The Boeing 757 Challenge
Wext
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2_em8G6DJE
Transcript:
The Boeing 757 Challenge!
Let's review the official story of what happened after Flight 93
allegedly crashed.
The Boeing 757 supposedly flipped on its back and crashed into an empty
field at a 40-deg angle.
Incredibly, hardly anything appeared to be left of the large plane.
People who reached the scene were stunned at what they saw, or better
yet, what they didn't see.
"It didn't look like a plane crash because there was nothing that
looked like a plane," Barron said. - Post-Gazette.com (09/12/01)
"If they hadn’t told us a plane had wrecked, you wouldn’t have
known," Delano said. - PittsburghLive.com (09/12/01)
Some thought the plane must have bounced into the woods.
"Officials [said]... Most of the plane's debris kept traveling
after the plane hit and landed in the woods past the mine." - Pittsburgh
Channel (09/11/01)
“It looked like the plane hit once and flopped down into the
woods,” said would-be rescuer Brad Reiman. - PittsburghLive.com (09/12/01)
Capt. Monaco [said] "the plane initially struck and continued on
into the south," disappearing into the woods. - Daily Athenaeum (09/12/01)
This was even depicted in a scene from a movie about the alleged crash
of Flight 93.
But no plane was found in the woods, so people just assumed that Flight
93 had simply disintegrated from impacting at such a high speed.
"the plane is pretty much disintegrated. There’s nothing left but
scorched trees," said Mark Stahl. - Daily American (09/12/01)
“It looked like it hit and disintegrated,” Delano said. -
PittsburghLive.com (09/12/01)
“Once it hit, everything just disintegrated,” said state police
spokesman Trooper Thomas Spallone. - PittsburghLive.com (09/12/01)
This explanation seemed to be what the news ran with ever since with
some officials still perpetuating it.
"[Wally] Miller holds up the bag and says that virtually the entire
airplane, including its 44 human occupants, disintegrated..." -
Washington Post (05/12/02)
"the overwhelming evidence that a Boeing 757, 55 metres long and
weighing 110 tonnes, had somehow been obliterated..." - The Age (09/09/02)
"the FBI and other authorities have said the plane was mostly
obliterated by the 500 mph impact..." - Standard-Times (09/11/02)
But this theory seemed problematic, because only two weeks after 9/11,
officials had announced that an astonishing "95%" of Flight 93 had been
recovered!
"The FBI announced... that 95 percent of the plane was recovered...
and the pieces of United Airlines Flight 93 that had been recovered were
turned over Sunday to the airline…" - CNN (09/24/01)
This claim just didn't seem to jive with the crime scene, since
practically no plane looked to be left afterward.
But what most people might not know, is that the news started reporting
another reason why so little of Flight 93 looked to be left -- a full
year after the incident!
It turns out that since Flight 93 "happened" to crash into an old
strip-mine that had been refilled with dirt, the ground was still "soft"
and "spongy" at the time of impact and this enabled most of Flight 93's
155ft-long fuselage to tunnel and disappear into the ground.
"The plane pitched, then rolled, belly up. It hit nose-first, like
a lawn dart... digging more than 30 feet into the earth, which was
spongy from the old mine work." - Pittsburgh Live (09/11/02)
"The site had been mined for coal, then refilled with dirt. It was
still soft when Flight 93 crashed, and firefighters said the Boeing 757
tunneled right in." - St. Petersburg Times (09/10/03)
--------------------------
(Following article not in video.)
"it took a while to identify the exact location of impact because
there was no plane visible... "There is no plane there, believe me."
The location was eventually determined because of some disturbed
ground in front of a grove of charred evergreens, explains Jamie. The
ground had swallowed up much of the wreckage." - St. Anthony Messenger
Online (09/06)
So this explains how officials were able to find 95% of Flight 93 when
practically nothing looked to be left of it on the surface that as a
result of the high speed impact into a soft patch of earth, about "80%"
of Flight 93 had supposedly burrowed under and buried itself in the ground.
Recovery crews said they had to excavate down to about 45ft to dig it
all out.
