FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

lets talk flight 93 to get a better understanding
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Critics' Corner
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 3:58 am    Post subject: lets talk flight 93 to get a better understanding Reply with quote

whats the latest story on flight 93, i remember them saying it vapourised on imapct, i then heard that the plane buried its self and was linked to piece of plane(maybe engine) being dug up. where is the rest of plane? we see a crater impact with black charred soil around it from the air. is the offical story that the plane buried itself or vapourised or other.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:15 am    Post subject: Flt 93 cutting edge discussion on a physics forum Reply with quote

Fresh meat on 911 esp. Flt 93

http://www.nolajbs.net/forum/index.php?topic=6891.0

dB

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

nope not fresh meet, just trying to figure which offical version is the one critics believe, evidance based. the link you provided isnt any help it just accuses people, im not after accusing anyone on this subject just evidance as to what happened.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is a very interesting analysis on Flt 93 that matches the audio recording from inside the plane with a credible hypothesis. Did you get that far or was your 'mustn't be an antisemite' brainwashing preventing you from reading that far. Or are you part of the cover up?

You want truth you have to look in dark places. Otherwise you are wasting yours and others time.

9/11 truth campaign censors research because it 'accuses someone'

What ludicrous sloppy thinking.

Jeeez! Maybe 911 happened without human involvement. We MUST be accusing someone. Is it just that we can't accuse MOSSAD is it? The 5 dancing Israelis were MOSSAD as even Shayler admitted on SKEW. Oh I see - only Shayler is allowed to accuse MOSSAD

Sharpen up your logic mate or you will never get close to the truth.

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:59 am    Post subject: Selection from the 'not fresh meat' link I posted. Reply with quote

The hijackers made their jumps at an altitude of about 7000 feet when the plane was going at 150 knots or less. Probably why they chose planes with low ballast - fewer passengers - it makes it easier to reduce the speed of the plane right down at those altitudes.

The transponder information gives FL93's altitude at 7.000 feet when it was turned on for three minutes near the end of its flight.

The sequence of events goes like this:

1) The hijackers are assembled in the cockpit. They are setting the flight controls to fly the plane at 7000 feet and a low speed.

2) The passengers are mounting for an attack - they group together at the door of the cockpit and start ramming a food cart into it. The hijackers have to act soon.

3) The hijackers have got the plane at the right altitude and speed now and it is flying over an unpopulated area of Pennsylvania and nearby in Kutztown is a parachute center; people descending in parachutes would go uncommented in this area.

4) The hijackers' voices can be heard on the CVR saying, "Down, down etc." Bring the plane down. The passengers are getting antsy; they want to bust the door open; they know what happened to the other planes by now (some of them anyway); a hijacker asks if he should hold up an axe to the door window to frighten the passengers.

5) 'is it time, is it time now" asks a hijacker, asking is it time to release the gas and incapacitate the passengers - they need to do this as close to the crash as possible to make it seem as if the passengers stopped talking because the plane crashed. this is 10:00.

6) The transponder is turned on - this is to alert the Mossad learjet that the plane is where it is now; the learjet will arrive and watch the plane spiral down into a death dive and then the learjet will detonate the bomb on board as the plane crashes (hence ordnance smoke plume caught by Val McClutchey's camera).

The transponder also tells the investigators that the plane was at 7000 feet at this point in time - between 10:00 and 10:03.

7) The hijackers at 10:00 release the gas into the main cabin. Instantly the passengers go silent although their cell phones are still running recording the silence on the plane.

The hijackers check their gear; parachutes and respirators, flip off the transponder; check that the plane is on the FMCS set flight path, and then go to an exit.

9) Between 10:03 and 10:06, nearer 10:03 than 10:06, the hijackers open the exit door. Thereafter wind sounds can be heard on the CVR and cell phones. A mechanical sound is heard as the door is opened. A couple of people waking up from the anesthetic drug scream, then collapse back into unconsciousness.

10) They jump out, open their parachutes and land; they call their contacts by cell phone and are whisked away never to be seen again. They are now in Israel.

