Flight 93 Never Crashed In The Empty Shanksville Field

MachZer0 · Jun 28, 2008

bjspurple said:
Labeling someone as a heretic or a traitor or denouncing them as a blasphemer is a strategy of ridicule that has been used since ancient days where anyone who expressed a view that was not necessarily popular was merely denounced for blasphemy regardless of any truth to be found in their assertions. Such labels, appeals to stereotypes, accusations of heresy and ridicule are thus limited in that they lack substance and reason and merely serve as convenient distraction.

That was a wonderful, though lengthy, strawman as I never labeled anybody anythng. All I did was produce photos of airplane parts at the scene of the crash. A crash that the OP claims never happens but doesn't explain where those darned airplane parts came from and how they happened to show up at the scene like that.

Terral · Jun 28, 2008

Hi Vylo:

Vylo said:
Wow, please tell me you aren't serious. All of your "evidence" means squat if you don't understand basic physics. You aren't goint to get 100 tons of large wreckage out of an event like that.

We are looking for 'pictures' of Flight 93 (a 100-ton Jetliner) crashed in the empty Shanksville field!

Where do you see the 'planted' evidence anywhere near this empty hole? How did your planted evidence get way over in the trees? :0) Why are there no signs of debris between this empty hole 'and' the location over in the trees where someone obviously planted a few little pieces? Please stop being ridiculous . . .

GL,

Terral

Vylo · Jun 28, 2008

Ah, the internet age. I managed to hunt down the phone number of the eye witness who saw the plane fall out of the sky. Am I allowed to post it here?

Edit:

Also found the number of the second eye witness who said he could almost count the rivets on the plane.

Terral · Jun 28, 2008

Hi Mach:

MachZer0 said:
That was a wonderful, though lengthy, strawman as I never labeled anybody anythng. All I did was produce photos of airplane parts at the scene of the crash. A crash that the OP claims never happens but doesn't explain where those darned airplane parts came from and how they happened to show up at the scene like that.

The tiny bit of plane debris was obviously PLANTED, but not even near the 'empty' impact hole. That is the very reason you see no 6-ton engines, massive tail section, 60 TONS of aluminum/titanium frame or anything but a few little pieces of whatever you want to call it . . . GL,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Vylo · Jun 28, 2008

Perhaps you aren't looking the same picture, because the one you posted is full of debris. There is a gigantic chunk of metal sticking out of the ground on the southern side of the hole.

Terral · Jun 28, 2008

Hi Purple:

Thank you, BTW, for your moral support. :0)

bjspurple said:
Labeling someone as a heretic or a traitor or denouncing them as a blasphemer is a strategy of ridicule that has been used since ancient days where anyone who expressed a view that was not necessarily popular was merely denounced for blasphemy regardless of any truth to be found in their assertions. Such labels, appeals to stereotypes, accusations of heresy and ridicule are thus limited in that they lack substance and reason and merely serve as convenient distraction.

Let the scoffers scoff and the mockers mock (Acts 13:41), because the attacks against my person only serve to assist these readers in defining THEM. :0) Some of us look at this OP picture (pic) to see an empty hole outside Shanksville, while others see a crashed 100-Ton Jetliner; even though in their entire life, none of them will ever produce a single picture of Flight 93 or Flight 77 crashed ANYWHERE. The weaker side of any debate generally resorts to using underhanded trash-mouth trickery to hide the absolute fact that they in reality have NO CASE for anything at all. If all they can do is attack my person, then that is A-Okay with me. :0)

The important thing is that the 911Truth has been presented for this Flight 93 case and everyone still has the right to believe anything they wish.

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Vylo · Jun 28, 2008

I only "trash mouth" those who deserve it.

I burnt 20 pounds of wood today, yet I can't find 20 pounds of debris. Clearly there is a Bushie conspiracy behind this, and not a complete lack of common knowledge.

_Zap_ · Jun 28, 2008

You are absolutely correct.

Bush and friends decided that bringing down the World Trade Center, and killing thousands of people doing it, just wouldn't be enough to incite the American people to war.

So they decided to crash a plane in the middle of freaking nowhere. Brilliant.

And then they proceeded to plant absolutely no evidence tying Iraq to 9/11, despite the fact that the whole point setting up 9/11 was to go to war with Iraq.

