Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Official story of UA 93 is a big lie

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-05 09:40 AM
Original message
Official story of UA 93 is a big lie
In the first part of and kiss the official UA 93 theory good-bye Ive already dealt with the raining debris that occurred east of UA 93s crash site.
I summarize quickly here. For further details please check out this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


The paper debris eight miles away, the FBI says, was wafted away by a
10mph wind
; the jet-engine part flew 2,000 yards on account of the savage
force of the plane's impact with the ground. The FBI conclusion: "Nothing
was found that was inconsistent with the plane going into the ground intact.
"

http://www.world-action.co.uk/independent.html

But the journalist has his doubts:
Aviation experts I have contacted are very doubtful about this. One expert
expresses astonishment at the notion that the letters and other papers
would have remained airborne for almost one hour before falling to earth.

http://www.world-action.co.uk/independent.html


And most likely hes right.
The wind would have needed 10 minutes (given the speed of 9 or 10 mph) to blow the debris from the crash site to Indian Lake Marina. But there is not a single eyewitness that supports the official explanation. Some see the debris raining down on the lake before, some right after the crash and some within minutes after the crash. Nobody speaks of ten minutes.

Moreover the official explanation is put to rest with the fact that also debris much heavier than paper was found:
Residents and workers at businesses outside Shanksville said they found clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human remains.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010914scene0914...

By Wednesday morning, crash debris began washing ashore at the marina. Fleegle said there was something that looked like a rib bone amid pieces of seats , small chunks of melted plastic and checks.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12967.html

And watching the video from webfairy one realizes that also the direction of the wind wasnt east, southeast as officially claimed (and as necessary to somehow explain the raining debris).
Watch this video. The forest behind the crater is west. The camera is east of the crater. Does the smoke blow towards the camera or slightly left of the camera??
http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/emptyhole.htm


So, we have a problem here.
Where does the raining debris come from?
Especially as the official UA 93 came from the west and NEVER crossed Indian Lake so the debris CANT have been from the official UA 93.


But the problem is bigger.

Several accounts point out that human remains were found on Indian Lake.

Brant has been taking FBI and ATF agents onto the lake to recover airplane parts and human remains.
(AP, 9/13/01)

On Wednesday morning, marina Service Manager John Fleegle found what he figured was a bone, washed up on one of the marina's concrete boat launches.
"It was maybe five inches long. It put me in mind of maybe a rib bone," Fleegle said. "I called the state police. They contacted the FBI, and they picked it up."

http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010914scene0914...


Finding the flight data recorder had been the focus of investigators as they widened their search area today following the discoveries of more debris, including what appeared to be human remains, miles from the point of impact at a reclaimed coal mine.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010913somersetp...


And now weve a real problem.
As shown the debris cant be from the official UA 93 coming from the west. Then the human remains found on Indian Lake cant be neither from the official UA 93.
This leaves us with two possibilities:

1. There has been a cover up concerning the DNA. If the real UA 93 is in the crater at Shanksville and in the crater are the DNA of the passengers two then it follows logically that the human debris found on Indian Lake are from persons that WERENT aboard UA 93. As this was never announced we have to assume a cover up.
2. If the human remains found in Indian Lake are from passengers aboard UA 93 as are the DNA found in the crater then the only logical conclusion can be that it wasnt the official UA 93 coming from the west that crashed. As many eyewitnesses have seen the last minutes of this plane from the west and as the Commission declared that indeed UA 93 came from the west then we have the problem that the plane that officially is assumed to have been UA 93 is not in the crater. And we do have the problem that the plane coming from the west is unaccounted for. Disappeared in a well-coordinated plan with a plane coming from the east that lost the debris which was found at Indian Lake. And Im sorry certainly this would be a plan that has not been executed by our 19 hijackers.

So we have the choice between a DNA cover up or a complete cover up.

As indicated in the second part of and kiss the official UA 93 good-bye I think it is impossible that the official UA 93 coming from the west caused the crater.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


So, in general the problem is not if UA 93 was shot down or not the whole story simple doesn't add up at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-05 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. Excellent summary. Any "Official Story" believers care to explain this?
Edited on Wed Feb-02-05 12:59 PM by spooked911
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-05 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
2. Options.
1. Flight 93 was shot-down by a US Fighter aircraft. OK fine
a. There would be missile remains, however small, but certainly detectable by crash investigators. would need to surpress.
b. There would be the pilot, the order, and the ordnance reports as evidence. Quite an extensive paper trail to cover up.