11) At 10:06, the plane crashes nose-cone first into the filled-in mine. The people in the white Learjet watch. As the plane hits the ground, the Mossad agents in the plane detonate the bomb(s) on the plane. The plane shatters into bits and pieces. All the evidence is destroyed except a couple of the black boxes - where we get the CVR evidence from. McClutchey captures the famous ordnance smoke plume on her camera. (The FBI later confiscate it also taking the hard drive/memory card with them).

12) The Learjet flies away to its private landing strip and the Mossad operatives are whisked away to israel when it's safe to do so.

The Mossad agents practised on their own jets before the 9/11 attack. Israel's El Al fleet are Boeings 757 and 767. This as well as the fact that these planes can be remotely controlled is the reason these planes were chosen by them to be attacked.

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 5:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rodin wrote:
There is a very interesting analysis on Flt 93 that matches the audio recording from inside the plane with a credible hypothesis. Did you get that far or was your 'mustn't be an antisemite' brainwashing preventing you from reading that far. Or are you part of the cover up?

You want truth you have to look in dark places. Otherwise you are wasting yours and others time.

9/11 truth campaign censors research because it 'accuses someone'

What ludicrous sloppy thinking.

Jeeez! Maybe 911 happened without human involvement. We MUST be accusing someone. Is it just that we can't accuse MOSSAD is it? The 5 dancing Israelis were MOSSAD as even Shayler admitted on SKEW. Oh I see - only Shayler is allowed to accuse MOSSAD

Sharpen up your logic mate or you will never get close to the truth.
first of all i didnt start this thread to accuse people regardless of who i think could be invovled. secondly just because i dont jump up and say yes your right it must be them dosnt mean im a part of a cover-up. i just want to know what critics takes are on the events of what happened, ie the crash itself not the surronding details. as i explained before im intrested in what happened not who did it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rodin
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 5:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You really should read those pages. I think debus is a very good analyst - he was being tested by Darryl Bradford Smith (arch sceptic - and we need sceptic) because he thinks micronuke. So do I. Take a look at my post on the burning cars/unharmed trees on the beam weapon thread.
Now I must sleep.

dB

_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 10:28 am    Post subject: Re: Selection from the 'not fresh meat' link I posted. Reply with quote

rodin wrote:


<much insanity snipped>

10) They jump out, open their parachutes and land; they call their contacts by cell phone and are whisked away never to be seen again. They are now in Israel.

11) At 10:06, the plane crashes nose-cone first into the filled-in mine. The people in the white Learjet watch. As the plane hits the ground, the Mossad agents in the plane detonate the bomb(s) on the plane. The plane shatters into bits and pieces. All the evidence is destroyed except a couple of the black boxes - where we get the CVR evidence from. McClutchey captures the famous ordnance smoke plume on her camera. (The FBI later confiscate it also taking the hard drive/memory card with them).

12) The Learjet flies away to its private landing strip and the Mossad operatives are whisked away to israel when it's safe to do so.

<more insanity snipped>


The Shankesville crash site


indicates that the plane was not demolished by a bomb before impact with the ground

_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 10:32 am    Post subject: Re: Selection from the 'not fresh meat' link I posted. Reply with quote

rodin wrote:
The hijackers made their jumps at an altitude of about 7000 feet when the plane was going at 150 knots or less. Probably why they chose planes with low ballast - fewer passengers - it makes it easier to reduce the speed of the plane right down at those altitudes.

The transponder information gives FL93's altitude at 7.000 feet when it was turned on for three minutes near the end of its flight.

The sequence of events goes like this:

1) The hijackers are assembled in the cockpit. They are setting the flight controls to fly the plane at 7000 feet and a low speed.

2) The passengers are mounting for an attack - they group together at the door of the cockpit and start ramming a food cart into it. The hijackers have to act soon.

3) The hijackers have got the plane at the right altitude and speed now and it is flying over an unpopulated area of Pennsylvania and nearby in Kutztown is a parachute center; people descending in parachutes would go uncommented in this area.

4) The hijackers' voices can be heard on the CVR saying, "Down, down etc." Bring the plane down. The passengers are getting antsy; they want to bust the door open; they know what happened to the other planes by now (some of them anyway); a hijacker asks if he should hold up an axe to the door window to frighten the passengers.

