"FLIGHT 93"

It has taken less than 10 years to pry open the can of worms enshrouding the pathetic 9/11 scam. The central role of the major newsmedia corporations to pull off this sordid "terror" simulation has now been comprehensively exposed. Before joining this forum, please get familiar with the research at: http://www.septemberclues.org
Equinox
Banned
Posts: 549
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:45 am
Contact:

"FLIGHT 93"

Unread post by Equinox »

...
Last edited by Equinox on Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Maat
Member
Posts: 1425
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:14 am
Contact:

Unread post by Maat »

And, just so it doesn't get missed from the previous page ;):
Maat wrote:Yes, good point, Anonymouse. Nonhocapito recently added a reminder above the post submit button re source links so everything we post can be verified and compared accordingly.

i.e. Greek Helios Airways Flt 522 in 2005:
@ http://aviation-safety.net/photos/displ ... r=8&kind=C

http://aviation-safety.net/database/rec ... 20050814-0

And http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helios_Airways_Flight_522
Equinox
Banned
Posts: 549
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:45 am
Contact:

FLIGHT 93

Unread post by Equinox »

Anonymouse wrote:
I think "ridiculous" is an understatement by the look of that so-called debris field. It's almost as if they didn't have a single "Air Crash Investigation" fan in their planning circle.

However, I am. Zomigosh...so absurd!
We DO NEED an Aircrash Investigation style analysis, I will compile together into a master post.

UA 93 master post preview.

In this article All the fake elements for the UA 93 crash hoax will be located in the master post. (complete very shortly)
Last edited by Equinox on Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Equinox
Banned
Posts: 549
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:45 am
Contact:

FLIGHT 93 - full report by Equinox

Unread post by Equinox »

A UA 93 compilation of data gathered from UA - 93 researchers.
Equinox- http://cluesforum.info/memberlist.php?m ... file&u=362
Killtown- http://killtown.blogspot.com.au/
Spooked- http://www.blogger.com/profile/08266697181345871878

United 93 Report.

1- The Debris Field.
2- The Crater.
3- The Laws of Momentum.
4- The Black Boxes.
5- The Planted Engine.
6- Vertical Stabilzer.
7- Fire resistant dry grass.



1-The Debris Field

Between the four airplanes which allegedly crashed on 911 there should be
approximately 9 million parts. 3 million parts each for the 767 and 1.5
million parts for the 757. In addition to the parts there should be 60 miles
of wiring for each 757 or 120 miles for both. There is 90 miles of wiring
on each 767 which makes 180 miles for both 767's. Wiring is stamped every 12
inches or so with data which includes where it is going, where it is coming
from and its maximum load capacity. The reason for this is that wiring is
braided into bundles of up to one hundred wires and when you are tracing
down a problem you have to know quickly which wire you are looking for and
identify it.


Every single part on a Transport Category airplane which means it is
certificated to the standards of CFR14 (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 25
of the U.S. Federal Air Regulations and to be certificated either it has to
be made by the factory (Boeing) itself or subcontracted to another parts
maker. If it is made by another parts maker that parts maker has to be
inspected by the FAA and given PMA Parts Manufacturer Authority.


There should be At least 1 million parts scattered in that crash site.
There should be body parts at least of 37 passengers, two pilots and five flight crew.

ALSO I’am going to demonstrate different crashes that have the same crash style. Two of the planes have the same downward trajectory and a lower speed. And one has the same speed UA 93,

Master—
UA 93-
Crash speed 500 mph.

Image

Pan Am Flight 103

Lockerbie, Scotland - Dec. 21, 1988

Speed: over 500 mph


Image


USAir Flight 427

Aliquippa, PA - Sept. 8, 1994

Speed: 300 mph

Image



United Airlines Flight 585

Colorado Springs, CO - March 3, 1991

Speed: over 230 mph

Image


I now would like too demonstrate the lack of debris in the UA 93 crash site. Compared with REAL plane crash sites of the same nature.


UA – 93
Image
Compared---
Image


UA 93
Image


Compared--
Image
Image
Image
Image


UA- 93
Image
Compared--
Image
Image
Image


UA- 93
Image
Compared--
Image
Image
Image


UA-93
Image
Compared--
Image
Image
Image
Image


UA-93
Image
Compared--
Image


UA 93
Image
Compared--
Image
Image



2-The Crater


Let's look at this photo again of the Shanksville crater:
Image
Here's the best possible match of a Boeing 757 with the Shanksvile crater, given the official trajectory of inverted impact, with the plane traveling in the basic direction of the top of the photo:

Image
Notice a wee problem?

