controller, news report and eyewitness accounts of military aircraft in the vicinity of Flight 93. Are you disregarding them all?
There is certainly evidence for an aircraft in the vicinity, a bizjet. The evidence for an F-16 seems as unreliable as your Mossad explosives claims.
QUOTE
If there was no in-flight break up of the airliner how is the separate debris field explained? Bear in mind this debris field was not a continuous trail from the epicentre of the crash leading outwards; it was localised at a site approximately 2 miles away.
I have no problem with light-weight debris downwind of a crash site.
QUOTE
Also this would be neglecting the call of Edward Felt, incidentally the only single call made to emergency services, who described an explosion and smoke which you have left unexplained.
You have a transcript for this?
QUOTE
Of course, but the fact is Donald Rumsfeld said “shot” and not “brought”. Of all the many ways it could be described ‘wrongly’ it is this phrase “shotdown” that came out.
So he claimed the hijackers shot down the aircraft? You think he really meant to say that, rather than making a mistake?
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 13 2007, 02:13 PM)
You have a transcript for this?
The transcript of the call has not been released to the public though Glen Cramer, the dispatch supervisor subsequently put under a gag order by the FBI, obviously had a copy. Excerpt from Fox News report regarding Edward Felt's call: -
Please do make this a good explanation so I can understand fully your version of events.QUOTEAn emergency dispatcher in neighboring Westmoreland County received a cell phone call at 9:58 a.m. from a man who said he was a passenger locked in the bathroom on that flight, said dispatch supervisor Glenn Cramer.
The man repeatedly told officials the call was not a hoax.
"We are being hijacked, we are being hijacked!" Cramer quoted the man from a transcript of the call.
The man told dispatchers the plane "was going down. He heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him," Cramer said.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 13 2007, 09:13 AM)
I have no problem with light-weight debris downwind of a crash site.
Me neither! Especially given the g-loads imparted on that airplane during the last couple minutes of it's flight.
Swanny:
Did you ever take a look at the FDR data in the NTSB analysis (I'm sure none of the CTs ever have...and they wouldn't understand it anyway)? Man, that last couple minutes was a hell of a nasty ride for those people. Lots of high g stuff going on, positive and negative loads that came close to limits for sure.
I would be reticent to put a Boeing through that, lest something break...I wouldn't be surprized to find some small debris located downwind...that last two minutes of the flight covered about 15 miles or perhaps a little more. Sheet metal, pieces of this or that...
QUOTE (Q24 @ Dec 13 2007, 05:02 AM)
Of course, but the fact is Donald Rumsfeld said “shot” and not “brought”. Of all the many ways it could be described ‘wrongly’ it is this phrase “shotdown” that came out.
Wouldn't it have been his decision as to whether or not to shoot the planes down? That's one heck of a tough call. I can see why he would closely associate the two things in his head, whatever happened.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 13 2007, 02:13 PM)
So he claimed the hijackers shot down the aircraft? You think he really meant to say that, rather than making a mistake?
QUOTE (Tiggs @ Dec 13 2007, 11:51 PM)
Wouldn't it have been his decision as to whether or not to shoot the planes down? That's one heck of a tough call. I can see why he would closely associate the two things in his head, whatever happened.
Donald Rumsfeld made a mistake in saying Flight 93 was “shotdown”; of course he was not intending to come clean on the inside job. Neither is the quote from Rumsfeld on its own conclusive of anything. This ‘misspeak’ though, alongside other facts, must be a point of interest.
When a suspect declaring their innocence is repeatedly questioned by the police, what is the purpose of this when they already said they had nothing to do with it? It is to uncover inconsistencies in the story or in the hope that the suspect will ‘slip up’ allowing the truth to come out. If a mistake does occur in the suspect’s story which he later alters (“I did have a gun and oh yeah I said shot him.. ah.. but that was my misspeak!”), you can be sure any investigator will not be forgetting it and the jury at that trial will be taking the information into account.
I suggest this was Rumsfeld’s ‘slip up’ and the truth of what he knew came out in a complacent moment.
QUOTE (MoonPrincess @ Dec 13 2007, 12:30 AM)
That doesn't mean it was. :/
That plane must have took a big hit. When it hit the ground. ><'
That plane must have took a big hit. When it hit the ground. ><'
The limited debris spread out and not very much of it makes if look more like it a took a bigger hit in the sky high above FIRST.
QUOTE (Q24 @ Dec 13 2007, 11:32 PM)
The transcript of the call has not been released to the public though Glen Cramer, the dispatch supervisor subsequently put under a gag order by the FBI, obviously had a copy.