"FBI and other investigators at the scene have excavated the crash
site down to a depth of about 45 feet looking for clues." -
dep.state.pa.us (09/16/01)
So that means 15% of the plane had to have been recovered above ground.
Now if a long thin 757 was able to act like a 'bullet' and burrow itself
underground, it's not surprising that not all of it made it underneath.
But what is surprising is the part that supposedly didn't make it under!
"[Wally] Miller recalled his arrival at the crash site about 20
minutes after the plane plummeted to the earth... He explained how the
cockpit broke off at impact, bouncing into a wooded area..." -
PittsburghLive.com (05/30/02)
But wait a minute, something just doesn't add up.
(No, not the part about most of the plane burrowing under except for the
cockpit which supposedly broke off and landed outside in the woods --
although that is a head-scratcher!)
It's just that if a 757 (with its long fuselage, two heavy engines, and
huge tail section) was able to mostly burrow under this "soft" soil, you
would think it would have left a deep gaping hole in the ground, one
that when first responders reached it and looked inside, they would have
easily seen the mangled remains of this United Airlines plane down in it.
But instead, all that was seen in the first aerial photos taken shortly
after the incident was just a shallow 10ft-deep crater which happened to
look more like it was caused by a bomb!
How could that be?!
Well get this, after most of Flight 93 supposedly burrowed more than
30ft underneath the surface, the ground just "happened" to self-seal
itself!!!
"the Boeing 757's fuselage disintegrated in a crater that collapsed
on itself" - Pittsburg Post Gazette (10/15/01)
"The rest of the 757 continued its downward passage, the sandy loam
closing behind it like the door of a tomb." - The Age (09/09/02)
Officials had even said that they actually had to dig quite a ways under
that shallow crater to find the plane!
"searchers said much of the wreckage was found buried 20 to 25 feet
below the large crater." - Standard-Times (09/11/02)
"firefighters said the Boeing 757 tunneled right in. They had to
dig 15 feet to find it." - St. Petersburg Times (09/10/03)
So by the hole self-sealing itself, any evidence that a 757 was buried
deep in the ground -- and thereby easily dispelling any rumors that no
plane had actually crashed there -- was blocked from everyone's view.
(but it's all just a coincidence, right?)
So if you still believe in the official story that Flight 93 crashed in
Shanksville (or that it was shot down, but still crashed in that field
for that matter), here's an easy challenge for you:
Prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, with VISUAL evidence that one of these:
was buried under this shallow crater:
To help with this challenge, here's what a 757 looks like in an empty field.
(Kind of fragile, huh?!)
Now remember, in order to win the challenge, you have to prove with
visual evidence that a United Airlines Boeing 757 was BURIED UNDER the
crater and not just show a bunch of photos of people digging up dirt
with nothing in it, or a bunch of debris collected who-knows-where and
say they are pieces of Flight 93 that were found under the crater.
And just in case you were going to show that one photo of the little
engine piece only about 4 feet below the surface that's supposedly being
extracted from the crater (like that alone is enough to prove a 757 was
buried underground!), remember that I showed in a previous episode that
this engine scrap looked rusted and wasn't even submerged in the dirt
and it just "happened" to be small enough to fit in the very backhoe
bucket seen right next to it which strongly suggests that rusted
dirt-free engine scrap was planted in that hole by the backhoe bucket,
thereby disqualifying that photo as proof beyond a shadow of a doubt.
But don't worry, 80% of a Boeing 757 is still a lot of plane, so there
should be plenty of other visual evidence that proves, beyond a shadow
of a doubt, that Flight 93 was buried under that shallow crater.
GOOD LUCK!
Freedom Fighter
controlled mass media is a pack of lies, some of it, like the
Constitution-abrogating "patriot act," prepared beforehand.
This conspiracy was the crime of the century, mass-murder plain and simple.
To this day many Americans, traumatized by that horrible disaster, bear
psychological if not physical scars that prevent them from realizing the
truth.