Even if we assume the whole plane both blew up into tiny pieces or burrowed into the ground (as the official story holds), the fuselage would have had to have make some sort of crater in the ground where it hit. But there is nothing there where the fuselage should have hit.

This crater is bogus.

This is a nice companion diagram to my earlier proof regarding the Shanksville crater.

Image

Now, the issue is, what attitude was the plane before impact to make this crater, officially?

According the the official NTSB report, the plane impacted the ground in an inverted position, at a 40 degree angle nose down. The upside-down or inverted attitude of the plane is also noted by wikipedia and by "Among the Heroes" (Jere Longman, Harper-Collins 2002, p215).

Thus, the government is telling a story where the plane was inverted before it impacted-- that the plane was upside-down or belly up as it hit the earth.

The tail-mark at the north part of the crater in the aerial picture above supports the upside-down story as well. A tail mark made by a plane going southwards can ONLY be produced at the north side of the crater if the plane was going upside-down when it impacts.

So what does it look like when the plane is going upside-down when it impacts? How would the plane FIT in the crater?

I'm going to use this picture, where the camera is looking down one of the wing scars, to the west. North is to the right and south is to the left. Thus, the plane would come from the right.

Image

Here is a diagram, with a plane superimposed onto the crater, using the picture above. (The tail end of the plane is cut off in this diagram because of size.)
(click to enlarge image)

Image
Immediately, you should see there is a problem.

Even if the fuselage impacts at the very north part of the crater, THERE IS NO WAY THE WINGS CAN IMPACT THE GROUND TO PRODUCE THE WING SCARS.

The wings simply do not line up in the right place.

If you move the fuselage so that it impacts the ground further to the left (further southwards), the wing alignment problem is even worse.

Further, it is impossible for the plane to flip backwards as it impacts, to have the wings produce the side scars, particularly when the plane (officially) is going 563 mph.

If anything, the wings are going to slide further southwards as the plane breaks up, and make marks further south of the crater.

I submit this wing alignment problem as rock-solid proof that the official flight 93 crash story is a lie.



Curiously, the wings DO LINE UP with the side scars, if the plane is right side up, as shown below—
Image

However, if the plane was in fact right-side up as it impacted, why a) is the government lying about it, and b) what made the "tail" scar on the northern edge of the crater???

I don't know exactly what happened at this crash scene.

I strongly suspect the crater was made artificially, to make it LOOK as though an airplane crashed there, and then plane debris was strewn around the site. Perhaps a bomb or projectile of some sort was used to create the damage.

In any case, the important point is that: THE OFFICIAL FLIGHT 93 CRASH STORY IS A LIE, BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT.


3- Laws of Momentum

Below is an official government photo of the flight 93 crash scene supposedly from 9/12/01. Northwards is to the top of the photo. "Wing" gashes are black marks in the middle of the photo; the central crater is not readily discerned but is between the two wing gashes. Burnt grass and burnt forest is to the south of the crater

Image

Government photo of the crater looking west along the length of the "wing" gashes. Note the unburnt grass on the right (on the northwards side of the crater).
Image

Another view from a similar angle as in the photo above but further out near the tips of the "wing" gashes. Note the unburnt grass out here.

Image

This aerial photo shows the "tail" scar on the left (northwards) side of the crater:

Image


Diagram of the official crash scene (the top of the diagram is northwards) froma similar view as in the top photo:

Image

Everyone should be able to agree about what I presented above. It is just a description of the crash scene using official photos as evidence.

Now keep in mind, NO LARGE PLANE DEBRIS was found on the ground around the Flight 93 crash site. By large, I mean no intact engines, tail sections, wing sections, no landing gear struts, no intact seats, no pieces of fuselage larger than a few feet across (and only two of these). None of the large debris seen in almost every other plane crash since 9/11.

OFFICIALLY, most of the plane went into the ground in the crater. The black boxes were supposedly found 15 or more feet below ground, along with most of the fuselage. Many people bought this story because there was no significant plane debris outside of the crater.

Again, this is the official story.

Now.. .we've never seen photos of the excavated crater showing the buried fuselage. The FBI says 95% of the plane was recovered, but we've never seen pictures of this recovered debris.