Those who have the audacity to question the truth of a well-accepted myth - a myth that functions as “orienting and mobilizing story for a people”, are quite often the subject of ridicule and accusations of blasphemy. Similarly, those who have the audacity to question the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 and call others to critically examine their own perceptions, are also either ignored, laughed at, or ridiculed as lunatic ‘tin-foil hatters’ and unpatriotic, anti-American conspiracy nuts - blasphemous traitors even. What crime have they committed to merit such an accusation of blasphemy? Simply questioning the orthodoxy of the widely-held faith. David Ray Griffin perhaps puts it best when he writes, “If some people have the bad taste to raise the question of the truth of the sacred story, the keepers of the faith do not enter into debate with them. They ignore them, or denounce them as blasphemers.”

Think, however, of all the other apparent ‘blasphemers’ and ‘heretics’, who while proposing ideas that ran counter to popular and widely-held beliefs, turned out to be true. They too were at first ignored, then laughed at and ridiculed, even publicaly shamed for asking questions and seeking the truth. Case in point, Galileo Galilei, who advocated the theory of heliocentrism which held the central thesis that Earth revolved around the sun. This theory, which Galileo advocated, ran contrary to the popular and widely held geocentric theory, which contended that the Earth was the center of the Universe. Galileo was ridiculed by many for holding such a belief, even called to stand trial under suspicion of heresy. Several centuries later, evidence appears to suggest that the vastly unpopular theory which Galileo advocated, is true. Martin Luther King, Jr too, who advocated for an end to segregation and racial discrimination proposed ideas that ran contrary to popular belief. For challenging popular myths and societal beliefs, King was ridiculed by many. No doubt that at the time many thought of him as a traitor as well and denounced him as a heretic. Charles Darwin too, who publicized the theory of evolution via natural selection in The Origin of the Species, is still criticized to this very day for having advocated an apparently “irrational” theory. If Darwin had advocated such a theory in the medieval era, he surely would have been denounced as a heretic by the Inquisition. Joan of Arc also was convicted of heresy and burnt at the stake in Rouen as a result of a politically motivated trial, despite there having no guilt been found as a later review would attest.

Labeling someone as a ‘heretic’ or a ‘traitor’ or denouncing them as a blasphemer is a strategy of ridicule that has been used since ancient days where anyone who expressed a view that was not necessarily popular was merely denounced for blasphemy regardless of any truth to be found in their assertions. Such labels, appeals to stereotypes, accusations of heresy and ridicule are thus limited in that they lack substance and reason and merely serve as convenient distraction.

And sometimes crazy people are just crazy.

Like the 9/11 troofers.

Their theories make no logical sense. They are absolutely impossible. They involves tens of thousands of people telling outright lies in order to cover it up. The sheer number of people who would need to be payed off means that the payout to the people would have only been a couple hundred dollars.

Do you really think so little of Americans that they would cover up mass murder for 200 dollars?

Bah, whatever. Arguing with twoofers is a waste of time. There's no point arguing with people who are unable to form a single rational though.
If twoofers had any capacity for using basic reasoning skills, they wouldn't be twoofers.

But then again, what do I know. I'm just a CIA disinformation agent.

P.S. I tracked your IP. The black helicopters are coming any moment now.

TheNewWorldMan · Jun 28, 2008

I wonder how all the passengers on Flight 93 are getting along with the little green men they're being housed with out at Area 51.

Panzerkamfwagen · Jun 28, 2008

This thread is further proof that tinfoil hats actually serve to amplify the mind control rays.

TheNewWorldMan · Jun 28, 2008

Terral said:
Where do you see the 'planted' evidence anywhere near this empty hole? How did your planted evidence get way over in the trees? :0) Why are there no signs of debris between this empty hole 'and' the location over in the trees where someone obviously planted a few little pieces? Please stop being ridiculous . . .
GL,
Terral

You obviously have no idea of the kinetic energy involved in an object travelling at several hundred miles an hour smacking into solid ground.

Ever see a really bad wipeout during a NASCAR race? One second, you've got an intact racecar, and three seconds later you've got spare parts strewn across a couple hundred yards of racetrack? A jetliner's airspeed at impact is about four or five times that of the racecar.

You do the math.

Btodd · Jun 28, 2008

Terral said:
Flight 93 never crashed in the empty field outside Shanksville, Pennsylvania on 9/11 or any other day. You are bearing witness to one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetuated on the masses in United States history. Try to find just one picture of Flight 93 crashed anywhere to realize NONE even exist.

Flight 93 did crash in Shanksville, and that is the official explanation of where all of the passengers of that flight went. They never came home, so please tell me your explanation of where those people went, and the evidence for your explanation. We have one, and DNA evidence to support it, along with flight data, and multiple phone calls from multiple passengers of the plane on record.