5) 'is it time, is it time now" asks a hijacker, asking is it time to release the gas and incapacitate the passengers - they need to do this as close to the crash as possible to make it seem as if the passengers stopped talking because the plane crashed. this is 10:00.

6) The transponder is turned on - this is to alert the Mossad learjet that the plane is where it is now; the learjet will arrive and watch the plane spiral down into a death dive and then the learjet will detonate the bomb on board as the plane crashes (hence ordnance smoke plume caught by Val McClutchey's camera).

The transponder also tells the investigators that the plane was at 7000 feet at this point in time - between 10:00 and 10:03.

7) The hijackers at 10:00 release the gas into the main cabin. Instantly the passengers go silent although their cell phones are still running recording the silence on the plane.

The hijackers check their gear; parachutes and respirators, flip off the transponder; check that the plane is on the FMCS set flight path, and then go to an exit.

9) Between 10:03 and 10:06, nearer 10:03 than 10:06, the hijackers open the exit door. Thereafter wind sounds can be heard on the CVR and cell phones. A mechanical sound is heard as the door is opened. A couple of people waking up from the anesthetic drug scream, then collapse back into unconsciousness.

10) They jump out, open their parachutes and land; they call their contacts by cell phone and are whisked away never to be seen again. They are now in Israel.

11) At 10:06, the plane crashes nose-cone first into the filled-in mine. The people in the white Learjet watch. As the plane hits the ground, the Mossad agents in the plane detonate the bomb(s) on the plane. The plane shatters into bits and pieces. All the evidence is destroyed except a couple of the black boxes - where we get the CVR evidence from. McClutchey captures the famous ordnance smoke plume on her camera. (The FBI later confiscate it also taking the hard drive/memory card with them).

12) The Learjet flies away to its private landing strip and the Mossad operatives are whisked away to israel when it's safe to do so.

The Mossad agents practised on their own jets before the 9/11 attack. Israel's El Al fleet are Boeings 757 and 767. This as well as the fact that these planes can be remotely controlled is the reason these planes were chosen by them to be attacked.
this post is certainly hard to take in. regardless of if its true or not. i was left stunned after reading it, but more to do with the fact i havnt heard any of this before. i carnt comment at the moment on this i obviously do not have information that can support or dispute at the moment. regardless of if its true or not it explains the crash site better than anything ive heard so far, you know the crater and no debris, well tiny pieces and nothing else Rolling Eyes no doubt the critics will be queing up ........ah here they come.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 10:34 am    Post subject: Re: Selection from the 'not fresh meat' link I posted. Reply with quote

Ignatz wrote:
rodin wrote:


<much insanity snipped>

10) They jump out, open their parachutes and land; they call their contacts by cell phone and are whisked away never to be seen again. They are now in Israel.

11) At 10:06, the plane crashes nose-cone first into the filled-in mine. The people in the white Learjet watch. As the plane hits the ground, the Mossad agents in the plane detonate the bomb(s) on the plane. The plane shatters into bits and pieces. All the evidence is destroyed except a couple of the black boxes - where we get the CVR evidence from. McClutchey captures the famous ordnance smoke plume on her camera. (The FBI later confiscate it also taking the hard drive/memory card with them).

12) The Learjet flies away to its private landing strip and the Mossad operatives are whisked away to israel when it's safe to do so.

<more insanity snipped>


The Shankesville crash site


indicates that the plane was not demolished by a bomb before impact with the ground
wheres the plane? Shocked
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IronSnot
Relentless Limpet Shill
Relentless Limpet Shill


Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 595
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 12:30 pm    Post subject: Re: Selection from the 'not fresh meat' link I posted. Reply with quote

rodin wrote:
a hijacker asks if he should hold up an axe to the door window to frighten the passengers.

Richard Guadagno took an axe on the plane. It's in Longman's book. Don't think he's mossad though, so just ignore it as it doesn't fit your 'theory'.