We've seen 3 pictures of "large" debris, two chunks of fuselage maybe 4 x 4 feet each, and a hunk of engine about 2 x 3 feet supposedly thrust into the ground by the crash. Two of these pieces of debris have signs of being planted, as I have noted before.

Nonetheless, let's try to understand what happened with this crash.

UA93 officially impacted the ground flying inverted at a 40 degree nose-down angle.

Image

If the plane crashes into the ground such that it explodes and burrows into the ground, there should be a significant deflection of debris BACKWARDS (as well as other directions). Remember the video of the F4 crashing into the concrete wall. Much of the plane debris was deflected backwards. But for the flight 93 crash site, the grass wasn't even BURNT on the edge of the north side of the crater!

Image

On the other hand, if the plane crashes and at the same time bounces off the ground, then debris would be flung mainly forward. But then there should be much more big debris.
Image

An analogy here might be useful. Imagine a hose shooting a high-pressure stream of water on a hard flat surface, at a 40 degree angle. You can see the water primarily splashes forward. This is analogous to the plane crashing and the debris bouncing off the ground and spraying forward.

Now, imagine a hose shooting a high-pressure stream of water at a 40 degree angle into a shallow hole in the ground. Now you should see that a lot of water is going to deflect backwards, back towards the hose. This is analogous to the plane crashing and burrowing into the ground and spraying debris backwards.

Physics, simple physics, says the official flight 93 crash story is just WRONG.

4- Black Boxes

Officials said that Flight 93's flight data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR) were recovered at Shanksville.
They said the FDR was recovered 15ft underground at 4:45 pm on 9/13 and the CVR was found 25ft underground at 8:25 pm on 9/14.
Image

“The black boxes were 15ft and 25ft into the ground.”

If Flight 93 didn't crash in Shanksville, then these black boxes must have been planted.
Some will be skeptical and will ask for evidence that the boxes were planted.

The photos of Flight 93's alleged black boxes were released in April 2006 after the Zacarias Moussaoui trial ended.
Image

Were these photos that crucial to the prosecution’s case that we had to wait four long years to see them???

The website these photos are posted at lists the “squared-shaped” box as the CVR...
Image

and the “cylinder-shaped” one as the FDR...
Image

However, when the NTSB released their data analysis on the FDR, they show the FDR as the squared-shaped one, not the cylinder-shaped one as the Moussaoui site has it.
Image

(NTSB shows the squared-shaped box as the FDR.)
Image

(Moussaoui site shows the cylinder-shaped one as the FDR.)

So either the Moussaoui site, or the NTSB have the pictures of the FDR and CVR mixed.

The day before the first black box was allegedly found, investigators and U.S. Rep. John Murtha said that one or both of the boxes might have been crushed by the impact or incinerated by the jet fuel-fed inferno.

Wait a minute?

What inferno???
Image

And how does fire exist under a sealed crater?
Image

The plane also supposedly crashed into dirt that was described as "soft" and "spongy".
So doesn't it seem a tad strange that they would comment that the black boxes might have been destroyed by impacting “soft soil” or burning up in a non-existent inferno?

The CVR was supposedly found 10ft deeper in the ground the day after the FDR was.
How did the CVR manage to burrow so much deeper when both boxes are located next to each other in the tail section?
Image


So with officials saying the boxes might have been destroyed by “soft dirt” or an inferno that didn’t exist and the CVR which allegedly recorded the terrorist’s voices found a day later because it burrowed so much deeper, kinda makes you wonder about these “recovered” black boxes, huh?

Take a look at the black boxes themselves…
How do we know that a pair of black boxes weren’t taken from a previous plane crash and those were used to stage these photos?

Image

Now take a close look at the squared-shaped black box…

Did you notice how it was propped up nicely on a piece of metal to be level for the shot?
Image

And notice all the wires around it too…
Image

Kinda makes the photo look more convincing, doesn’t it?!
By the way, this would be the ONLY photo from the scene that shows any wires from the alleged plane crash.
Also, did you notice that only the labeled part of the black box was photographed?
Image

The photo wouldn't have quite the same effect if just the other half was shown...
Image

So what happened to the rest of the built-to-last black box? Surely it didn't just disappear.
And what's with this piece of wood in the crater???
Image

Now take a look at the cylinder-shaped black box…
How do we know it wasn't put on the ground at some other location and photographed?
Notice how it was placed by some rocks along with a small piece of twisted metal nicely tucked underneath...
Image

Is that twisted piece of metal aluminum from a plane, or just a piece of tin?
Image

So was it placed by some rocks with a piece of scrap metal tucked underneath too again, make the photo look more convincing?
As with the squared box, notice that only the main labeled part was photographed...
Image


So it just a coincidence that BOTH bottom sections of the boxes are missing and only the labeled parts are photographed to make the photos look all the more dramatic?
Image

Also, have you ever seen black boxes from a crash scene photographed like these were?

