FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

Using any picture..... Has anyone official source pointed out if there is any imprints letft behind from the crash such as wings or stabilizers or did all it leave was a missile crater?

[edit on 28-4-2008 by IvanZana]

reply to post by IvanZana


Do you mean, are the "wing scars" a part of the official story, or the media fairytale?

reply to post by weedwhacker

Boone, that UAL93 CVR transcript, part of the Government's 'Exhibit'.....it does not conform to normal NTSB CVR transcript format.

Was it played, in audio, to the jury? And is this 'transcript' simply what the court reporter heard, and documented?

You've stumped me on this one WW.

I know that the version I posted is translated. I'm pretty sure that I've seen the non-translated version, but I can't find it.

I'll keep looking.

Also, the actual recording was played in court and the victims families listened to the recording at an earlier date before the trial.

reply to post by Boone 870


Boone, hope you can find it....you can reference other NTSB transcripts to get an idea of what it should look like, the format.

It is bone-chilling to me to think about the families having to hear the actual recording. That was an exception, in this case, due to the circumstances.

A CVR tape is only heard by a select few, the accident investigation team. The ACTUAL recordings are never, ever allowed in public. (I am guessing it was a closed courtroom...)

The CVR recording is part of the toolsets needed to ascertain the cause of an accident, particularly if the pilots don't survive.

Some years ago in re-current training there was video that had been produced to re-create the NorthWest accident in Detroit. A computer-generated depiction, along with 'actors' reading, from the transcript, so we could hear it, as it unfolded. Stunningly effective.

WW

reply to post by weedwhacker

Boone, hope you can find it....you can reference other NTSB transcripts to get an idea of what it should look like, the format.

Yes, kind of like this one from EgyptAir Flight990.

It is bone-chilling to me to think about the families having to hear the actual recording. That was an exception, in this case, due to the circumstances.

A CVR tape is only heard by a select few, the accident investigation team. The ACTUAL recordings are never, ever allowed in public. (I am guessing it was a closed courtroom...)

The families of the crew and passengers were allowed to listen to the CVR recordings in April of 2002. No reporters were allowed and the family members had to sign confidentiality agreements.

The FBI played the cockpit recordings for family members of the crew this morning and separately revealed them to passenger families this afternoon. It was the first time such tapes had been played for families of victims of a U.S. airplane crash.Source

Here is a link to several newspaper articles about the recordings being played in court.

reply to post by Boone 870

The families of the crew and passengers were allowed to listen to the CVR recordings in April of 2002. No reporters were allowed and the family members had to sign confidentiality agreements.

I understand that this was an unprecedented occurence, but really, why the need for confidentiality? The only practical reason I can think of would be to spare the families further anguish. The same reason that I accept that other evidence isn't made public. But why demand, under penalty of law, that the family memebers keep quiet?

reply to post by jackinthebox
Because the FBI was planning on using it to prosecute criminals and they didn't want the evidence to the tainted.

The family members are now allowed to speak freely about what they heard, some have.

Using any picture..... Has anyone official source pointed out if there is any imprints letft behind from the crash such as wings or stabilizers or did all it leave was a missile crater?


No?

Thats what I thought.

Flight 93 was a crash simulation exercise. The crater was probaly caused by a cruise missile or bomb.

reply to post by IvanZana


IVAN....OK, just for the sake of arguing your side, I'll debate from your POV for a try. You have the pictures, I assume....besides the ones you have shown repeatedly. Please bring out some more, different angles, different heights. I would like to see the full impact area, from multiple angles.

I would like to see the DFDR data, integrated with the CVR transcript, and whatever ARTCC and local RADAR (ASR9) data that tracked the primary target to impact. Let's look at the soil analysis data, and the Coroner's report, the various eyewitnesses.....the FBI report....you've done all of this research, right? SO, since I'm taking your POV, I want to make sure....damned sure....that if I take your side, I will be 100% convinced!

You have all of this info already, since you've been researching so thoroughly....show me, convince me.