SIMPLE PHYSICS EXPOSES THE BIG 9/11 LIE -
GOVERNMENT BUILDING COLLAPSE
EXPLANATION FAILS REALITY CHECK
On September 11, 2001, the world watched in horror as the World Trade Center
(WTC) Twin Towers collapsed, killing thousands of innocent people. Videos of
the collapses were replayed ad nauseam on TV for days. About 5 hours after
the towers fell, WTC building 7 also collapsed suddenly, completely, and
straight down at near free-fall speed. This steel-framed building was not
touched by the planes that struck the towers, and had sustained relatively
minor debris damage and small fires. Nearby buildings far more heavily
damaged remained standing.
In June 2005, in an apparent response to an article by Morgan Reynolds,
former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated,
"The American people know what they saw with their own eyes on September 11,
2001. To suggest any kind of government conspiracy in the events of that day
goes beyond the pale."
We will prove here, with scientific rigor, that it's the government's tale
that's "beyond the pale"!
Did most of the American people really understand the unprecedented
phenomena they had witnessed? Could a lack of knowledge of physics, and the
emotional shock of this mass-murderous "terrorist attack" have stymied
objective thinking and led to the blind acceptance of authoritarian
assertions?
The government and the media TOLD US what we saw. The government told us
that we had witnessed a "gravitational" collapse; what is now referred to as
a "pancake collapse". According to the government claims, the plane crashes
and subsequent kerosene (like lamp oil - jet fuel is NOT exotic) fires
heated the UL-certified structural steel to the point where it was
significantly weakened, which is very difficult to believe, never mind
repeat in an experiment. Even with massive fires that incinerate everything
else, the steel frames of such buildings generally remain standing.
According to the "pancake theory", this purported (all physical evidence was
quickly and illegally destroyed) weakening supposedly caused part of the
tower to collapse downward onto the rest of the tower, which, we've been
repeatedly told, somehow resulted in a chain reaction of the lower floors
sequentially, one at a time, yielding to the weight falling from above.
There are some problems with that theory - it does not fit the observed
facts:
* It cannot account for the total failure of the immense vertical steel core
columns - as if they were there one moment and gone the next.
* The collapse times were near free-fall, far too rapid to be due to gravity
alone. This article focuses on the latter of these two discrepancies.
Those that concocted the "pancake theory" made a fatal error - they didn't
check their story against the inviolate laws of physics! This is easy to do,
even without any physical evidence to examine. We can test that incredible
pancake tale using basic high-school physics. Let's do that - use a simple,
unassailable, incontrovertible conservation-of-energy analysis to perform a
reality check that establishes once and for all that the government, and
such government story backers as PBS, Popular Mechanics, and Scientific
American have falsified the true nature of the 9/11 disaster.
How Gravity Acts:
Sir Isaac Newton noticed that apples fell from trees. Others had also
noticed this, but none had ever devised a theory of gravity from the
observation. Over the years, mankind has learned that the force of gravity
at and near Earth's surface produces an acceleration of known constant
magnitude. That doesn't mean we know HOW it works, or WHY, but we have
become able to predict its effects with a high degree of precision and
certainty - gravity has always had the same, predictable, effect.
Galileo Galilei used the leaning tower of Pisa to demonstrate that a large
ball and a small one (of lesser mass) fell (accelerated downward) at the
same rate. Prior to Galileo, people had just assumed that heavier objects
fall faster, much the way they had assumed the Earth was flat.
So while an object of greater mass will exert more force (its weight) upon
anything supporting it against gravity's pull, it does not experience any
greater acceleration when gravity's pull is not opposed - when it is
falling. Earth's gravity at and near the surface of the planet can only
accelerate objects downward at one known, constant rate: 32 feet per second
for each second of free fall. As Galileo demonstrated centuries ago, heavier
objects are not accelerated any quicker than are lighter objects.
So Earth's gravity produces a downward acceleration of 32 feet per second
per second. This means that an object, after falling one second, will be
falling at a speed of 32 ft/sec. After the 2nd second, it will be falling at
64 ft/sec. After the 3rd second, it will be falling at 96 ft/sec., and so
on.
Further, since gravity's acceleration is constant, and an object is falling
at 32 ft/sec after one second has elapsed, we know that it has averaged 16
ft/sec for the entire distance. Thus after one second, the object has fallen
16 feet.