We were told that Flight 93 crashed at a whopping 580mph and burrowed down deep into “soft dirt”…
Image

Well if that’s so, then why isn’t there any dirt on the black boxes after they supposedly burrowed so far through dirt?

Image
Did you notice there is no fire damage either?

One last thing...
After the alleged FDR was sent back to the NTSB for analysis their report mentions the manufacturer of the FDR: Allied-Signal
Image


You can also tell it's an Allied-Signal because you can still make out one of the letters on its damaged label...
Image

The NTSB released the transcript from Flight 93's alleged CVR, but never mentioned who the manufacturer was.
United Airlines Flight 93 went into service in 1996.

The CVR from Flight 93 should be by the same maker as the FDR: Allied-Signal
Image

5-Planted Engine .

Image

Officials told us that both engines from Flight 93 were recovered after it allegedly crashed.


(Well, sort of.)

One of the engines was photographed being recovered from the crater at the scene.
Image

The other was reportedly found in the woods behind the crater, or in the pond.
Image

Confused?

Don't worry, that's what happens when a story doesn't add up.


Let's start with the engine allegedly found in the woods, or in the pond, or wherever it was supposedly found.

First, it was reported that a "whole engine" was found at a "considerable distance from the crash site."
Image
(Flight 93 was equipped with two Pratt & Whitney PW2037 engines.)

One report said this massive engine was found 600 yards from the crater.
Image
And got there by "bouncing" off the ground.

Then it was changed from a whole engine, to a 1,000 pound piece of it found far from the crash and to the west of it.
Image
They reportedly had to haul this engine out of the woods with a bulldozer.

And who was it that reportedly hauled this engine out of the woods?

You guessed it!

Jim Svonavec, whose company worked at the site and provided excavation equipment, told AFP that the recovery of the engine “at least 1,800 feet into the woods,” was done solely by FBI agents using his equipment.


Then the story changes again in which now a section of the engine was found in a catchment pond just south of the crater.

This section supposedly was an engine fan.

(or was it a piece of fuselage?)

But regardless of whatever was supposedly found in the water, it was reported that they recovered whatever they did in the woods BEFORE they even searched the pond!


Update:
Four Flight 93 victims identified
Saturday, September 22, 2001

"Investigators have identified remains of four of the 44 people aboard Flight 93, the jetliner that crashed here 11 days ago, the Somerset County coroner said yesterday.

Yesterday, investigators drained a two-acre pond about 1,000 feet from the crater where the jetliner slammed into the ground, just another step in hunting airliner parts, personal belongings and remains, Miller said." - post-gazette.com
But let's skip all the major inconsistencies of where this engine was found and assume a piece of it was found in the pond.

The pond is about 300 yards south of the crater.
Image

Remember that Flight 93 was said to have crashed at 580mph into the ground at a 40deg angle.

There appears to be markings in the crater of where the two engines from Flight 93 supposedly hit.

(I guess.)

Remember that the ground was said to be "soft & loose" and that's why, they say, most of the plane was able to burrow deep underground.

So if Flight 93 hit this "soft" ground at nearly 600mph and at a 40deg angle then why did one of its massive engines that weighs almost 10,000 lbs burrow underground and the other one just bounced off?

Also, do any of these “engine marks” in the ground even look like marks made from 10,000-pound engines plowing nearly 600mph into the ground at a 40deg angle?
Image
But if these marks were caused by Flight 93’s engines plowing into the ground, how did one not only manage to escape, but tumble so far from the crash?

But let's just assume for a second that its engine (or massive fan) did bounce off the ground after impact.

Could it have tumbled 300 yards after crashing?

Officials say so and I would actually agree.

However, what I am wondering is, whether it was an entire engine, or one of its massive fans, how in the world did it manage to tumble into the pond with this 70ft wall of trees in the way?

