FLIGHT 93 - The Biggest 911 Smoking Gun!

reply to post by CaptainObvious


I cannot agree on any soil conditions unless I personally see and dig through those soil conditions. Why do you ask for any agreement merely from photographs? All I have to accurately judge on any soil conditions, is what I can physically examine on my acre of land and anyone else's. If I want to know the chemical composition of my soil, I have to take that for testing to the agricultural agent in my area.

However, I do know the general make-up of soil, and how long it takes for landfill to settle and become as hard and more stable (density of soil packing) as any soil below it. Just because a photo indicates soil is hardened to a certain density of packing does not make it so.

Was any of that area heavily ladened with clay? Yes, it certainly does make a difference in density packing of the land. Yes, they they do strip mining in soil heavily laden with clay if there is something of significant value to be found.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

I'm not sure why I even got into this stupid debate. Not one of these guys can provide ANY proof to any of their claims.

Proof is a subjective word. Proof that a plane didn't crash in that hole in Shanksville for an experienced airman such as myself might not be proof to anybody who hadn't the slightest idea of what it would take to ram a 250,000 pound airplane with a wingspan of 124 feet and length of 155 with two 3 ton engines into a hole 10 feet by 20 feet and have only one turbine disk, a fuselage panel 7 feet long, voice and flight recorder remaining.

I am wondering how the perps recorded all the voices of the passengers...and carried on conversations with family members.

I don't believe any of the conversations actually took place but if they did I'm sure the government has voice synthesizers and already had a data base of most people in the United States or world for that matter.

High tech is so far ahead of where anybody believes it is that much of what happened on 911 was simply not real. It was for all intents and purposes magic. This is typified by that favorite old 911 Whine "But I saw it!" Of course you did.

Oh tell me ... after this so called explosion you claim ...in Shanksville.... how were all the plane parts

There was only four plane parts of any significance recovered. A turbine disk, a fuselage panel 7ft. long that somehow didn't get crunched, a flight recorder and voice recorder. The turbine disk doesn't appear to be the size representative of the P&W2037 which UAL had.

and body parts planted in this hole in the ground?

Wallace Miller, the coroner who got there first originally claimed there were no bodies and no blood.

He was correct because there was no airplane crash in Shanksville. It was a PsyOp.

Thanks for the post.

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by apex


If the airplane did get to speeds over 400 knots its doubtful that it would be controllable.

Thanks for the info.

But in case you missed it, the Valujet plane crashed, indicating that indeed, the pilot lost control.

Or was this a Psyop also to acclimate us to the idea that planes could crash into the ground and leave only small pieces and body fragments.

Just checking.....

Originally posted by MikeVet

Thanks for the info.

But in case you missed it, the Valujet plane crashed, indicating that indeed, the pilot lost control.

Or was this a Psyop also to acclimate us to the idea that planes could crash into the ground and leave only small pieces and body fragments.

Just checking.....

The Valujet DC-9 crew lost control because the fire in the forward cargo compartment that was initiated by the oxygen generators (which were not properly deactivated and secured) had burned through the elevator controls under the floor. It also filled the cockpit with smoke.

The quick dons (quick donning oxygen mask) won't help you with smoke in the cockpit. For that you have to have a full face mask. Most pilots are barely aware of where the full face masks are located in the cockpit and other than in initial training have ever tried them on. They are a pain in the butt to don and secure.

So in the 30 seconds or less that she would have with dense smoke in the cockpit it is very unlikely that she had the time to locate then don the full face smoke mask. Not to mention she had no elevator control.

Thanks for the post. :

Originally posted by esdad71

WHAT CAUSED THE SCARRING AT THE SITE? If there was no plane, no passengers, etc, what the hell made that mark?

It seems that something left that Missile crater but it was no Boeing 757.

Originally posted by johnlear


Proof is a subjective word. Proof that a plane didn't crash in that hole in Shanksville for an experienced airman such as myself might not be proof to anybody ........