2. Flight 93 was crashed intentionally by the Hijackers.
a. May or may not account for the alleged debris fields.

3. Flight 93 broke up midair and then crashed.
a. the aircraft was at high speed, at a relative low altitude, and put into some very violent maneuvers by the hijackers in order to neutralize the passenger revolt. Flight 93 may have partially broke up before impact, explaining the alleged debris field.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-02-05 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Thanks
Thanks Vincent for entering the discussion.
The problem is that the official UA 93 was soming in from the west. The debris is found in the east on Indian Lake. The official UA 93 never crossed Indian Lake. Therefore the debris can't be from this plane. So all shoot down or whatever scebarios have to account for the flight path. What happened to the official UA 93 coming in from the west (official flight path and seen by many eyewitnesses) and what plane is responsible in the east for the raining confetti.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-03-05 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
4. Again-- do any "Official Story" believers care to explain this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
5. Maybe
there was even a third plane ....
Another Boeing coming in from the east:


"People were calling in and reporting pieces of plane falling," a state trooper said. Jim Stop reported he had seen the hijacked Boeing 757 fly over him as he was fishing. He said he could see parts falling from the plane.
http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_eyewitness.html

I didn't use this quote so far because it is impossible to find the original source of it (although there is one source with another quote of Jim Stop).

I'm just curious with or without this quote:

Does anybody bother to explain how the human remains found on Indian Lake can possibily be from UA 93 that is supposed to have crashed west of Indian Lake? (/b]
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-07-05 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. And yet another physcial miracle
A payroll check was found in New Baltimore more than eight miles away from the crash site. Can anybody please explain this miracle. Not only that this check is supposed to have been blown by the wind according to the official theory for more than 50 minutes but he also escaped a wet landing in the Indian Lake but blew without even touching the water across the lake to land in perfect condition in New Baltimore. It was to Antonio B. Costa in San Jose, California.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12967.html


I'm simply impressed. If nobody cares about all the refusals for the wind theory maybe at least somebody can explain this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-12-05 07:20 AM
Response to Original message
7. FBI first didn't believe in the wind theory neither
Edited on Sat Feb-12-05 07:20 AM by John Doe II
John Fleegle, an Indian Lake Marina employee, said FBI agents were skeptical of his reports about debris in the lake until they traveled to the lake shore Wednesday afternoon.
Fleegle, marina owner Jim Brant and two of Brants employees were among the dozens who witnessed the crash from Indian Lake. Fleegle had just returned to the marina to get fuel for a boat that had run out of gas when Carol Delasko called him into the drydock barn to watch news of the World Trade Center attack.
All of a sudden the lights flickered and we joked that maybe they were coming for us. Then we heard engines screaming close overhead. The building shook. We ran out, heard the explosion and saw a fireball mushroom, said Fleegle, pointing to a clearing on a ridge at the far end of the lake.
Delasko, who ran outside moments later, said she thought someone had blown up a boat on the lake. It just looked like confetti raining down all over the air above the lake, she said.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12967.html


And while somebody might be on to explaining how the wind can have blown the debris to Indian Lake although ALL eyewitnesses contradict this explanation I'd be happy to hear how part of seats and bones can be blown by a 9 mph wind:
By Wednesday morning, crash debris began washing ashore at the marina. Fleegle said there was something that looked like a rib bone amid pieces of seats, small chunks of melted plastic and checks.
He said FBI agents who spent the afternoon patrolling the lake in rented boats eventually carted away a large garbage bag full of debris.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12967.html


Feegle, who piloted one of the FBI's boats, said the debris included correspondence with a California return address, the charred photograph of a boy, small pieces of seat cushions, and a 5-inch-long curved bone.
(Newsday, (9/14/01)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. Questions of Original Post still unanswered
This post tries to prove that the original explanation of UA 93 is a clear lie and that also a simple explanation as eg a shoot-down scenario can't explain what happened. Yet, nobody has come forward with even the slightest explanation that keeps the official explanation alive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-12-05 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
9. New Baltimore
Edited on Sat Mar-12-05 03:20 PM by John Doe II
Just found this:

The village of New Baltimore is a dozen or more miles by automobile but eight as the wind blows, which it was doing a year ago. Melanie Hankinson was at the church next to her home, transfixed before a television that showed the World Trade Center ablaze, when the man who sprays her lawn stopped by to tell her he was finding odd things in the weeds.
"He said there was a loud bang and smoke and then these papers started blowing through your yard," she said. "I said, 'Oh.' Then I went back to the TV." Then the parish priest, the Rev. Allen Zeth, told her an airplane had crashed in Shanksville.
For the next few hours, Hankinson gathered charred pages of in-flight magazines, papers from a pilot's manual -- she remembers a map showing the Guadalajara, Mexico, airport -- and copies of stock portfolio monthly earnings reports.
"And there was some black webbing -- a lot of people found that," she said. The webbing, flexible where it hadn't burned, crisp where it had, was from insulation lining the belly of the jetliner.

http://www.post-gazette.com/columnists/20020911roddy091...

Wow.
Now look at this: New Baltimore is 8 miles away from the crash site. Given the speed of wind of 9 mph on that morning the debris would have needed (if the direction of the wind was perfect) 53 min!!
Now look at the account:
"He said there was a loud bang and smoke and then these papers started blowing through your yard
This really doesn't sound like 53 min later ...