Show me how the movie 'United 93' is wrong....because, before I can fully come to your side, I have to tell you....it was pretty compelling to support the 'official' story, as you call it.

Convince me.

WW

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Show me how the movie 'United 93' is wrong....because, before I can fully come to your side, I have to tell you....it was pretty compelling to support the 'official' story, as you call it.

So you would rather believe a movie then do research for actual facts and evidence of what happned?

I guess i will have to start using movies to suport what i post to you then.


[edit on 1-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]

I am not sure if this link was even posted, someone who "debunks" the myth of the Somerset Crash, Flight 93. (this is so many pages that I cannot get through them all)

It is an interesting read. It did one thing, makes me want to search out all the names in there and see what I can find out. As well as the pictures of found items at crash site.

www.unitedflight93.com...

reply to post by TLynn


TLynn, very good link. I hope everyone takes the time to read it.

What is particularly compelling is the photo of the pilot's logbook...it's the 'little red book' we use to log the details, date, times, city pairs, names, etc, while on the trip, then it gets transposed into a Master log book later, if you're industrious. Actually, the red books count as valid records too.

Interesting, isn't it, that in the chaos of the crash it survived? Just shows you how strange things can happen.

WW

Originally posted by TLynn
I am not sure if this link was even posted, someone who "debunks" the myth of the Somerset Crash, Flight 93. (this is so many pages that I cannot get through them all)

It is an interesting read. It did one thing, makes me want to search out all the names in there and see what I can find out. As well as the pictures of found items at crash site.

www.unitedflight93.com...

From that website:

Photos

Now lets look at photos of the crash site to determine if they agree with what the witnesses said.

IMPACT CRATER shortly after impact.

Notice the charred earth, small fires inside the crater, and smoke.

That photo is from a movie!

lol

Originally posted by weedwhacker
What is particularly compelling is the photo of the pilot's logbook...it's the 'little red book' we use to log the details, date, times, city pairs, names, etc, while on the trip, then it gets transposed into a Master log book later, if you're industrious.

Wasn't there as man who keep a log of planes he flew on had the tail number of Flight 93 in his log AFTER 9/11?


[edit on 1-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by weedwhacker


I took the time to read it, and it posits that the engine which was found over a mile away from the crash site got there because of exploding jet fuel.

That wandering engine is still the biggest impediment to believing 93 wasn't shot down. Gotta do better than that site for convincing proof.

Originally posted by gottago
I took the time to read it, and it posits that the engine which was found over a mile away from the crash site got there because of exploding jet fuel.

Do you know how big of an explosion it would take to through an engine that far?

reply to post by ULTIMA1


To launch a couple of tons of compact steel and titanium that far? I'd say you'd need all the PE from all the jet fuel focused on that one engine, and have it already on its trajectory to get if even a hundred yards away.

What a (sick) joke.

Has anyone been able to superimpose a picture of an actual airplane to fit the impact site, with variations of angle and sizes compared to actual people standing at the site using possible computer aid? An engine 1 mile away could mean it suffered major turbulance or extreme manuevers not consistent to normal flight or possible shoot down knocking the engine off; such as the 747 in Alaska that lost an egine do to extreme turbulance; the bolts that hold the engine on are engineered to break before the wing suffers catastophic in flight failure.

[edit on 1-5-2008 by 38181]

[edit on 1-5-2008 by 38181]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by weedwhacker
What is particularly compelling is the photo of the pilot's logbook...it's the 'little red book' we use to log the details, date, times, city pairs, names, etc, while on the trip, then it gets transposed into a Master log book later, if you're industrious.

Wasn't there as man who keep a log of planes he flew on had the tail number of Flight 93 in his log AFTER 9/11?


[edit on 1-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]

ULTIMA, I don't know.....was there? You ask a question, leaving it uout here in the ether....so tell us more about it!! Don't drop a bomb, and leave! tell us more, provide links....OK?

reply to post by gottago


gottago, this engine core is now a mile or more away??? First it was 2000 feet...then the exaggerations began......

WOW! I can only say WOW!!

WW