Your right John. Although your experience is appreciated, your theories are baseless

I don't believe any of the conversations actually took place but if they did I'm sure the government has voice synthesizers and already had a data base of most people in the United States or world for that matter.

High tech is so far ahead of where anybody believes it is that much of what happened on 911 was simply not real. It was for all intents and purposes magic. This is typified by that favorite old 911 Whine "But I saw it!" Of course you did.

I rest my case... Your post is not only a form of paranoia, but it borders delusional.

There was only four plane parts of any significance recovered. A turbine disk, a fuselage panel 7ft. long that somehow didn't get crunched, a flight recorder and voice recorder. The turbine disk doesn't appear to be the size representative of the P&W2037 which UAL had.

please reference your claim with a source.

Wallace Miller, the coroner who got there first originally claimed there were no bodies and no blood.

Dont be so misleading John. Mr. Miller stated that he recovered many body parts. Not much was left. Kind of like the value jet crash where the examiner there stated that the largest body part recovered was no larger than a knee.

He was correct because there was no airplane crash in Shanksville. It was a PsyOp.

Yeah... ok John.

Originally posted by johnlear


The Valujet DC-9 crew lost control because the fire in the forward cargo compartment that was initiated by the oxygen generators (which were not properly deactivated and secured) had burned through the elevator controls under the floor. It also filled the cockpit with smoke.

The quick dons (quick donning oxygen mask) won't help you with smoke in the cockpit. For that you have to have a full face mask. Most pilots are barely aware of where the full face masks are located in the cockpit and other than in initial training have ever tried them on. They are a pain in the butt to don and secure.

So in the 30 seconds or less that she would have with dense smoke in the cockpit it is very unlikely that she had the time to locate then don the full face smoke mask. Not to mention she had no elevator control.

Thanks for the post. :

Interesting info about Valujet. I would assume that she would try and save the jet, what kind of things would she have done to try and save it? I would assume throttle back would be priority at some point, and try to slow down some. Maybe even drop the landing gear to slow it up? Dirty it up by extending flaps, etc? But the plane went into a dive anyways when she lost elevator control. Which means that there's nothing else she could have done, presumably. All this, and yet the plane hit hard enough to obliterate it.

So, if the hijackers went over 400kts, then they would also have lost control, and would have augered into the ground. And given the assumption that they weren't interested in saving the plane, and had the throttles WFO, and also in a dive, would the plane have the capability to hit at 480kts? Not that you believe it, just asking your infirmed opinion....

[edit on 28-12-2007 by MikeVet]

Then what? What left that hole? Also, Mr Lear, did you not read the post with the people who sifted through the remains of Flight 93. THere was the man you stated on the scene and he saw no bodies but that does not mean they are not there. Ever heard the old "if a tree falls in the woods' question?

I think it is perception here that needs to be adjusted. Facts are nothing but statements until they can be proven, then it is truth.

Originally posted by IvanZana

It seems that something left that Missile crater but it was no Boeing 757.

Actually, when you compare the size of the hole and the light tower/generators sitting on the access road, it looks to be the right size for a jet.

The shape is correct also. Bigger hole where the fuselage/wing roots/landing gear hit, and shallower trenches to either side where the wings hit.

And then the burned trees, in the direction of travel when it hit, and all the pieces of the puzzle fit perfectly to substantiate that a plane DID go in there.

Great find !!!!

reply to post by esdad71


That is true. A blind person will not see what sighted people do, but that does not mean sighted people do not see what a blind person cannot.

However, the corner/mortician was sighted, as were the other people at the site. It has been reported none of them saw any bodies upon arrival. How is it all those sighted people completely missed that many bodies, particularly a coroner/mortician? It did not take them that long to arrive on site per their own testimony.

reply to post by MikeVet


Actually, that hole has been consistenly reported to be be 10' x 20'. Exactly which commercial jetliner would fit in that size hole?

