It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by hooper
'Captain Brice stated that they never found " parts to that airplane" away from the crater. The statement implies that there was no aircraft debris away from the impact point. But, news reports published at the time (and preserved by other Internet researchers, against the destruction of articles — which has already occurred) show that there were two debris fields away from the impact point. One field was 2.5 miles away; the other was eight miles away. I find it hard to believe that the senior crash investigator from the airline would not have known about these debris fields — especially given their unusual nature, and the fact that they were well-publicized in the Shanksville area (and beyond, thanks to the Internet). In fact, news accounts at the time stated that FBI agents were out tagging corn stalks in a farm field to show where debris pieces had landed. The key to the statement, and to the mystery of the crash, is that not all items of debris are "parts to that airplane.''
From www.renewamerica.com...
also www.flight93crash.com...
But I would not believe everything on the internet. I am mainly following my gut feeling. I also called the marina at Indian Lake.
Only one child died on 911 from the attacks.
American Flight 77 victims at a glance
Lists of victims
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At age 11, Bernard Brown already had style. He dressed sharply and made sure his clothes and accessories were always coordinated. "He was very particular about his looks. He was handsome and had charisma," says Denise Sessoms, assistant principal at Leckie Elementary School in Washington, where Bernard attended sixth grade.
............
Sarah Clark, 65, was a beloved sixth-grade teacher at Backus Middle School in Washington. She was accompanying student Asia Cottom, 11, on the National Geographic Society field trip....
Others on the National Geographic Society field trip included James Debeuneure, 58, of Upper Marlboro, Md., a fifth-grade teacher at Ketcham Elementary School in Washington, and Rodney Dickens, 11, a sixth-grader at Ketcham.
Originally posted by Lillydale
DO NOT TELL ME WHAT I HAVE CLAIMED BASED ON WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE CLAIMED.
If you want to discuss my claims, then please actually address them. To tell me I am wrong about what I say based on things other people you do not agree with have said is the stupidest attempt at an argument yet.
Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by hooper
Try the links I posted. I was wrong, the lake is only 6 miles from the "crash site". Melted plastic and bodies don't blow along the ground.
I was wrong, the lake is only 6 miles from the "crash site".
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by earthdude
Only one child died on 911 from the attacks.
MORE propaganda....how about some FACTS:
American Flight 77 victims at a glance
Lists of victims
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At age 11, Bernard Brown already had style. He dressed sharply and made sure his clothes and accessories were always coordinated. "He was very particular about his looks. He was handsome and had charisma," says Denise Sessoms, assistant principal at Leckie Elementary School in Washington, where Bernard attended sixth grade.
............
Sarah Clark, 65, was a beloved sixth-grade teacher at Backus Middle School in Washington. She was accompanying student Asia Cottom, 11, on the National Geographic Society field trip....
Others on the National Geographic Society field trip included James Debeuneure, 58, of Upper Marlboro, Md., a fifth-grade teacher at Ketcham Elementary School in Washington, and Rodney Dickens, 11, a sixth-grader at Ketcham.
Just a opartial list...."only one child was killed"???? You can't seriously believe that crap???
Originally posted by hooper
Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by hooper
Try the links I posted. I was wrong, the lake is only 6 miles from the "crash site". Melted plastic and bodies don't blow along the ground.
Actually, go take a look at google maps, the lake is only a few thousand feet from the impact point, not miles. The nearest part of the lake may be even closer.
How could it have changed? One kid, he was going on a oceonographic scholarship.
On September 11, 2001, 11-year-old Asia Cottom was headed to California.
She had been selected to attend a National Geographic Society ecology conference with other talented young students from around the country. Tragically, terrorists hijacked Cottom's plane and crashed into the Pentagon. No passengers survived.
Originally posted by earthdude
Originally posted by hooper
Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by hooper
Try the links I posted. I was wrong, the lake is only 6 miles from the "crash site". Melted plastic and bodies don't blow along the ground.
Actually, go take a look at google maps, the lake is only a few thousand feet from the impact point, not miles. The nearest part of the lake may be even closer.
Oh god! all of my research has been changed. I really did check it years ago. I swear, I was sure I was right. Indian lake, right? You better not be a disinfo agent and be changing google maps. This has ruined my credibility. I was not trying to decieve anyone. I suspect foul data.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
then what conspiracy scenario is it that you subscribe to, exactly?
Reason grass around FRONT of the crater is not burned (as shown in your
pictures) is that the fuel load would have been projected forward of
the impact point before igniting in massive fireball
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by Lillydale
DO NOT TELL ME WHAT I HAVE CLAIMED BASED ON WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE CLAIMED.
If you want to discuss my claims, then please actually address them. To tell me I am wrong about what I say based on things other people you do not agree with have said is the stupidest attempt at an argument yet.
When you're bickering over how "we don't know how many people are going in and out of the WTC" I necessarily assume you're in the controlled demolitions camp, mainly becuase that claim is the foundation for the controlled deolitions scenario. If that's NOT what you subscribe to, then don't blame me, since you conspiracy people are all but getting into fistfights with each other over what the "secret conspiracy" is supposed to be, and it's easy to lose track. You truthers have more explanations of what "the real truth" is than Baskin Robbins has flavors of ice cream
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Seventh
Hey- you forgot
6) Things that explode inside a box behave differently than things that explode not inside a box.
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by LaughingMan1121
Whats even more unnerving is that PDEP (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection) took soil samples from the crash site a few days after and found no evidence of a large volume of jet fuel at the crash site. The PDEP Secretary David E. Hess stated that the the reason for lack of fuel in the soil was probably due to the consumption of the fuels by the crashs hazardous fire. There wasn't a very large fire though, at least not one that looked like it had consumed the amount of fuel clamied to be present.
I doubt you are using correct photos for your analysis. For one thing, all the photos I've seen were after they dug up every single piece of wreckage, bone, and suitcase, so any signs of scorching would have obviously been disturbed.
Scorching? Bones? You said that they wouldn't release photos of burned human remains. Also there are unscorched portions of the crash (the point the OP is trying to illustrate) like the tuft of grass growing on the side of the crater. Thats seems to me it would be a clear sign that there was a lack of any drastically large fire that should have taken place with the large amount spilled fuel. Granted the situations are different, but with the pentagon crash the fires were so hot they supposedly burned most of the planes, including the titanium engines. Why are suitcases, bones, and other objects that have a lot less resistance to heat still some what unaffected by the imense heat? Im not saying whether I think it was shot down, blown up, faked or anything else. Im making a more modest claim of suspicion. With the force and fuel remaining on board I feel that this crash site should look a lot more drastic then it does.
[edit on 14-10-2009 by LaughingMan1121]