Scientists have derived simple free-fall equations that can be used to
harness this knowledge mathematically. These equations can be found in any
high-school physics book:
* Falling velocity = acceleration of gravity x time. (V = G x T)
And
* Distance fallen = 1/2 x acceleration of gravity x time squared. (D = 1/2
x G x T x T)
So if we want to know how far an object has free-fallen after 3 seconds:
Distance = 1/2 x 32 x 9 = 144 feet
So after 3 seconds in Earth's gravity, an object will have fallen 144 feet
and will be falling at 96 ft/sec.
Checking Our Work:
We've just solved a simple physics problem. Now let's check our work, using
conservation of energy.
We know that energy can neither be created nor destroyed - it merely changes
form. If we take the potential (in this case chemical, molecular) energy in
a barrel of oil and burn it, it changes to heat energy. When we burn
gasoline in our car's engine, we get kinetic (motional) energy, plus some
heat, as an engine is not 100% efficient. When we use our car's brakes to
bleed off some of that kinetic energy (slow down), that energy is converted
into heat (the brakes get hot). Explosives convert potential energy
[molecular or atomic] to kinetic energy (explosive force) quickly enough to
shatter or even pulverize concrete.
In the case of the free-falling object, the two kinds of energy we are
concerned with are kinetic energy and potential energy. Examples of
potential (gravitational) energy are the energy available from water stored
up high in a water tower, or a boulder perched atop a hill. If whatever is
holding it up there is removed, it will fall under the influence of
gravity's pull. As it accelerates downward, the potential energy is
converted to the kinetic energy of the object's motion.
So, as an object falls, it changes its potential energy into kinetic energy.
The equation for potential energy is:
* Potential Energy = Mass (or weight) x Gravity x Height. (PE = M x G x H)
The equation for kinetic energy is:
* Kinetic Energy = 1/2 x Mass x Velocity squared. (KE = 1/2 x M x V x V)
So let's just say, for the sake of simplicity, that our falling object has a
mass of 1. (Remember, the object's mass will affect its energy, and its
momentum, but not its rate of free-fall.)
The potential energy given up by falling 3 seconds (144 ft) is: 1 x 32 x 144
= 4608
The kinetic energy gained after falling 3 secs is 1/2 x 1 x 96 squared = 1/2
x 9216 = 4608
So, the available potential energy was converted into kinetic energy. Seeing
that energy was, in fact, conserved is how we know that the answer in the
simple case above was correct. We've checked our work, using an independent
analysis, based upon the sound physical principle of conservation of energy.
Now, and only now, we can be certain that our answer was correct.
One Little Complication - the effect of air resistance:
The free-fall equations above reflect a perfect, frictionless world. They
perfectly predict the behavior of falling bodies in a vacuum. In fact, you
may have seen a science class demonstration in which the air is pumped out
of a tube and then a feather will fall, in that vacuum, just as fast as will
a solid metal ball.
That's how parachutes work: much of the falling object's potential energy
gets expended doing the work of pushing a lot of air out of the way in order
for the object to fall. As a result, not all of the gravitational potential
energy can go towards accelerating the object downward at gravity's rate of
32 ft/sec/sec.
In other words, only when there is zero frictional resistance can any
falling object's potential energy be completely converted into kinetic
energy. Anything that resists a falling object's downward velocity reduces
its acceleration from the maximum gravitational acceleration of 32 feet per
second per second, as some of gravity's potential energy is consumed in
overcoming frictional resistance.
This explains the phenomena of "terminal velocity". The free-fall equations
predict that a falling object's velocity will continue to increase without
limit. But in air, once a falling object reaches a certain speed, its
propensity to fall will be matched by the air's resistance to the fall. At
that point the object will continue to fall, but its speed will no longer
increase over time. Another way of looking at it is this: gravity's
incessant force produces a downward acceleration, but friction with the air
creates an upward force and thus an upward acceleration. When falling at
terminal velocity, the acceleration downward equals the acceleration upward,
they cancel each other out, and a constant downward velocity is maintained.