Originally posted by Nickdfresh

Originally posted by tezzajw
The Valuejet crashed in swampland. Flight UA 93 crashed on solid ground....

No, no it didn't.
Of course, as has been routinely ignored here post after post, the ground in Shanksville was over an abandoned mining shaft.

Flight UA 93 allegedly crashed on solid ground. To say otherwise is deliberately misleading.

What you type does not make sense. You claim that it crashed into a mining shaft, but how can that be when there was SOLID GROUND above the mining shaft?

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by MikeVet

 

Actually, that hole has been consistenly reported to be be 10' x 20'. Exactly which commercial jetliner would fit in that size hole?

Reported by who?

Look again at the light towers. They're trailer mounted. Now go to your nearest rental center and check how big the smallest trailer mounted light tower is. 4 x 8 is about the smallest I've ever used or seen.

How many would fit in the hole at its widest part? 2 1/2? Or closer to 12-15?

Again, you should investigate on your own, rather than swallowing whatever garbage CT sites are shoveling. These are things that YOU can do to prevent looking sorely misinformed.

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by esdad71

 

That is true. A blind person will not see what sighted people do, but that does not mean sighted people do not see what a blind person cannot.

However, the corner/mortician was sighted, as were the other people at the site. It has been reported none of them saw any bodies upon arrival. How is it all those sighted people completely missed that many bodies, particularly a coroner/mortician? It did not take them that long to arrive on site per their own testimony.

He didn't see any bodies because there weren't any, just fragmented body parts.

Just like how the coroner stated in the Valujet crash.

Seems consistent to me.....

Exactly, no bodies were seen upon arrival. Should there have been? Can you fathom the impact this plane made going as fast as it was and in that steep of a dive? Tremendous.

Look up this claim. There was a plane and it was hit. This is six minutes to impact....

www.thinkandask.com...
Flight 93 passenger Edward Felt reports to 911 operator he heard an explosion and sees white smoke.

and this one

www.thinkandask.com...
Two miles northeast from the crash site, residents of Indian Lake, tell a different story than ABC or NBC news about the debris field. They collected burnt papers, shredded cloth, and scrap metal scattered about their yards and floating in the lake. But the FBI claims debris from Flight 93 likely blew into their neighborhood after the crash. On September 10, 2001, a strong cold front pushed through the area, and behind it -- winds blew northerly. Since Flight 93 crashed west-southwest of Indian Lake, it was impossible for debris to fly perpendicular to wind direction. The plane had to have flown overhead. The FBI lied

THere was a plane in Shanksville.
This is the coverup that no one wants to allow out. No one.


[edit on 28-12-2007 by esdad71]

dbl post

[edit on 28-12-2007 by IvanZana]

Originally posted by esdad71

www.thinkandask.com...
Two miles northeast from the crash site, residents of Indian Lake, tell a different story than ABC or NBC news about the debris field. They collected burnt papers, shredded cloth, and scrap metal scattered about their yards and floating in the lake. But the FBI claims debris from Flight 93 likely blew into their neighborhood after the crash. On September 10, 2001, a strong cold front pushed through the area, and behind it -- winds blew northerly. Since Flight 93 crashed west-southwest of Indian Lake, it was impossible for debris to fly perpendicular to wind direction. The plane had to have flown overhead. The FBI lied

[edit on 28-12-2007 by esdad71]

Sorry, but that's all wrong.

FACT: Wallace Miller, Somerset County coroner, tells PM no body parts were found in Indian Lake. Human remains were confined to a 70-acre area directly surrounding the crash site. Paper and tiny scraps of sheetmetal, however, did land in the lake. "Very light debris will fly into the air, because of the concussion," says former National Transportation Safety Board investigator Matthew McCormick. Indian Lake is less than 1.5 miles southeast of the impact crater — not 6 miles — easily within range of debris blasted skyward by the heat of the explosion from the crash. And the wind that day was northwesterly, at 9 to 12 mph, which means it was blowing from the northwest — toward Indian Lake.