So the only evidence you have is hearsay?
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 15 2007, 01:53 PM)
So the only evidence you have is hearsay?
That depends if you count the word of the supervisor of the person taking the call, who had seen a copy of the transcript, to be hearsay. If you are lumping this in with the other media and eyewitness reports you disregard because they do not match up with your perceived version of events, then just say so. I am just putting together your explanations of the anomalies to see how they match up with the very simple explanation that a shootdown occured.
QUOTE (Q24 @ Dec 17 2007, 03:28 AM)
That depends if you count the word of the supervisor of the person taking the call, who had seen a copy of the transcript, to be hearsay. If you are lumping this in with the other media and eyewitness reports you disregard because they do not match up with your perceived version of events, then just say so. I am just putting together your explanations of the anomalies to see how they match up with the very simple explanation that a shootdown occured.
Perhaps you should check the definition of hearsay, because your reply amounts to an admission that that is what you have.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 17 2007, 03:26 PM)
Perhaps you should check the definition of hearsay, because your reply amounts to an admission that that is what you have.
To me, hearsay means unofficial/unconfirmed/rumour. The emergency dispatch supervisor is an official representative of the office who took the call and that he reported the story says it is confirmed. I understand where you are going with it though, so here is your explanation of events: -
- Multiple eyewitnesses who described military aircraft in the area were all mistaken… dumb Americans right? The air traffic controller who stated an F-16 must have seen the whole thing… he made it up.
- The dispatch supervisor who reported the last call of Ed Felt, well he misread the call transcript and imagined these words “explosion” and “smoke”. He had the confidence in what he had heard to report this to the media though as, um… hmm… dumb American again.
- After impacting the ground, light debris was carried on the breeze to a point 2 miles from the crash site. The reason the debris sites were isolated from one another is that, ah… there are unusual mini tornados in the U.S. One must have been passing through Shanksville at the time.
- Rumsfeld misspoke and the fact the word “shotdown” came out was purely coincidental… he is old after all.
QUOTE (Q24 @ Dec 17 2007, 11:32 PM)
To me, hearsay means unofficial/unconfirmed/rumour. The emergency dispatch supervisor is an official representative of the office who took the call and that he reported the story says it is confirmed. I understand where you are going with it though, so here is your explanation of events: -
- Multiple eyewitnesses who described military aircraft in the area were all mistaken… dumb Americans right? The air traffic controller who stated an F-16 must have seen the whole thing… he made it up.
- The dispatch supervisor who reported the last call of Ed Felt, well he misread the call transcript and imagined these words “explosion” and “smoke”. He had the confidence in what he had heard to report this to the media though as, um… hmm… dumb American again.
- After impacting the ground, light debris was carried on the breeze to a point 2 miles from the crash site. The reason the debris sites were isolated from one another is that, ah… there are unusual mini tornados in the U.S. One must have been passing through Shanksville at the time.
- Rumsfeld misspoke and the fact the word “shotdown” came out was purely coincidental… he is old after all.
I and several other posters have covered our opinions on this before - basically all your evidence is less than compelling. In particular, no-one who listens to the Rumsfeld speech could think that the people he is referring to are anyone other than terrorists, so how does it help your theory if he says that terrorists shot down Flight 93?
As for "mini-tornadoes", perhaps you might consider what the updraft from an impact fireball might do to light-weight debris.
If you are happy with your explanation disregarding multiple eyewitnesses, air traffic controllers, emergency dispatchers, a Flight 93 passenger and the Secretary of Defense, all whilst using an implausible theory for the debris fields, then it is clear you are interested only in believing what you want and to hell with the evidence saying anything else.
In the same way that an investigator is helped when a suspect slips up under questioning, saying he did commit the crime before asking to retract the statement. It is blatant if you have the most basic clue about human psychology that the words did not come from Rumsfeld’s mouth by pure random chance; rather because it was exactly what was on his mind.
Perhaps you might consider what the landscape any wreckage is blowing across will do to the debris field. If all of the debris emanates outward from the crash site, moving approximately 2 miles across the countryside, is it not logical that there will be a trail leading from one debris field location to the other? Did you watch the media report of the secondary debris site? It was described as a separate debris field and the reporters knew that something was not right, even without wanting to speculate they suspected a shootdown.
Therefore I must assume the only way your ‘it blew there’ theory would work is due to a mini tornado picking up the debris as one mass and depositing it altogether at the secondary site.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 18 2007, 07:59 PM)
In particular, no-one who listens to the Rumsfeld speech could think that the people he is referring to are anyone other than terrorists, so how does it help your theory if he says that terrorists shot down Flight 93?