Thus the parachute, with its high air friction resistance, allows the person
attached to it to float to earth unharmed.
A Quick Recap:
Earth's gravity causes objects to fall, and they fall according to precise
physical equations. The equations assume no air or other resistance. Any
resistance at all will cause the object to fall less rapidly than it would
without that resistance. If a falling object is affected by air resistance
it falls slower than it would if free-falling, and it will take longer to
fall a given distance.
Free-fall From WTC Building Heights:
The towers were 1350 and 1360 feet tall; average = 1355 feet. Let's start by
using our free-fall equation to see how long it should take an object to
free-fall from the towers' height.
Distance = 1/2 x Gravity x Time squared. (D = 1/2 x G x T x T)
With a little basic algebra, we solve the equation for the fall time, T:
2 x Distance = Gravity x Time(squared) (2 x D = G x T x T)
Time squared = (2 x Distance) / Gravity (T x T = 2 x D / G)
Time squared = 2 x 1355 / 32 = 84.7 (T = square root of (2 x D / G))
Time = 9.2
So our equation tells us that it takes 9.2 seconds to free-fall to the
ground from the height of the WTC towers.
Using our simpler equation, V = G x T, we can see that at 9.2 seconds, the
free-falling object's velocity must be about 295 ft/sec, which is just over
200 mph.
But that can only occur IN A VACUUM.
Since the WTC was in Earth's atmosphere at sea level, you might be able to
imagine how much air resistance that represents. Think about putting your
arm out the window of a car moving even half that fast! Most free-falling
objects reach their terminal velocity long before they reach 200 mph. For
example, the terminal velocity of a free-falling human body is around 120
mph. The terminal velocity of a free-falling cat is around 60 mph.
Therefore, it is clear that air resistance alone will make it take longer
than 9.2 seconds for anything falling from the towers' height to reach the
ground.
Observations from 9/11:
On page 305 of the 9/11 Commission Report, we are told, in the government's
"complete and final report" on 9/11, that the South Tower collapsed in 10
seconds. Here is the exact quote:
"At 9:58:59, the South Tower collapsed in ten seconds". That's the
government's official number. With all the videos that show it, they could
not lie about this.
But as we've determined above, the FREE-FALL TIME IN A VACUUM is 9.2
seconds, and 10 seconds is an exceptionally short fall time through the air.
This "collapse" was not without far more physical resistance than from the
air alone. It proceeded through all the lower stories of the tower. Those
undamaged floors below the plane impact zone offered resistance thousands of
times greater than that of air. Those lower stories, and the central steel
core columns, had successfully supported the mass of the tower for 30 years
despite hurricane-force winds and tremors. Air cannot do that.
Can anyone possibly imagine undamaged lower floors getting out of the way of
the upper floors as gracefully and relatively frictionlessly as air would?
Can anyone possibly imagine the lower stories slowing the fall of the upper
floors less than would, say, a parachute?
It is beyond the scope of the simple but uncontested physics here to tell
you how long such a collapse should have taken. Would it have taken a
minute? Ten minutes? Hard to say, but certainly it would take far more than
10 seconds!
What is certain, beyond any shadow of a doubt, is that the towers could not
have collapsed gravitationally, through their intact lower stories, as
rapidly as was observed on 9/11. Not even close. This is shown above to be
physically impossible!
Not only was tremendous energy expended in causing the observed massive
high-speed sideways debris ejections, but virtually all the concrete and
glass of the tower was pulverized - actually dissociated is a better word.
Never mind what happened to all the supporting steel core columns! The
energy requirements to do anything like that, alone, rival the total amount
of potential energy that the entire tower had to give. Gravity alone is
sufficient to cause some things to fall that far, even through air, in close
to the observed 10 second collapse time. But that is without the huge
expenditure of energy necessary to pulverize all of that concrete and glass,
eject debris, plus cause the steel core columns to effectively disappear.
The gravitational potential energy present was certainly not enough to have
done all these things at once.
Energy can neither be created nor destroyed; it only changes form. So WHERE
DID ALL THAT ADDITIONAL DESTRUCTIVE ENERGY COME FROM?