Is this perhaps explainable due to the fact that this story is recalled one year later?
Unlikely. On the one hand there is NOT a single eyewitness account who supports the wind theory but also the woman recalls:
Then I went back to the TV." Then the parish priest, the Rev. Allen Zeth, told her an airplane had crashed in Shanksville.
If it really was 53 minutes after the crash she would already have had of this crash from the television.

Moreover I want to stress that many papers have been found in New Baltimore. That's pretty amazing given the fact that the papers not only had to stay 53 minutes in the air but also had to "survive" the danger of a big lake they had to cross .....

For everybody who starts yawning now and says well, I always knew they shot UA 93 down I want to underline once again:
UA 93 never flew over New Baltimore nor of the Indian Lake

If a plane was shot down and was responsable for this debris it wasn't UA 93 which was seen coming in from the west (see first part of ... and kiss the official UA 93 theory good-bye!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-19-05 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
10. Where are the usual naysayers?
This thread gives the proof based on eyewitnesses and many newspaper accounts that the official UA 93 story is clearly a lie. A lie that doesn't only simply cover up a shoot down of UA 93 but a scenario that is much more complex and only explainable if one assumes some US-officials knowing about 911 beforehand.
So, does everybody agree that the official story is a clearcut lie or does somebody and try to explain the raining debris and the human remains found on Indian Lake?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-02-05 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. So I take it
that LARED, Bolo and Vincent agree with me that
the FBI lied
the NTSB lied
that the whole UA 93 story is a clear lie.

Well, if you don't then maybe you should come up with something that explain the raining debris on Indian Lake and New Baltimore (although UA 93 never crossed theses locations).....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-02-05 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I love this standard that you have
John Doe II, take it from me: there are not enough hours in the day to disprove every silly conspiracy theory you guys come up with.

I choose my battles and so far I'm not getting a lot of discussion going, because no one deals with anything I say. (Please don't think I'm crying about this - I'm just stating a simple fact.)

And when I can't even convince somebody which way north is, it doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in me that we could actually ever agree on anything, especially when people on the other side of the discussion won't step in and stop their fellow conspiritorialist from embarassing himself. And why is that? Because it would mean saying that I was right about something? Could that be the reason?

Even though I was?

So forgive me if I give the 93 argument a rest. I don't regard any reluctance to confront my arguments as victory or evidence of being right - and neither should you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seatnineb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-03-05 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Even with all the help.......

.....that such noble entities such as the FBI,CIA,NIST,FEMA,DOD,NYT and the 9/11 ommission report provide to consolidate the story that you believe in.....

....you are still struggling to convince people that what you believe in makes any sense..........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-03-05 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Dude. I'm struggling to convince people which way north is.
I can't be responsible if people resist it. The poor and the CTs will always be among us.

There are some things that I have resigned myself to:

1. I don't have all the answers.

2. I will never have all the answers.

3. I will never, ever, at any time possess enough of the answers to convince the committed of their mistakes.

4. Because I dare to deny their dogma, people on the other side will entrench themselves in total error rather than admit I was right. (That's not an absolute, but it will certainly hold true more often than not.)

Also, I have a job, I have a life. There's just so many hours in the day - I can only be a signpost, not a mentor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
k-robjoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-03-05 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. I had a quick
look at the North - notNorth debate.

And I think I will stick out my head and grant to Boloboffin that he was right on that matter, and C. was wrong. Hope this can help to see that he is not up against a 20-headed CT-monster, so that when the JD2-head asks a question, he can just answer with referring to something the C-head said on another thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-04-05 02:50 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Bolo
Edited on Mon Apr-04-05 02:50 AM by John Doe II
First of all sorry that I had to provoque you guys a bit in order to make at least one OCTler enter the discussion.
I find it rather strange that no one of you has a word to say in order to refuse a thread that proves that the whole UA 93 story can't be true. And btw thanks for classifying this thread apparently as "silly consipracy theory". Excuse me, if you call it silly then maybe you should come up with something in oder to refute it.
The wind theory isn't possible. The FBI lied. The NTSB lied.
Or otherwise explain me why there isn't a single eyewitness who supports the wind theory? Why is debris found immeadiatley after the crash in New Baltimore when it should have fallen down inly 52 min later?
Explain me the following quote (thanks to Zaphod 36):

Meanwhile, investigators also are combing a second crime scene in nearby Indian Lake, where residents reported hearing the doomed jetliner flying over at a low altitude before "falling apart on their homes."

"People were calling in and reporting pieces of plane falling," a state trooper said.

Jim Stop reported he had seen the hijacked Boeing 757 fly over him as he was fishing. He said he could see parts falling from the plane.



But I'm sure that no OCTler will come up with even trying to refute this thread.
....

(Pittsburgh Tribune, 9/13/01)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-24-05 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
17. Distance to Indian Lake
Even more completely refuted is the wind theory by the fact that although most journalists wrote the distance from crash site to Indian Lake Marina would be 1 1/2 miles in reality it is 3 miles. Therefore the wind would have needed not 10 but 20 minutes. So the contradiction to all the eyewitnesses is even more striking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Apr 30th 2017, 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC