Shanksville pics..?

a reply to: neutronflux

What you say is a quote from Capt. Frank Monaco is not in quotes. It is paraphrasing by the reporter at best?

The part of the article below showing quotes then no quotes.

www.capecodtimes.com...

Jet crashes in Pa.; passenger reported hijacking in phone call

Thursday
Posted Sep 13, 2001 at 2:00 AM
Updated Jan 5, 2011 at 10:31 AM

"At this point, we're not prepared to say it was an act of terrorism, though it appears to be that," Morrison said.

Reporters were taken to the top of a hill overlooking the scene. The crash left a V-shaped gouge in a grassy field surrounded by thick woods, just below a hilltop strip mine. The gouge is 8- to 10-feet deep and 15- to 20-feet long, said Capt. Frank Monaco of the Pennsylvania State Police.

Investigators believe the plane crashed there and disintegrated, sending debris into thick trees nearby, Monaco said.

Considering a 757 did not create the crater as the crater is not even big enough for one engine and it's nacelles
As you can see in this image the small crater created on 9/11 was around 2 feet wide at the impact zone which fans out to 15 feet wide 10 feet deep and 25 or so feet long. Much too small to have been caused by a boeing 757.

Show your family and friend they will easily agree without any convincing that flight 93 didn't crash in shanksville on 911

. There, now let people decide on their own

triple post sry

Double post

a reply to: AsherLewin11

Why do you choose to not give the complete details of the flight 93 crash? You completely rely on the suppression of facts to try to push your false narrative.

Here is your running list of items you will not address.

The pucture you stopped using of the person standing by the crater? You ignored the large grass free area of lose soil that shows the true extent of the impact and were much of the wreckage was buried do to force of impact

Ignore the fact the impact area of buried wreckage was actually 85 feet by 85 feet wide. Up to 40 feet deep.

Ignores the fact the soft ground was conducive to the force of impact pushing the wreckage deep into the ground, then being back filled by the unstable soild. The ground was able to absorb the impact instead of being carved out by the fractured fuselage.

Title: Memories of Flight 93 crash still fresh at 5-year anniversary

www.post-gazette.com...

Veteran FBI agent Michael Soohy had been to airplane crash scenes before, and he thought he knew what to expect: chaos, bodies, a hulking wreck of a jet.

"I don't think anyone expected to see what they didn't see," said the 50-year-old who grew up near Johnstown. "It's almost like a dart hitting a pile of flour. ... The plane went in, and the stuff back-filled right over it."

How did all the wreckage, DNA, and personal items end up at the flight 93 crash site? Right number of engines and correct nomenclature.

How did the flight recorders end up at the site buried 15 and 25 feet deep.

What created the fire damage and extensive debris field of passenger plane wreckage.

Recognizable piece of fuselage ended up 900 feet from crash site.

Where did flight 93 and the passengers end up in the no crash narrative.

Ignoring that the position of flight 93 was visually verified by other flights and tracked by radar to the crash site.

Eyewitness accounts of a passenger jet on collision course to crash site. Accounts verified by physical evidence of crashed passenger jet.

You claim the crash site was caused by an object rogue from a live fire military exercise. You will not name a live fire exercise that included a cruise missile or missile. You will not state what live fire range the object originated from. The investigations that would result from a missile leaving and / or missing its target on a live fire range. No missile parts or missile engines found at the flight 93 crash site.

The persons questioning the crash of flight 93 have had their inquiries answered by frank and transparent responses. Information based on citing sources and physical evidence.

The persons questioning the crash of flight 93 have only provided:

Quotes out of context from persons that concluded flight 93 crashed at Shanksville.

Giving false dimensions concerning the crash site and will not acknowledge the extensive impact area revealed by the excavation of buried wreckage.

Will not provide answers to questions concerning the eyewitness who said the object that crashed was to small for flight 93.

Personal favorite. Individual stating they had to correct what "debunkers" believed were wing trenches are drainage ditches. This is truely a statement of ignorance. One, the official account was flight 93 hit nose and right wing first and the drainage ditches were never thought to be caused by the wings. Two, the individual would not reply if wreckage / buried wreckage was recovered from the ditches. Three, person never provided quotes and sources of "debunkers" who were confused about the nature of the ditches. Four, my internet search only revealed persons trying to prove flight 93 did not crash referring to the ditches as wing scars.