BTW what do Mossad Lear Jets have on them to identify them as such? Star of David?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 12:43 pm    Post subject: Re: Selection from the 'not fresh meat' link I posted. Reply with quote

marky 54 wrote:
Ignatz wrote:
rodin wrote:


<much insanity snipped>

10) They jump out, open their parachutes and land; they call their contacts by cell phone and are whisked away never to be seen again. They are now in Israel.

11) At 10:06, the plane crashes nose-cone first into the filled-in mine. The people in the white Learjet watch. As the plane hits the ground, the Mossad agents in the plane detonate the bomb(s) on the plane. The plane shatters into bits and pieces. All the evidence is destroyed except a couple of the black boxes - where we get the CVR evidence from. McClutchey captures the famous ordnance smoke plume on her camera. (The FBI later confiscate it also taking the hard drive/memory card with them).

12) The Learjet flies away to its private landing strip and the Mossad operatives are whisked away to israel when it's safe to do so.

<more insanity snipped>


The Shankesville crash site


indicates that the plane was not demolished by a bomb before impact with the ground
wheres the plane? Shocked


Mostly buried. It impacted soft ground at a steep angle at high speed.

You could do worse than have a look through the Wikipedia entry for Flight 93. Or 911research.wtc7.net (CT site)

_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
telecasterisation
Banned
Banned


Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs

PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can’t be the only one here who, when reading someone’s nickname and a few of their posts, mentally conjures up an image of what I think that person looks like.

So forget all this Shanksville nonsense, how do others view marky?

My view is below;

_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i take it you think theres nothing strange about the crashsite. it looks like a cartoon hole in the ground that the plane just fitted through and left no wreckage, luggage or anything that looks like a plane had been there apart from the hole. you would expect devastating damage but not nothing around the impact site. yes id expect some to be buried but not the whole plane.

Last edited by marky 54 on Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:57 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

telecasterisation wrote:
I can’t be the only one here who, when reading someone’s nickname and a few of their posts, mentally conjures up an image of what I think that person looks like.

So forget all this Shanksville nonsense, how do others view marky?

My view is below;
which posts please by all means point out what you have a problem with. very funny but i aint here to judge posters just try and understand where they are coming from to believe what they believe, and also get the offical storey straight, as i ve heard so many differant versions flung my way when ever i have a question.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

marky 54 wrote:
i take it you think theres nothing strange about the crashsite. it looks like a cartoon hole in the ground that the plane just fitted through and left no wreckage, luggage or anything that looks like a plane had been there apart from the hole. you would expect devastating damage but not nothing around the impact site. yes id expect some to be buried but not the whole plane.


Who said there was no wreckage? If you look around the 'net you'll find plenty of photos of wreckage, flight recorders etc. Do some searching marky.

_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

if the plane crashed nose down and mostly buried itself, how where debris found miles away from the site? and how did trees get severed along its flight path when the micky mouse shape in the floor in the picture above clearly shows there are no trees when flying directly downward out of the sky(ie nose down).


http://pittsburgh.about.com/library/pictures/shanksville/uc_flight_93- 2.htm there are a number of photos with statements please check all to see what im refering to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
telecasterisation
Banned
Banned


Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ignatz wrote:
marky 54 wrote:
i take it you think theres nothing strange about the crashsite. it looks like a cartoon hole in the ground that the plane just fitted through and left no wreckage, luggage or anything that looks like a plane had been there apart from the hole. you would expect devastating damage but not nothing around the impact site. yes id expect some to be buried but not the whole plane.


Who said there was no wreckage? If you look around the 'net you'll find plenty of photos of wreckage, flight recorders etc. Do some searching marky.


To say there are 'plenty' of photos of wreckage is highly misleading, there are just a few items that appear highly contrived in their arrangement and that is it. What marky means is that a plane hitting the ground (as opposed to a reinforced vertical wall), would in essence leave at least a wing or a bit of tail to say that is was a large passenger jet that landed.

Of course it is only perspective, but 'plenty' of photos to me would be at least 25 clear images of wreckage.

The biggest 'evidence' to say there was no wreckage is the interview done almost immediately after the services arrived. A worker said there was absolutely no wreckage whatsoever, completely nothing, just a hole in the ground. He had walked the site and seen nothing, 100 tons of aircraft had simply vanished.