Conclusions:
In order for the towers to have collapsed "gravitationally" in the observed
duration, as we've been told over and over again, one or more of the
following zany-sounding conditions must have been met:
* The undamaged structure below the impact zone offered zero resistance to
the collapse.
* The glass and concrete spontaneously disintegrated without any expenditure
of energy.
* The massive vertical steel core columns simply vanished, as if by magic.
* On 9/11 alone, in that location alone, gravity was much stronger than
gravity.
* On 9/11 alone, in that location alone, energy was not conserved.
None of these laws-of-physics-violating, and thus impossible, conditions can
be accounted for by the official government theory of 9/11, nor by any of
the subsequent analyses and arguments designed to prop up this official myth
of 9/11.
The Bottom Line:
The government explanations for the WTC collapses fail the most basic
conservation-of-energy reality check. Therefore the government theory is
FALSE; it does not fit the observed facts, and the notion of a "pancake
collapse" cannot account for what happened. The "pancake collapse"
explanation is impossible, and thus absurd. It is A LIE.
It is utterly impossible for a gravitational collapse to proceed so
destructively through a path of such great resistance in anywhere near
free-fall time. This fact debunks the preposterous contention that the WTC
collapses can be blamed solely upon damage resulting from the plane impacts.
The unnaturally short durations of the top-down collapses reveal that the
towers did not disintegrate because they were coming down, but rather they
came down because something else was causing them to disintegrate.
So, to the extent that people accept the ridiculous "pancake collapse"
story, former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Gates' other
premise, that people know what they saw, is also false. It is left to you to
decide if his conclusion, which was based upon clearly incorrect
presumptions, is also flawed.
The collapse of WTC building 7, which was NOT hit by any plane, and which
also collapsed within a second of free-fall time later that same day,
similarly fails the conservation-of-energy analysis. The 9/11 Commission
made no attempt to explain it.
Just how and why so many highly-accredited and credentialed people all so
miserably failed to check the "pancake collapse" theory, by giving it this
basic physics reality check, is beyond the scope of this analysis.
---------------------------------
FURTHER IRREFUTABLE PROOF BY PHYSICS OF THE 9/11 INSIDE JOB:
http://vehme.blogspot.com/2007/12/glaring-proof-of-something-hotter-than.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck's_law_of_black_body_radiation
Sam Spade
You don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Al Dykes
Wext <911ex...@noemail.neu> wrote:
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2_em8G6DJE
>
>Transcript:
>
>The Boeing 757 Challenge!
>
>
>Let's review the official story of what happened after Flight 93
>allegedly crashed.
>
>The Boeing 757 supposedly flipped on its back and crashed into an empty
>field at a 40-deg angle.
>
>Incredibly, hardly anything appeared to be left of the large plane.
>
>People who reached the scene were stunned at what they saw, or better
>yet, what they didn't see.
>
> "It didn't look like a plane crash because there was nothing that
>looked like a plane," Barron said. - Post-Gazette.com (09/12/01)
>
> "If they hadn’t told us a plane had wrecked, you wouldn’t have
>known," Delano said. - PittsburghLive.com (09/12/01)
>
All the cheery-picked quotes in the world don't trump the fact that
95% of the airplane's structure was recovered from the crash site
along with body parts for all the people that got on Flt93 that
morning and both black boxes, all of which are consistent with the
standard story and show the "Half Truth Movement" k00ks for the liars
they are.
Here is just some of the evidence thats the shows that United Airlines
Boeing 757-222, registered N591UA took off from Newark on the morning
of 9/11 and crashed in SHanksville.
There is lots of evidence at Shanksville that say that the plane hit
the ground, intact. For starters, no gun or missile carried by an
F-16 can demolish a 757/767 in the air. If the figher shoots out an
engine, a 757 will continue to fly, at last for a while. Any
explosions or impacts are recorded on the black boxes, both of which
have been recovered. If part of the aircraft is damaged, that
information is stored in the black boxes, also. Anything said in the
cockpit ("they are shooting at us!") is recorded.