Just a reminder of what happens to aircraft during high speed impacts

youtu.be...

youtu.be...

What do you see left of the air frame?

a reply to: neutronflux

Just a reminder of how people react under pressure, why did Wally Miller change his story so dramatically?

Maybe it was natural gas chamber that blew up

a reply to: FlyingFox





Moles and gofers make bigger holes in the ground than this.

a reply to: Salander

Answer to this list, then we will get to Miller......

Why do you choose to not give the complete details of the flight 93 crash? You completely rely on the suppression of facts to try to push your false narrative.

Here is your running list of items you will not address.

The pucture you stopped using of the person standing by the crater? You ignored the large grass free area of lose soil that shows the true extent of the impact and were much of the wreckage was buried do to force of impact

Ignore the fact the impact area of buried wreckage was actually 85 feet by 85 feet wide. Up to 40 feet deep.

Ignores the fact the soft ground was conducive to the force of impact pushing the wreckage deep into the ground, then being back filled by the unstable soild. The ground was able to absorb the impact instead of being carved out by the fractured fuselage.

Title: Memories of Flight 93 crash still fresh at 5-year anniversary

www.post-gazette.com...

Veteran FBI agent Michael Soohy had been to airplane crash scenes before, and he thought he knew what to expect: chaos, bodies, a hulking wreck of a jet.

"I don't think anyone expected to see what they didn't see," said the 50-year-old who grew up near Johnstown. "It's almost like a dart hitting a pile of flour. ... The plane went in, and the stuff back-filled right over it."

How did all the wreckage, DNA, and personal items end up at the flight 93 crash site? Right number of engines and correct nomenclature.

How did the flight recorders end up at the site buried 15 and 25 feet deep.

What created the fire damage and extensive debris field of passenger plane wreckage.

Recognizable piece of fuselage ended up 900 feet from crash site.

Where did flight 93 and the passengers end up in the no crash narrative.

Ignoring that the position of flight 93 was visually verified by other flights and tracked by radar to the crash site.

Eyewitness accounts of a passenger jet on collision course to crash site. Accounts verified by physical evidence of crashed passenger jet.

You claim the crash site was caused by an object rogue from a live fire military exercise. You will not name a live fire exercise that included a cruise missile or missile. You will not state what live fire range the object originated from. The investigations that would result from a missile leaving and / or missing its target on a live fire range. No missile parts or missile engines found at the flight 93 crash site.

The persons questioning the crash of flight 93 have had their inquiries answered by frank and transparent responses. Information based on citing sources and physical evidence.

The persons questioning the crash of flight 93 have only provided:

Quotes out of context from persons that concluded flight 93 crashed at Shanksville.

Giving false dimensions concerning the crash site and will not acknowledge the extensive impact area revealed by the excavation of buried wreckage.

Will not provide answers to questions concerning the eyewitness who said the object that crashed was to small for flight 93.

Personal favorite. Individual stating they had to correct what "debunkers" believed were wing trenches are drainage ditches. This is truely a statement of ignorance. One, the official account was flight 93 hit nose and right wing first and the drainage ditches were never thought to be caused by the wings. Two, the individual would not reply if wreckage / buried wreckage was recovered from the ditches. Three, person never provided quotes and sources of "debunkers" who were confused about the nature of the ditches. Four, my internet search only revealed persons trying to prove flight 93 did not crash referring to the ditches as wing scars.

a reply to: neutronflux

Radar is easily spoofed, and even mainstream media carried reports of the use of injects. With Vigilant Guardian in play that day, the radar was spoofed. You should read Michael Ruppert's "Crossing the Rubicon". It is well documented with footnotes and sources.

What happened to the crew and passengers of all the flights is certainly interesting to contemplate, but irrelevant to what was observed and what transpired at Shanksville.

Your claims, such as where the FDR was found, engine serial numbers and the like, is pure propaganda from the pentagon. So were the DNA samples, as told 11 years later by Miller himself. He and his workmates, 11 years later, tell how the FBI agents leaned on Miller to "be a team player", which he did.


It was a staged event. We were all fooled initially. Some have come to their senses and realized the deception, others like yourself have not yet, 15 years later.

Will you ever? I have no idea.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

Radar is easily spoofed, and even mainstream media carried reports of the use of injects. With Vigilant Guardian in play that day, the radar was spoofed. You should read Michael Ruppert's "Crossing the Rubicon". It is well documented with footnotes and sources.

Radar was not "spoofed"

One, the position of flight 93 was visually verified by pilots in the air.
Two, witnesses seen the jetliner go down.
Three, the witnesses did not see any objects or weather events large enough to cause a false radar image.

What happened to the crew and passengers of all the flights is certainly interesting to contemplate, but irrelevant to what was observed and what transpired at

You play it off because all past explanations by the movement have been debunked. If flight 93 did not crash, its passengers and equipment landed someplace with witnesses.

Your claims, such as where the FDR was found, engine serial numbers and the like, is pure propaganda from the pentagon. So were the DNA samples, as told 11 years later by Miller himself. He and his workmates, 11 years later, tell how the FBI agents leaned on Miller to "be a team player", which he did.

How did the wreckage, debris field, and burn damage end up at the crash site?

Millers comments are greatly taken out of context. It's obvious a crash that devistating, in loose soil, would create little in identifiable remains and free blood. Is common sense a crash that devistating would not leave bodies, only fragments.

Please link to a quote where Miller said there were no victims at the crash site.

It was a staged event. We were all fooled initially. Some have come to their senses and realized the deception, others like yourself have not yet, 15 years later.

Will you ever? I have no idea.

Please tell how the stagging in your false narrative was created? Where did the personal items, DNA, debris fields, flight recorders, the dirt engulfed wreckage, radar data, eye witnesses accounts, and visiual verification stem from?

Very sad your hatred for government has consumed all common sense to the point of putting faith into the snake oil salesperson using 9/11 to make a buck.

a reply to: neutronflux

You play it off because all past explanations by the movement have been debunked.

False, I have yet to see all explanation debunked. The fact is, I have read mostly "opinions" to what people think happened.

Please provide evidence for your "opinions" and stop insulting everyone who does not support your narratives.

How did the wreckage, debris field, and burn damage end up at the crash site?

Do you believe everything the government tells you?

Very sad your hatred for government has consumed all common sense to the point of putting faith into the snake oil salesperson using 9/11 to make a buck.

Because someone doesnt support your views now hate the government? Where do you get this crap from?

ATS is about sharing ideas, working together debunking many things and sharing new information from around the world and many other wonderful things, however making up lies against ATS members who do not support your beliefs such as the one you just demonstrated in your above post only shows readers how ignorant you really are.

BTW Happy Thanksgiving.

a reply to: Informer1958

Going to present what you view is false with a counter argument? Or just carry on the same rant about opinions while not presenting any logical arguments?

a reply to: Informer1958


Here are some items that are fact.


Why do you choose to not give the complete details of the flight 93 crash? You completely rely on the suppression of facts to try to push your false narrative.

Here is your running list of items you will not address.

The pucture you stopped using of the person standing by the crater? You ignored the large grass free area of lose soil that shows the true extent of the impact and were much of the wreckage was buried do to force of impact

Ignore the fact the impact area of buried wreckage was actually 85 feet by 85 feet wide. Up to 40 feet deep.

Ignores the fact the soft ground was conducive to the force of impact pushing the wreckage deep into the ground, then being back filled by the unstable soild. The ground was able to absorb the impact instead of being carved out by the fractured fuselage.





Title: Memories of Flight 93 crash still fresh at 5-year anniversary

www.post-gazette.com...

Veteran FBI agent Michael Soohy had been to airplane crash scenes before, and he thought he knew what to expect: chaos, bodies, a hulking wreck of a jet.

"I don't think anyone expected to see what they didn't see," said the 50-year-old who grew up near Johnstown. "It's almost like a dart hitting a pile of flour. ... The plane went in, and the stuff back-filled right over it."

How did all the wreckage, DNA, and personal items end up at the flight 93 crash site? Right number of engines and correct nomenclature.