In the same way that an investigator is helped when a suspect slips up under questioning, saying he did commit the crime before asking to retract the statement. It is blatant if you have the most basic clue about human psychology that the words did not come from Rumsfeld’s mouth by pure random chance; rather because it was exactly what was on his mind.
QUOTE (flyingswan @ Dec 18 2007, 07:59 PM)
As for "mini-tornadoes", perhaps you might consider what the updraft from an impact fireball might do to light-weight debris.
Perhaps you might consider what the landscape any wreckage is blowing across will do to the debris field. If all of the debris emanates outward from the crash site, moving approximately 2 miles across the countryside, is it not logical that there will be a trail leading from one debris field location to the other? Did you watch the media report of the secondary debris site? It was described as a separate debris field and the reporters knew that something was not right, even without wanting to speculate they suspected a shootdown.
Therefore I must assume the only way your ‘it blew there’ theory would work is due to a mini tornado picking up the debris as one mass and depositing it altogether at the secondary site.
QUOTE (Lovelynice @ Dec 15 2007, 05:37 AM)
The limited debris spread out and not very much of it makes if look more like it a took a bigger hit in the sky high above FIRST.
But the plane went down head first. It might have blown itself up. On impact. I don't know.
QUOTE (MoonPrincess @ Dec 19 2007, 12:52 AM)
But the plane went down head first. It might have blown itself up. On impact. I don't know.
Mate, think of a plane like a jar full of jelly beans.
Actually go test this, is there any angle you can smash it that does not have a debris feild?
Not only do I believe flight 93 WASN'T shot down, I don't believe it ever crashed.
The same reason I don't believe that anything but a missle ever went into pentagon.
The absense of debree is just frieghtening. Check early photos of the pentagon or 93 .. its like a bomb has (or bomb fire) has been set.
I don't know about the US goverment being involved, i sure don't think bin laden did it.. hell he said he didn't. The CIA fabbed a not very convincing look-a-like.
I can't believe the US goverment are secretive enough pull this off just to invade Iraq.
Interesting - I did a googlee search for "I saw the plane fly into the pentagon" - only 1 person has ever said this.
I tried a random "i saw bigfoot once" and got 472
" I was abducted by aliens today" 6
" I was abducted by aliens last night" 219
QUOTE (courage_now @ Dec 19 2007, 03:11 AM)
Not only do I believe flight 93 WASN'T shot down, I don't believe it ever crashed.
The same reason I don't believe that anything but a missle ever went into pentagon.
The same reason I don't believe that anything but a missle ever went into pentagon.
Can't say I agree with your Flight 93 theory - there appears to be enough evidence to suggest a crash. I think this is a point Loose Change got wrong, mostly down to the coroner saying something along the lines of there were no bodies at the site.
Regarding the Pentagon, I agree with you and posted the outline of points in question on the Flight 77 thread. I would be interested if anyone has anything to add there that I missed.
QUOTE (RationalFrank @ May 9 2006, 09:11 AM)
What that means is that the plane was shot down!
If the plane had crashed with those people onboard, both the bodies and wreckage would have been found radiating from the hole in the ground where the INTACT plane would have hit, and you would find large debris such as engines, fuselage, tail, just like with every other plane wreck that ever occured, except for this one and the Pentagon.
Physics and chemistry laws dictates that the kinetic energy released from a 600 MPH crash of a mass of a passenger plan, is a TINY TINY TINY TINY TINY TINY TINY FRACTION of the energy needed to break EVERY SINGLE atomic bond in the molecules of such strongly atomic bonded metals such as aluminum and titanium that the plane consisted of.
If merely kinetically "smashing" metals like aluminum and titanium can make them vaporize, why does industry use huge expensive electric arc furnances, instead of just dropping huge rocks on the ore from great heights?
The offical flight 93 "hypothesis", just like the ones for the Pentagon and WTC voilate all known rules of chemistry, physics, and mechanics, but given the state of America's science education it is easy why the government can get its citizens to believe such ridiculous ideas!
If the plane had crashed with those people onboard, both the bodies and wreckage would have been found radiating from the hole in the ground where the INTACT plane would have hit, and you would find large debris such as engines, fuselage, tail, just like with every other plane wreck that ever occured, except for this one and the Pentagon.
Physics and chemistry laws dictates that the kinetic energy released from a 600 MPH crash of a mass of a passenger plan, is a TINY TINY TINY TINY TINY TINY TINY FRACTION of the energy needed to break EVERY SINGLE atomic bond in the molecules of such strongly atomic bonded metals such as aluminum and titanium that the plane consisted of.