Image


Image

But if some part of an engine was found in the pond, who's to say it wasn't just planted there?

Isn't it just a little too coincidental that of all the places a piece of a plane's hot engine would be found is in the cold water of a pond?

So if the perps planted a heavy engine part in the pond, how did they get it there without being noticed?

Image

Now that you're probably curious as to what was actually found in the pond (or woods for that matter) we can probably identify what this mystery part was by the photos taken of it at the scene:

Image

Did you see it?

No?

That's because officials never took any, or at least never released any.

Hmm, kinda weird they never showed us any photos of this large piece from Flight 93 that was reportedly recovered from the pond, or found in the woods.

(or was it found in the bushes???)

So what about the engine seen being excavated from the crater in that photo that wasn't released until 4 1/2 years after 9/11?

Is it from a Pratt & Whitney PW2037 engine, the kind Flight 93 had?

Image

Kinda hard to tell since it's so smashed up.

But let's assume it is for the sake of argument.

The obvious first question about this engine is why is it only a few feet under the surface when officials said the black boxes were recovered 15ft & 25ft underground?

Image
Also, doesn't this engine look kind of old and rusted?

Right about now it should start becoming obvious that this is a planted engine scrap.

But planted how and when?

There was a person living in a cottage right around the corner and there is a scrap yard right up the street in plain view.


Image
How were the perps able to plant such an engine scrap without being noticed?

Seems unlikely that they dug up the field and planted it before the "crash".

So realistically, the perps would have to have planted it sometime afterwards.

But how could they have done that with so many responders stationed at the scene?

Image


Well, it helps when the piece of debris you are planting fits neatly in the equipment you are "excavating" it with!

Image


They just used one of their excavators at the scene and simply lowered it down for a nice little photo-op.

Didn't you notice the engine scrap was small enough to fit in the backhoe bucket?

Image


And that no dirt is caked on it after supposedly burrowing down "soft soil" at nearly 600mph?!

And all those responders that were stationed next to the crater would have only seen the backside of the backhoe bucket.

Image

Image


And if it can’t get more obvious the perps threw little pieces of shiny aluminum in the crater to try to make their staged photo-op look more real.
Image

When will they learn that United Airlines planes are not silver, but dark blue and grey?
Image

But you can’t blame them for trying.

I mean, what are you supposed to do when you have to excavate a hole with no plane in it?
Image
Image


6-Vertical Stabilizer

When a plane crashes the tail section usually survives.
Image

Sometimes fully.
Image

Sometimes partially.
Image

And even in very violent crashes where nothing looks to be left...
Image


the tail still survives.
Image



► Uncontrolled Descent and Collision With Terrain, United Airlines Flight 585
"The size of the impact crater measured approximately 39 feet by 24 feet and was about 15 feet deep.
The vertical stabilizer and rudder were in the impact crater, damaged severely by impact and fire.
The horizontal stabilizer was in the crater, in pieces and severely burned. The horizontal stabilizer parts were located at the top of the pile of destroyed airplane debris." – NTSB


On a Boeing 757, the tail section is HUGE.
Image

So that begs the question:
What happened to Flight 93's tail section???
Image


Some official story-huggers think they know the answer.
They say that since Flight 93 flipped and crashed going really, really fast...
Image
Image

that caused the plane to plow mostly underground...
Image
"80% of the plane was in the crater."
- UA93 Memorial ambassador

in which the tail struck the ground really, really hard, thereby causing it to shatter into a million little pieces too small to be seen from a distance.
Image
Wow!
Can you imagine what the ground that was described as:

► On Hallowed Ground
"To the casual eye, it looked like solid, consolidated ground but in reality the reclaimed expanse was loose and uncompacted. When flight 93 hit the ground..." - The Age (09/09/02)

Is a massive Boeing 757'tail shattering against the ground going to look like a fragile wine glass dropped on a hard surface?!
Image
Image


You would think that a huge visible mark would be left in the "loose and uncompacted" soil just like the marks the wings supposedly made...
Image
Image



and not some perfect imprint of itself like you see in the cartoons.
Image


I mean that would just be ridiculous to believe!
So that begs another question:

Why IS there a "Wile E. Coyote" tail imprint in the ground?
Image
Image
Image
Image

Image
WTF???
Who would have thought that a Boeing 757's tail would leave a near-exact impression of itself after striking loose dirt so hard that it was essentially obliterated by it?