And what did they do with it after it landed.
None of the serial-numbered parts can ever be seen again for reasons
that k00ks are clueless about, and all the important parts of an
airplane have serial numbers.
Even of a k00k says "they melted it down", disposing of 140 tons of
aircraft that way is involves lots of people and is unusual enough
that you would just have to shoot them, afterwards.
1,200 first responders [9] from 74 local, state and federal agencies
and organizations worked at Shanksville. They would be very suprised
to hear that that all the roughly 130 tons of airplane parts they
found were not Flight 93. Those people would all have to be part of
any conspiracy.
95% of the aircraft See [3] that was Flight 93 was recovered in the
hole. [2] This included both black boxes which have been analyzed [4]
and the DNA of all the people that boarded Flight 93 in Boston have
been identified by DNA, jewlery, luggage, and dental records. [1].
At Shanksville over 1,100 people from 74 agencies and organizations
worked at the scene. [6] They all waould have to be part of a
cover-up.
The data in the black boxes is consistant with all other evidence. [4].
All the data in the FAA has is consistent with the records in the
black boxes and with the Telephone Company's cell phone and all the
other evidence we have, some of which is below.
All the evidence says that United Airlines Boeing 757-222, registered
N591UA, took off from Boston on the morning of 9/11 and crashed in
Shanksville.
There is no evidence that it was shot down. Any bullet/missile impact
would be recorded in the black box or in the cockpit voice recorder
("Oh sh*t, Mohammed, they are shooting at us")
[1] DNA for all passangers crew found and identified
[2] The hole
[3] 95% of the airplane recovered in the hole
[4] Black boxes recovered and analyzed
[5] Video of Phanton hitting wall
[6] Lots of Flight 93 links
[7] 1960 Air-to-air collision NYC
[8] Analysis of Flt 93 Balck Boxes
[9] 1,200 investigators and first responders,.
[10] Remains of aircraft in storage.
[11] Papers & light objects found up to 8 miles from the crash
[12] Pictures
[13] Largest peice of Flt 93 was half a ton
[14] Coroner Statement
[15] Flight Data Recorder data and WTC data for Flt 93
[16] THE NORAD RESPONSE TO 9/11 COmplete timing and FAA info
[17] VIDEO: Eyewitnesses to Flt93 crash
[1] --------------------------------------------------------------------------
DNA
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011220shanksville1220p2.asp
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2fhpe8
Links to forensics and hijacker identification
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/linksto911forensicsaqndvictimidentificat
The hijacker's license
http://bp0.blogger.com/_rLV-ZuNPwJ4/RzjIqhqANiI/AAAAAAAAAuw/8Ve-LbpabIs/s1600-h/PA00101A.jpg
[2] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Hole:
The aircraft impacted at approximately 563 mph (906 km/h), at a
40 degree angle.[26] The impact left a crater about 115 feet (35
m) wide and 10 to 12 feet (about 3.5 m) deep. There were no
survivors among the 44 passengers, crew and terrorists (all were
killed by the impact or had been previously killed during
flight).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_93
http://preview.tinyurl.com/5tvkk
[3] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the in the news on 9/24/2001, CNN reports 95% or the aircraft
was recovered form that hole including both black boxes.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/24/inv.pennsylvania.site/index.html
CNN.com
FBI finished with Pennsylvania crash site probe
SHANKSVILLE, Pennsylvania (CNN) --The FBI announced Monday that its
investigation of the site where a hijacked jet slammed into a field
here is complete and that 95 percent of the plane was recovered.
The federal investigation into the September 11 terrorist attacks
continues.
Evidence-gathering was halted Saturday afternoon and the pieces of
United Airlines Flight 93 that had been recovered were turned over
Sunday to the airline, with the exception of the flight data recorder
and the voice recorder, which are being held and analyzed by the FBI,
according to FBI agent Bill Crowley.
Crowley said the biggest piece of the plane that was recovered was a
6-by-7-foot piece of the fuselage skin, including about four
windows. The heaviest piece, Crowley said, was part of an engine fan,
weighing about 1,000 pounds.