How did the flight recorders end up at the site buried 15 and 25 feet deep.

What created the fire damage and extensive debris field of passenger plane wreckage.

Recognizable piece of fuselage ended up 900 feet from crash site.

Where did flight 93 and the passengers end up in the no crash narrative.

Ignoring that the position of flight 93 was visually verified by other flights and tracked by radar to the crash site.

Eyewitness accounts of a passenger jet on collision course to crash site. Accounts verified by physical evidence of crashed passenger jet.

You claim the crash site was caused by an object rogue from a live fire military exercise. You will not name a live fire exercise that included a cruise missile or missile. You will not state what live fire range the object originated from. The investigations that would result from a missile leaving and / or missing its target on a live fire range. No missile parts or missile engines found at the flight 93 crash site.

The persons questioning the crash of flight 93 have had their inquiries answered by frank and transparent responses. Information based on citing sources and physical evidence.

The persons questioning the crash of flight 93 have only provided:

Quotes out of context from persons that concluded flight 93 crashed at Shanksville.

Giving false dimensions concerning the crash site and will not acknowledge the extensive impact area revealed by the excavation of buried wreckage.

Will not provide answers to questions concerning the eyewitness who said the object that crashed was to small for flight 93.

Personal favorite. Individual stating they had to correct what "debunkers" believed were wing trenches are drainage ditches. This is truely a statement of ignorance. One, the official account was flight 93 hit nose and right wing first and the drainage ditches were never thought to be caused by the wings. Two, the individual would not reply if wreckage / buried wreckage was recovered from the ditches. Three, person never provided quotes and sources of "debunkers" who were confused about the nature of the ditches. Four, my internet search only revealed persons trying to prove flight 93 did not crash referring to the ditches as wing scars.


Quotes by Miller greatly taken out of context. It's expected that a high speed jetliner crash will fragment and leave human remains almost impossible to ID by sight, not whole bodies. Please give a Miller quote that the wreckage of flight 93 held not human remains or victims.

a reply to: FlyingFox

You are making a bad mistake by referring to people as idiots. This only turns people off you and your message. If you actually want to the help the exposure of the conspiracy that is 911, then your job is to engage, inform and influence people, not turn them away from you.

Question; If someone called you an idiot because you did not accept their assertion how would you react to them?

1 of 10 for trying I'm afraid

originally posted by: AsherLewin11
Considering a 757 did not create the crater as the crater is not even big enough for one engine and it's nacelles
As you can see in this image the small crater created on 9/11 was around 2 feet wide at the impact zone which fans out to 15 feet wide 10 feet deep and 25 or so feet long. Much too small to have been caused by a boeing 757.

Show your family and friend they will easily agree without any convincing that flight 93 didn't crash in shanksville on 911

. There, now let people decide on their own

Good point, thanks for making that.

Just one interesting thing. Some bloke did some research and found a pic of that paddock was that dated in 197? something or other, or, thereabouts. It had been taken by arial photography. IMO this suggests that the post was picked out as the crash site sometime before 911.

Yes, the ground was soft and a plane impacting at several hundred mph in an almost vertical descent could have been swallowed up almost by the ground. But even though Flight 93 supposedly disappeared into the earth, the crater allegedly made when it hit the ground seems to have been too small for this to have been the case. Frank Monaco told reporters that the "V-shaped gouge" created by the plane was "eight to 10 feet deep and 15 to 20 feet long." Roger Bailey, of the Somerset Volunteer Fire Department, recalled that the crater "wasn't deep. Ten to 12 feet deep." Bailey said he "thought it was a hole that they had dug to burn garbage." No, the V-shaped gouge was a natural feature that misled people into thinking that it had been made by the wings.

John Maslak estimated that the crater was "maybe 25 feet wide and 40 feet long," and "ten to 15 feet deep." After the ground had been excavated in order to recover the wreckage of the plane, the crater was still only 35 feet deep, according to the FBI. Flight 93 had a wingspan of 125 feet, a tail height of 44 feet, and was 155 feet long. Is it really possible that such a large plane, when it hit the ground, would make a crater only about 40 feet across and 25 feet wide, and disappear entirely into soil just 35 feet deep? As reporter Jon Meyer commented, "You just can't believe a whole plane went into this crater."