Maybe its tail acted like a Samurai sword instead and sliced cleanly through the ground like we are supposed to believe Flight 175's tail did through the South WTC Tower's steel facade?
Image
Image


Well apparently not because whatever made that "tail imprint" in that Shanksville field didn't even penetrate through the ground!
Image
Image



Well so much for the Samurai sword theory.
Image

So how in the world could Flight 93's tail slam down so hard against loose soil that it shatters against it like a dropped wine glass, but looks as if it was just lowered down on its edge thereby leaving a faint impression of itself in the grass from its own weight?
Image

Could it be that this "tail imprint" is something else and just by chance looks like a tail imprint?
Well I suppose, but is it just another coincidence that there is another imprint in the ground that looks to have come from the left horizontal stabilizer?
Image
Image
Image
Image



Of course that begs yet another question:

Did Flight 93 suffer from "taco neck"?
Image
Image


Maybe Flight 93 kept spinning on its right-side as it burrowed into the ground causing the right tail to strike in the imprint created by the right wing?
Well not according to the NTSB’s flight path animation as it shows Flight 93 spinning slightly back to the left before it supposedly hit.
Image


But something else really proves that the right tail didn't strike inside the right wing's imprint.

The ground!
Image
Image



So we have quite a mystery here.
How can Flight 93's tail section do this:
Image


Yet only leave this:
Image
Image



7-Drygrass

If this is true, I guess I really DON'T know much about plane crashes:

Where is all of that JET fuel burning away??
The dry grass next to the crater is left unscathed.
Image
Image
Here is what jet fuel does to dry grass in a smaller plane accident from the same downward trajectory-
Image
Image

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by Equinox on Wed Jun 13, 2012 12:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Heiwa
Banned
Posts: 1062
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:20 pm
Contact:

Re: The ridiculous "PLANE PARTS evidence"

Unread post by Heiwa »

Thanks!
Anonymouse
Member
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 9:02 am

Re: The ridiculous "PLANE PARTS evidence"

Unread post by Anonymouse »

Wow Equinox! That was awesome.

Even though a person with only a TV education on plane crashes can see there's something very wrong with that scene - it's infinitely useful to have clear and specific examples. Like, the burnt grass (or rather, lack thereof), and those diagrams of the spread of debris in a crash (and the water from a hose analogy) - You really nailed the absurdity of the scene at multiple levels.

+ a whole bunch of internets to you! :P
whatsgoingon
DELETED THEIR OWN POSTS :(
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 7:56 pm

Re: The ridiculous "PLANE PARTS evidence"

Unread post by whatsgoingon »

a
Last edited by whatsgoingon on Fri May 24, 2013 9:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Maat
Member
Posts: 1425
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:14 am
Contact:

Re: The ridiculous "PLANE PARTS evidence"

Unread post by Maat »

Dear Equinox,

As much as I appreciate the time and effort you've put into gathering and analyzing all your info and images, I really must ask you to:-

1.) Please include the website source links for the photos and images you post (e.g. you have at least a dozen there with no reference data at all.)

2.) Try to break long graphics-heavy posts into at least 2–3 separate ones. It makes it very difficult to follow (or find) specific parts of your analyses when the page takes ages to load &/or scroll through — it really doesn't do your hard work justice if people can't view or read it through easily (& not everyone has a super-fast internet connection ;)).

I trust you can appreciate why this is important and give it your full attention. Thanks mate :)
Equinox
Banned
Posts: 549
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:45 am
Contact:

Re: The ridiculous "PLANE PARTS evidence"

Unread post by Equinox »

Thanks for the good feedback guys. :)
And I can go through and break down and source it all shortly easily enough, thanks for the advice Maat :)
MrSinclair
Member
Posts: 402
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 1:29 am

Re: The ridiculous "PLANE PARTS evidence"

Unread post by MrSinclair »

Bravo Equinox. This kind of work can really impact those rare people with curiosity and an open mind. Shanksville has always been such a farce, no plane, no bodies, plenty of time for the coroner to catch up on his sleep. A decent backyard party leaves more debris than this "crash" did.
Equinox
Banned
Posts: 549
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:45 am
Contact:

Re: The ridiculous "PLANE PARTS evidence"

Unread post by Equinox »

MrSinclair wrote:Bravo Equinox. This kind of work can really impact those rare people with curiosity and an open mind. Shanksville has always been such a farce, no plane, no bodies, plenty of time for the coroner to catch up on his sleep. A decent backyard party leaves more debris than this "crash" did.
HAHA

True that! I work in construction Demo destroying offices all day long. With sledgehammers and the work boys would leave more debris in a couple of minutes flat! Haha
Image

Now the Bodies SHOULD be there…
Like the poor people I demonstrated in the 427 crash ( which was exact to UA 93)
BodyBags--- (respect) :mellow:
Image

Bodies CANNOT burn in Jet fuel.

Dr. Michael Baden, the state's chief forensic pathologist and a top expert in the field, said in September that most bodies should be identifiable because the fires had not reached the 3,200 degree (F), 30-minute level necessary to incinerate a body.

"Recovered tissues will likely be identified," Baden said, because "bodies are not cremated — or burnt beyond the ability to be identified — in the type of fire that occurred at the World Trade Center. The cremation of a body requires a temperature of over 3000 degrees Fahrenheit for close to half an hour... and that did not occur when the airplanes struck the World Trade Center."
To put things in perspective, the temperature of a normal house fire is about 1700 degrees (F); jet fuel burns at a temperature a little lower than that. In a normal house fire of 1700 degrees, the body is charred on the outside but remains intact on the inside; it is not reduced to ashes," he said.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FCsqayKrSM
simonshack wrote:*
Yesterday, a Youtube user ("happymealmobster") posted this comment on my channel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gORu-68SHpE
sorry but no. i knew someone in the towers who died. i went to his funeral

happymealmobster
1 day ago
So I asked the mobster: "Do you care to mention his name? You know, just to honor his memory!" The short reply was:
Christopher Noble Ingrassia.

happymealmobster in reply to simonshack (Show the comment) 14 hours ago
So I checked up this Ingrassia - and immediately found two 'curious' portraits of him "it" - and a commemorative plaque with two names: Christopher Ingrassia and "fellow Watchung, NJ resident" Honor Elizabeth Wainio:

Image
( source of commemorative plaque image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sheenachi/2989492495/ )
( source of upper Ingrassia image: http://www.cantorfamilies.com/cantor/js ... sp?ID=3677 )
( source of lower Ingrassia image: http://www.chrisclassic.com/ )


Christopher Noble Ingrassia- from Watchung, NJ, 28, allegedly died in the twin towers (a Cantor Fitzgerald amployee)
Honor Elizabeth Wainio, from Watchung, NJ, 27, allegedly died in Flight "United 93".

So now we have two "9/11 victims", united by residence, age (almost), death and ... photoshopping. <_<


The Christopher N. Ingrassia Memorial Organization http://www.chrisclassic.com/

THE CHRIS CLASSIC GOLF OUTING SPONSORSHIP FORM: http://www.chrisclassic.com/sponsor_form.htm

Image
http://www.chrisclassic.com/course.htm

I would hereby like to thank Youtube user "happymealmobster" for this interesting information.
simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7341
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

"FLIGHT 93"

Unread post by simonshack »

I have opened this dedicated thread for "FLIGHT 93" - and split previous posts about the same from "The ridiculous PLANE PARTS evidence" thread.

I thank Equinox for his dedication - but will kindly ask him to avoid making such huge, gif-laden posts in the future - since they make for annoyingly long uploading times.
Tufa
Member
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 10:13 pm
Contact:

"FLIGHT 93"

Unread post by Tufa »

A Gold Star for for the flight-93 analysis!
SmokingGunII
Member
Posts: 557
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:34 am
Contact:

"FLIGHT 93"

Unread post by SmokingGunII »

Nice summing up, Equinox.

If you get a chance, you might want to add a couple of videos. There was one taken from the air a few hours after the event that appeared to show no fire damage to the forest (I think there was a local Governor on board?), the one of the FBI agent trying to explain how the plane disappeared into the hole and the dust then covered it up and the one of the early eyewitness that said there was no plane crash, which I seem to recall never got aired again?

You're doing a sterling job!
Equinox
Banned
Posts: 549
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 8:45 am
Contact:

"FLIGHT 93"

Unread post by Equinox »

Roger That, It was defiantly a one off post.

Apart from general research stuff, like jokes, encouragement, and talking about my day at work, I never really talked about me here. Really, the past couple of years to me have been it’s all about the jokes and just progressing and learning with the research.