If merely kinetically "smashing" metals like aluminum and titanium can make them vaporize, why does industry use huge expensive electric arc furnances, instead of just dropping huge rocks on the ore from great heights?
The offical flight 93 "hypothesis", just like the ones for the Pentagon and WTC voilate all known rules of chemistry, physics, and mechanics, but given the state of America's science education it is easy why the government can get its citizens to believe such ridiculous ideas!
When you have something as large as a airliner going close to 600mph and crashing almost straight into the ground there is not going to be a hell of a lot left. I don't believe there is any conspiricy in any of the 9-11 events. It was just a bunch of Islamic terrorists killing people for reasons only the insane could explain. And as far as violating the laws of physics that's crap. And the lack of education in America comes from the government controlled schools.
QUOTE (Q24 @ Dec 19 2007, 12:44 AM)
Perhaps you might consider what the landscape any wreckage is blowing across will do to the debris field. If all of the debris emanates outward from the crash site, moving approximately 2 miles across the countryside, is it not logical that there will be a trail leading from one debris field location to the other? Did you watch the media report of the secondary debris site? It was described as a separate debris field and the reporters knew that something was not right, even without wanting to speculate they suspected a shootdown.
Therefore I must assume the only way your ‘it blew there’ theory would work is due to a mini tornado picking up the debris as one mass and depositing it altogether at the secondary site.
Therefore I must assume the only way your ‘it blew there’ theory would work is due to a mini tornado picking up the debris as one mass and depositing it altogether at the secondary site.
The 'blew there' theory doesn't seem unrealistic. The secondary debris field was found in the direction the plane was travelling and in the direction the wind was blowing. Everything that was found at the secondary site was pretty light so it makes sense that a lot of that type of material could be blown up into the air on impact. It was a high speed impact so it's likely it was blown up fairly high and the wind carried it distance until it landed again.
I can see your point about a trail being formed, but the debris was stopped in a lake. If it landed on ground then the debris cloud would come down and the wind would continue blowing the light debris, causing a trail. But if the debris cloud was carried to pretty near the lake then a lot of it could come down in the water. Perhaps some debris did come down a little bit before the lake but was then by the wind into the water. Once the debris hits the water it's not going to be blown any further, thus it all collects in one place.
QUOTE (ifisurvive @ Dec 19 2007, 01:24 PM)
The secondary debris field was found in the direction the plane was travelling and in the direction the wind was blowing.
A shootdown is more strongly supported by the secondary debris field being in line with the indicated flightpath, rather than believing the wind just happened to be blowing in that direction on the day. Upon looking, I am getting mixed messages on the actual wind direction and cannot find an official source to confirm it – what coincidence though that according to the official story the wind happened to be blowing back along the precise line of the flightpath that day!
Edit: Misinterpreting the above, someone is going to pop up and say that I think the wind is in on the conspiracy. No, I am claiming the precise direction of the wind cannot be for sure.
QUOTE (ifisurvive @ Dec 19 2007, 01:24 PM)
Everything that was found at the secondary site was pretty light so it makes sense that a lot of that type of material could be blown up into the air on impact. It was a high speed impact so it's likely it was blown up fairly high and the wind carried it distance until it landed again.
I would agree with all that except to say that alternatively, the secondary site being light debris of the sort that would be contained in the passenger compartment, matches with a breaching of the fuselage in flight.
QUOTE (ifisurvive @ Dec 19 2007, 01:24 PM)
I can see your point about a trail being formed, but the debris was stopped in a lake. If it landed on ground then the debris cloud would come down and the wind would continue blowing the light debris, causing a trail. But if the debris cloud was carried to pretty near the lake then a lot of it could come down in the water. Perhaps some debris did come down a little bit before the lake but was then by the wind into the water. Once the debris hits the water it's not going to be blown any further, thus it all collects in one place.
So the lake acted as a sort of collection bowl? How about the uneven land, shrubbery and particularly large wooded areas acting as collection points as well? If it is light debris and only a moderate wind, even long grass is going to trap pieces and form a trail between the sites. Still the only way I can see your explanation working is if there was a gale or mini tornado which picked up the light debris and deposited it altogether a distance away.
A challenge – take a mixed amount of paper, card, fabric, etc, throw it all up into the breeze and watch how it falls. Does the mixed material land in two isolated fields a distance apart? Or does it scatter everywhere forming a continuous trail?
Incidentally ifisurvive, what is your view on the Flight 93 passenger Ed Felt who, an emergency dispatch supervisor told, reported an explosion and smoke from the aircraft?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.