The perps ordered Flight 93 to be shot down (Cheney years later admitted to a reporter that he gave the order) and it broke up in the air, the debris being scattered over a wide area, explaining why debris too heavy to have been blown by the wind was found miles away from the supposed impact site - something that is impossible to explain had the plane been intact before it crashed almost vertically. This scenario would also explain why no jet fuel was found in the soil and ground water around where Flight 93 supposedly crashed (it had been ignited when the plane exploded in the air after being fired at by a miltary jet plane). It would also explain why some of the black box flight recorders were discovered buried at widely different depths - impossible if the plane had crashed whilst intact but possible if some of the debris, including black boxes, had been planted in order to fool the world that a whole plane had crashed there.

originally posted by: micpsi
Frank Monaco told reporters that the "V-shaped gouge" created by the plane was "eight to 10 feet deep and 15 to 20 feet long."

This is the actual article. The crater statement is not an actual quote, but paraphrased from a sentence with no indication of context. Another statement taken entirely out of context.

Title: Jet crashes near Somerset; passenger reported hijacking in phone call

From: old.post-gazette.com...

Reporters were taken to the top of a nearby hill, overlooking a V-shaped gouge in the field. The gouge is 8- to 10-feet deep and 15- to 20-feet long, said Capt. Frank Monaco of the Pennsylvania State Police.

Investigators believe the plane crashed there and disintegrated, sending debris into thick trees nearby, Monaco said.

"There's nothing in the ground you can see," Monaco said of the crash site. "It just looks like tiny pieces of debris."

The plane fragmented upon a high speed impact. Video showing the devistating impact of a high speed crash.

youtu.be...

Why would the wreckage work deeper that forty feet?

Flight 93 did not strike with the wings perpendicular to the ground. It hit at an angle, right wing and nose first. The left wing followed the path of the right wing and nose.

The soft ground back filled as the wreckage impacted the soft ground.

The actual impact area was 80 feet by 80 feet square and up to forty feed deep in an even larger debris field.

From: www.nps.gov...

8. Where did Flight 93 crash? The plane crashed in an open field next to a wooded area in Stonycreek Township, Somerset County, Pennsylvania at 10:03:11 am. The nearest town is Shanksville. Flight 93 struck the ground at a 40 degree angle almost upside down, hitting right wing and nose first, at a speed of between 563-580 miles per hour. It was carrying approximately 7,000 gallons of Jet A fuel at impact.

Had the plane maintained its speed and flight path, rather than crashing in Stonycreek Township, it would have arrived in Washington D.C. in 18-20 minutes. The nation's capital is about 125 air miles from the Flight 93 crash site.

9. How big was the crash site and what did the wreckage look like? The first responders described the crater as about 15 feet deep and about 30 feet across. It was irregularly shaped. The wreckage around and inside the crater consisted of largely unrecognizable pieces of twisted metal, pieces of the landing gear of the plane, a tire, the frames of some of the seats, bits of charred paper, and remnants of luggage and clothing. Most of the pieces of wreckage were quite small, the size of a notebook or smaller. Many more pieces of wreckage, also quite small, were recovered during the investigation when the crater was excavated. Extensive searches through the wooded area south of the crash site, and even arborists in the tree tops found more debris from the crash. A pond about 900 feet southwest of the crater was partially drained to recover debris. Debris was collected from the yards of nearby homes, farmer's fields, and from around a nearby residential lake. The largest and heaviest pieces recovered were parts of the plane's two engines and a piece of fuselage with several window openings. This fuselage piece measured about six feet by seven feet and was found near the woods south of the crater. Lightweight paper items were found as far away as New Baltimore, eight miles away.

No eyewitnesses reported any fuselage separation before the jet struck below the tree line.

What is the difference if the fuel all burned up on impact than otherwise.

No missile fragments, nor missile engine recovered from the crash site. Yet the crash site went through an exacting investigation that recovered personal items of passengers and the buried flight recorders.

Flight 93 debris field was indicative of a crash and then wreckage ejection. Not a debris frield from an overhead exsplosion.

a reply to: neutronflux

Such nonsense. You sir, are no longer worth responding to.