You must accept that given the circumstances of the day - three steel framed buildings all collapse due to fire - never happened before. Two aircraft virtually vapourise leaving practically no trace.

Plausible? Possibly, but highly unlikely - aircraft do not bury themselves into holes, they do not have the capability to dig.

_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

other points of intrest is these two eye witness statements, both reported by media of sorts, were these on your main news channels? no just the web then as usual, the major news channels and commission report no doubt ignore these statements.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/flight_93.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/new/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30682
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

lots of photos here from close up to far away, very little plane in any picture if any, and im being generious.

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight93/gallery.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

reports of a secondary debris field? failure to disclouse if it was caused by an explosion in the air?

http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_secondary_debris_field.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.rumourmillnews.com/cgi-bin/archives.cgi?noframes;read=74928

another report
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

alot of people who live near the crashsite call the offical storey a patriotic pack of lies according to one of the links above. and i ask you who would know better? eyewitnesses or people arriving at an empty field with an hole in it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

marky 54 wrote:
alot of people who live near the crashsite call the offical storey a patriotic pack of lies according to one of the links above. and i ask you who would know better? eyewitnesses or people arriving at an empty field with an hole in it.


The alternative is that secret agents went out to a field near Shankesville with heavy gear, dug a massive hole, put in the FDRs and sprinkled aircraft debris around and carried away hundreds of tons of spoil in lorries. Unobserved? The building site over from my work has vast diggers that leave monstrous great ruts in the ground. Where's the evidence of that at Shankesville?

Or they crashed a drone plane and faked the phone calls, spiriting the passengers away to a secret life? Or execution?

You seem utterly determined to adopt the CT, marky. Eventually it leads to absurdity.

Virtually all of your questions attack the OT. Why? Have a crack at this -

"The CT claims WTC7 had a few isolated fires on a few floors" Now, why not go and undermine that claim? It's a breeze, and all you need to deal with is actual evidence.

_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
telecasterisation
Banned
Banned


Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ignatz wrote;

Quote:
The alternative is that secret agents went out to a field near Shankesville with heavy gear, dug a massive hole, put in the FDRs and sprinkled aircraft debris around and carried away hundreds of tons of spoil in lorries. Unobserved? The building site over from my work has vast diggers that leave monstrous great ruts in the ground. Where's the evidence of that at Shankesville?

Or they crashed a drone plane and faked the phone calls, spiriting the passengers away to a secret life? Or execution?

You seem utterly determined to adopt the CT, marky. Eventually it leads to absurdity.


The topic was very clearly the tiny number of images or evidence of an aircraft, or rather THE aircraft in question. You hammer tiny wheels to the goalposts and we seem to be now running about trying to get a handle on a subject that is being seemingly made fluid.

The faking of the scenario was not even on the agenda. However;

The faking of the hole is hardly difficult, although using heavy machinery to dig holes would leave an additional footprint.

You say that the aircraft debris could be sprinkled about post-event - this can be the only option as the number of witnesses present at the scene say they saw NONE at the time of arrival, no bits, nothing.

The 'how' it was done is not in question - you say;

Quote:
If you look around the 'net you'll find plenty of photos of wreckage


Well, back to you to supply the 'plenty' of photos of wreckage (not just holes and mist).

_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

telecasterisation wrote:

The faking of the scenario was not even on the agenda. However;

The faking of the hole is hardly difficult, although using heavy machinery to dig holes would leave an additional footprint.

Faking becomes an agenda item if the CT claims Flight 93 didn't crash at Shankesville.

telecasterisation wrote:

You say that the aircraft debris could be sprinkled about post-event - this can be the only option as the number of witnesses present at the scene say they saw NONE at the time of arrival, no bits, nothing.