Map:

media.popularmechanics.com...

reply to post by OrionStars

Since some people cannot be bothered to validate what they state, I have come to this conclusion. Unless, people are willing to be bothered to validate their own claims, neither will I be when those same people request or demand validation from me. I will be willing to tell them how to find it. But I am no longer wasting vast amounts of time searching through my own researched work.

I couldn't agree more.

Can you validate your own claims?

Perhaps some people may wish to familiarize themselves with the EC-130 cargo plane aka military psyops plane. The plane's tech performs, among other amazing feats, jamming of radar signals, intercepting telephone signals and altering voices to sound exactly like a person calling is actually the person the receiver of a call knows. It also capable of remote contol of UAVs.

You might as well say that C-130's are invisible. Why did you bring up the C-130 anyhow?

reply to post by MikeVet


What have light towers at "the widest point" to do with what I asked? I asked what size commercial jet would fit into a hole 10' x 12'. Your light poles are not even as long as the widest part of that hole.

Exactly, what relevant point are you trying desperately to make?

reply to post by Boone 870


Because there are numerous reports of what looked to be a C-130 (confimred by military) was flying over the Pentagon and Shanskville. That was after the FAA finally grounded all planes, and prior to the Pentagon and Shanksville alleged descriptions of events by the "official" reports. That is why.

Unless, people could see inside a C-130, they would never know if it was a C-130, EC-130, or a DC-130. They all look alike on the exterior.

911exposed.org...

"Despite numerous terrorist attacks and a FAA grounding Andrews AFB launches a routine C-130 across the nation!

Was it a routine flight? The C-130 (call sign: Golfer 06) was at both the Pentagon and Shanksville at the time of each attack. It was highly classified. (Since when is a routine ANG flight so classified that nobody at the Pentagon or NORAD knows!) And most importantly, we know that the government tried to cover it up for as long as they could, 36 days. Was it an EC-130 (electronic warfare version of C-130) on a sinister highly classified mission? How was this C-130 able to take off from Andrews AFB when the FAA issued a ground stop for all planes, including military, five minutes before?

At 9:25, The FAA in collaboration from the White House, initiated a national ground stop, which forbids takeoffs and requires planes in the air to get down as soon as reasonable. The order...applied to virtually every single kind of machine that can takeoff — civilian, military, [and] law enforcement.178

And so the fable began:

About 9:30 a.m., O’Brien throttled the lumbering plane down a runway at Andrews Air Force Base, just southeast of the District of Columbia …[xii]

Even though his account is rather immature and laced with inconsistencies, it was a clever ploy to turn an embarrassing and incriminating incident into something rather contrary. Since the government seemed to be coming up short of good evidence in substantiating it’s story, it appears that they elected to craft this “I saw the plane” tale. The tale would, like others before him (Donald “Tim” Timmerman — who fell on his face on CNN), attempt to unequivocally state that it was an American Airlines 757 — Flight 77. More on Steve O’Brien and the C-130 in the “Witnesses” chapter.

This of course was just spin, while the real questions were being circumvented. For one, why was the C-130 following and guiding a jet toward the Pentagon? Why was it circling above the Pentagon just prior to the attack? And why was this exact plane spotted, and even confirmed by the military, over Shanksville during Flight 93’s crash? And most importantly, how was the government promptly able to launch a transport plane, but unable to launch any high-speed fighters?

The flight path of the C-130.

We can reconstruct the flight paths of the jet and the C-130, which followed it by a few seconds. Witnesses claimed it was flying “on top of and behind” of a jet “and guiding it toward the Pentagon” as “to prevent two planes from appearing on radar”. At the time of the attack it was seen diving down and then circling the Pentagon. Later, it was seen heading in a westerly direction."

I recognize the above. It is from Peter Tiradera's book. I have no idea who made that website.