Flight 93 was one of four jets hijacked Sept. 11. Authorities believe
the flight, which originated in Newark, New Jersey, and had been
destined for San Francisco, was headed for the nation's capital, where
the hijackers may have intended to slam it into the White House or the
Capitol.
Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller have
praised the passengers of that flight, saying it appears their actions
in trying to regain control of the aircraft averted a greater tragedy.
People who spoke by phone with passengers after the plane was hijacked
say that after the passengers found out about the earlier World Trade
Center attack, they decided to try to overpower the hijackers.
And officials familiar with the flight's cockpit voice recorder say it
shows there was a "definite struggle," which they described as
desperate and wild, between hijackers and some of the passengers.
All 44 people on board the flight were killed when it slammed into the
ground.
[4] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Black boxes recovered and analyzed
http://www.ntsb.gov/info/autopilot_AA77_UA93_study.pdf
Black boxes recovered and analyzed
http://www.ntsb.gov/info/autopilot_AA77_UA93_study.pdf
Of the airliner parts, the pieces that investigators judged
most significant were the plane's cockpit voice recorder and
flight data recorder, both unearthed within 3 1/2 days of the
crash. The voice recording that remained is being analyzed for
clues to confirm the identities of the four hijackers who
seized the Newark-to-San Francisco flight before it crashed.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp
[5] ------------
Video of Phanton hitting wall
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--_RGM4Abv8
[6] Lots of Flight 93 links
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93shanksvillesummaryofevidence%2Cman
[7] Air-to-air collision
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_New_York_air_disaster
[8] ----------------
Black boxes recovered and analyzed
http://www.ntsb.gov/info/autopilot_AA77_UA93_study.pdf
Discussed : http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=102924
[9] 1,200 investigators and first responders,.
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93shanksvillesummaryofevidence%2Cman
[10] --------------------
Remains of aircraft in storage.
Since it had no more use for it, the FBI turned the airliner debris
-- but not the data and voice recorders -- over to United Airlines
yesterday. Asked what United will do with the debris, airline
spokeswoman Whitney Staley said, "I don't think a decision has been
made ... but we're not commenting."
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp
"With the recovery Friday night of the cockpit voice
recorder from United Flight 93, workers at the crash site
have shifted their focus to a long, arduous search for what remains of
the jet and its victims.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010916otherjetnat5p5.asp
[11] -----------------------------
Debris from the crash has been found up to 8 miles from the crash
site, but searchers are concentrating on the crater where most of
the remains are located. Papers and other light objects were
carried aloft by the explosion after impact of the plane and they
were transported by a nine-knot wind.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010916otherjetnat5p5.asp
[12] -----------------------------
Pictures
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200061.html
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200062.html
Live news coverage showing debris http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeWi0JpI__M
The hijacker's license
http://bp0.blogger.com/_rLV-ZuNPwJ4/RzjIqhqANiI/AAAAAAAAAuw/8Ve-LbpabIs/s1600-h/PA00101A.jpg
[13] -----------------------
FBI spokesman Bill Crowley said that the largest piece of plane
recovered was a shred of fuselage skin that covered four windows --
a
piece seven feet long from a jetliner that was 155 feet long.
The heaviest piece, he said, was a half-ton section of engine fan.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp
[14] --------------------
Once he was able to absorb the scene, Miller says, "I stopped
being coroner after about 20 minutes, because there were no
bodies there. It became like a giant funeral service." As a
funeral director, Miller says, he is honored and humbled to
preside over what has become essentially an immense cemetery
stretching far into the scenic wooded mountain ridge. He
considers it the final resting place of 40 national heroes.
He saw dust, not bodies.
[15] -----------------------------------
Flight Data Recorder data and WTC data for Flt 93
http://www.ntsb.gov/info/foia_fri.htm
[16] ----------------------------
THE NORAD RESPONSE TO 9/11 Compiled by Andrew Burfield
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2164577#post2164577
[17] ----------------------------
VIDEO: Eyewitnesses to Flt93 crash (0:1:15)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxsmhnZeM6w
--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
Stephen
My thoughts were...No passenger plane there nor in Pentagon.