I'm not saying it plausibly could, just that it would be highly desirable in a "faked hole" setup.
But , as for "no debris" reports -

Certainly the local Mayor was misquoted this way on German TV and it percolated back to the CT world. He was outraged when he heard about it. He confirms that he saw engine parts in the trees. Der Spiegel got hold of the original interview, where he said :
"They just found the two turbines because, of course, they're heavier and more massive than everything else. But there was almost nothing left of the actual airplane. You can still find plate-sized parts out there. And Neville from the farm over there found an aluminum part from the airplane's outside shell behind his barn that must've been about 8 by 10 or even 8 by 12 feet."
at : http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160-5,00.html

Then there's the curious case of the photographer in one of the versions of Loose Change who at one point says there was no debris, but then says of some other people present :
"They look like part of the NTSB crew. Walking around, looking at the pieces."

Who else says they saw no wreckage?

telecasterisation wrote:

Well, back to you to supply the 'plenty' of photos of wreckage (not just holes and mist).


Quite a number were used as exhibits at the Moussaoui trial and can be seen here, among many others:
http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/index.php?sortby=datedesc

for example:

(much clearer at the website. dunno why it shrank when I saved it)

_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
telecasterisation
Banned
Banned


Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ignatz wrote;

Quote:
Faking becomes an agenda item if the CT claims Flight 93 didn't crash at Shankesville.


Possibly but this was not on the agenda, the numerous images you quoted were.

You have supplied a link to what is indeed a mass of images (although I already have the page in my 9/11 favourites folder). You were asked for ‘plenty’ of Shanksville wreckage images as this is how you described the number freely available.

In the link you supplied there are but seven and of those, two are general scenes of nothing recognizable as being from the crash, they could be anything. A couple of others are close-ups of earth and a component - both were taken where exactly?

I have no wish to get into how your witness contradicts mine, we cover no ground there, so I will leave that alone.

Essentially, for being part of the biggest event in recent history - the lack of photographic evidence is astonishing. To ask people to accept that the plane just disappeared. Looking at the picture, where are the wings, even sections of them - the tail section? There were no explosives, or missiles - yet the plane vanishes into the ground???

Even the Lockerbie Pan Am left huge recognisable sections having plunged many thousands of feet and being ripped apart by a bomb - the cockpit windshield is even still intact! Yet the Shanksville plane just..............

_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thermate
Angel - now passed away
Angel - now passed away


Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 445

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 4:49 pm    Post subject: Re: Selection from the 'not fresh meat' link I posted. Reply with quote

Ignatz wrote:
The Shankesville crash site


indicates that the plane was not demolished by a bomb before impact with the ground


Funniest thing I've read in weeks, thanks Ignatz Laughing

That hole in the ground is the most ridiculous and obvious rushed fake imaginable and you pimping it as proof says all we need to know about you.

_________________
Make love, not money.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

telecasterisation wrote:

Even the Lockerbie Pan Am left huge recognisable sections having plunged many thousands of feet and being ripped apart by a bomb - the cockpit windshield is even still intact! Yet the Shanksville plane just..............


The Lockerbie Pan Am remained in large pieces because it was blown up. An aircraft only travels at 600mph when its engines are running. Rip it into pieces, and then it will rapidly slow down due to drag, and then it will only hit the floor at its terminal velocity, which I'd guess to be around the 100mph mark. Cockpit glass is designed to withstand being hit at high speed because of the danger of birdstrikes, so that cockpit glass didn't experience anything near its design limits.

Flight 93 on the other hand was driven into the ground at 500 and something mph. It actually impacted at that speed. That rarely happens in aircraft crashes because the pilot is usually trying to slow the plane down as much as possible, not to kill everyone on board.

What you need to do is to compare like with like. Find another high speed impact to compare Shanksville with. Then you can see if there are inconsistencies.

_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918

PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

telecasterisation wrote:

You have supplied a link to what is indeed a mass of images (although I already have the page in my 9/11 favourites folder). You were asked for ‘plenty’ of Shanksville wreckage images as this is how you described the number freely available.


Then type "shanksville" into google images, and you can add to your collection. I'm sure you'll be delighted to display them here. I've been perfectly happy to play along so far, but that'll do for now.

p.s. you can avoid those clumsy frames around photos by opening a free account at photobucket.com and uploading images. Then cut+paste the Img tag from your photobucket folder into your message here (Though this might not be possible if you have to go through a filtering system, such as might exist in a schools network)

_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Critics' Corner All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group