Until today.... after these years I want to speak what I feel for once…

Back in the day (3 years back) The UA- 93 crash site was the first factor of 9/11, that made me curious. I remember sitting on my little laptop after a hard days work, with a couple of beers and mucking around, with Google earth making distance estimates, planes speeds, and crash sites of UA 93 and flight 77.
(I recall as a child reading about Jack the ripper, and JFK and other clues type research and guess I have a real natural sherlock curiosity gene... Above all it’s why I do it, I wouldn’t be here if I wasn’t happy…)


I had not even heard about CGI, at all... until I stumbled across your great video “nosed out”( I don’t see how anyone can not say it’s the nose of the plane.) Within a day or so I watched September Clues and truly found that very interesting.
Its unique research, it’s so rare it’s different. And I like your style Simon I noticed your sense of humor right from beginning! :P
And you always have been cool and genuine to me. I do actually consider you a long distance friend. Who I have learnt from :) and see a lot on the same perspective as you as things.

A lot of times I’m at a point. where the forum feels like family! Kinda hard not too right? :lol:
This isn’t no pussy stuff it’s mutha-fuking 9/11! And whilst laughing our asses off... we are rewriting the true story of one of the biggest days in history.

(Why did other so called interested contributors seem one day just overnight the research so easily? And turn Anti Simon? Anti clues? WTF!? All like supposed experts in photo.s and truthers just go sour overnight ? I thought it would have have been an fun easy an enjoyable experience for them!! how come little a Joe average from the suburbs who couldn’t download a photo could dig this for so long?)

It’s true, I never knew even to download a simple photo! :lol: and just watching what you guys do and learning day in day out. I truly have been a rookie the whole time, I have been here. I mean, realistically though I put some cool stuff on now. I was just a young dude learning. I still have been learning to date.

I’m kind of happy dude because today I feel like I have left the rookie stage, it was like some cool phase I had to go through. I don’t classify myself as anything now. But I know now I left my rookie status of research. It’s like it all come back to hit me today B) when I see the UA 93 post above!!
That’s where my roots were before here! And since coming to septclues.info I have been reading literally day in day out on here.

I do know a fair bit of knowledge on 9/11 now! And yes you guys are still funny, insightful, and interesting to hear from. :D

Actually like a few of us here, since I looked at the CGI.. I was really like “UA 93? Pfffttttt who cares! that’s like the old news, the hundreds of hours of footage flight 175 has way more depth! And to be honest it always has been a hassle to link to research on the UA 93 hoax, as the links and info are scattered here and there. I would be lying if I said it wasn’t happy to say 90% of the relevant information can be located in the report above.
Because it’s a one of factor in the whole scheme of things… I really don’t want to post anymore about the crash it’s done and dusted…. The thread is obviously slow, because mainly of the huge gifs I use of actual footage from 4 different crash sites.
The information was all a combination of killtown, spooked and me, I went through and compiled it all. So it’s easy in one spot, and can speak for itself. All the photos I used and research techniques I used aware verifiable and sourced I put them up gradually.


I do want to assert that the above UA 93 report is written to be 100% proof!
It should speak for itself, in proving there was no plane there. I want to focus on other stuff than the actual crash site. If anyone has any questions I’m here to help! And as I say it’s very strong case!... debunkers eat your heart out.

Those Flights with the gif’s that I compared to be defiantly the same crash path and also the same speed. There should be debris, all the other stuff is verifiable… and if needed I can demonstrate using a 3d model Boeing 767 for comparison. Whatever it takes.

O.K, so now we have heard my personal view on some things, I will get back to the real relevance….
Why UA 93? – The September clues is a media fakery research!

Where does it truly stand? After all this time looking at the research, and funnily enough re-arriving back at where I first began I look at like this.

It’s simple, verifiable, and obvious, It speaks for itself and It makes a very strong case, Of what Simon Hoi Polloi, and many others have been constantly proving for years by themselves with out mentioning much of the UA 93….. The were no 4 Hijackings There were no Planes … There were No Victims,



Another cool factor! I believe it helps with the other crash scenes... The flying patterns, and planes expected capabilities, crash sites, you can compare the engines, actual plane guidelines. And the complete absurdity of it all.


I’m real happy today to see that things worked out for me in life and see this thread here, At the end of the day It isn’t about me.



Peace EQ...

Image
Last edited by Equinox on Sun Jun 17, 2012 6:04 am, edited 3 times in total.
Post Reply