Your fault is in assuming that there should be big parts of 93 lying all over the place, which isn't so. It hit the ground at around a 40 degree angle going around 500 mph. Expecting there to be large parts lying around is simply absurd. Most of the plane would disentigrate into thousands of small pieces due to the force involved. Here are some photos for you, some of specific parts of the plane, and some are general shots to show scattered, small debris:

Terral said:
Carefully inspect the area inside and outside the impact crater where we can see a man in a dark shirt and light pants walking to our left. You can see the time is around high noon by the shadow gathered directly under his feet. The obvious problem for the Official Cover Story LIE is that nothing even remotely similar to a real 100-Ton Jetliner (pic) appears anywhere in the frame. I encourage everyone here to flip through all the pictures on the Flight 93 Website (here) in search of a crashed 100-Ton Jetliner. In fact, search the internet high and low for a single picture of Flight 93 crashed ANYWHERE. Good Luck. :0)

First of all, if you had shown an overhead from even farther away, it would be even more difficult to see small debris. Perhaps a satellite photo of the earth will suit your purposes better next time; I certainly couldn't point out debris from that shot, either.

The other funny thing is that you're posting a pic from the Moussasoui trial, and you were telling us there isn't a single picture of Flight 93 parts anywhere on the net, yet the photos I posted above are from the Moussaoui trial, also. Did you miss them when you were choosing your photo, or are you simply very selective about which photos you show, and which ones you skip?

The next pic you showed was from even farther away, fuzzy, and had 'Senor Bushie' inserted in the title. I hope you can stick to the subject matter without interjecting your severe political hatred into the debate, but I realize it is what drives your confirmation bias. The evidence will fall where it does, regardless of George Bush (whom I voted against in the last election, which is odd for a 'Bushie Loyalist').

Terral said:
The only difference is that someone took the time and effort to create an explosion in this depression to then dump a huge pile of garbage and set everything on fire:

Why didn't any eyewitnesses, among the many who witnessed the plane, also see people exploding ditches and planting 'garbage' in them? One of the eyewitnesses was the first person on the scene! This is an absurd claim, and unless you have positive evidence to back it up, it's merely your personal fantasy. Evidence, please. Your wild accusation will not trump DNA evidence to the contrary, especially if you can't provide positive evidence for ditch explosions, or photos of people dumping garbage, lighting it on fire, etc. Can you?

What you've already been told in this thread, and what is to be expected in such a crash, is that most of the plane would disintegrate into thousands of small pieces. The photo you went on to post has numerous, smoldering small parts which you conveniently refer to as 'garbage'. Evidence, please. Maybe a sanitation truck backing up to the ditch?

Terral said:
Let this little video (link) replay over and over again and look carefully across the grassy depressions on either side of the smoldering garbage pile to realize there is no 100-Ton Jetliner crashed anywhere.

You keep referring to this as if we're supposed to see a fully-intact jetliner in plain sight. Of course you can't see a 100 ton jetliner crashed there. It disintegrated into thousands of small pieces you cannot see, over an area much larger than the crater. The crater did contain larger, heavier parts, such as the engine I will post immediately after this one (I think the limit is 5 pics per post, which I've already reached).

Btodd

Btodd · Jun 28, 2008

That's the engine pic I promised you. From the very same trial you are getting some of your pics from, too.

Terral said:
At this point, many readers are willing to acknowledge that Flight 93 never crashed into this empty field, but they want to ask “Okay, so what really happened???” I am glad you asked: :0)

What Really Happened:

The story you just linked us to implies that the plane was shot down. The eyewitness testimonies directly contradict that, so does the flight data from the recorder, and unless you have positive evidence to support the claim, then it's another fantasy. The article references a phone call by a man locked in the bathroom who saw white smoke. The plane continued to fly after that time, so how can you use his call to try and make a case that it was shot down? If it were, he wouldn't get to make the call, would he? Also, even if he did see white smoke, how is that an indicator of an attack by another plane? Would the smoke somehow be a different color if it were for any other reason? None of this makes any sense at all for your case.

Terral said:
All the reporters see is a large hole in the ground. Period! The hole is estimated to be 20 feet long and 10 to 15 feet wide, when a real 100-Ton Jetliner (pic) is 155 feet long and 125 feet wide and weighs in at a whopping 100 Tons (real pic and another = the schematic)! Here are some pictures of real Jetliner crash sites (pics + pic + pic) with others showing massive 6-ton engines (pic and pic) separated from the fuselage.

The plane isn't going to make an imprint in the ground that mimics wings and all. As has been stated several times, most of the plane disintegrated into thousands of small pieces. You cannot compare a plane crash at 500 mph almost straight into the ground with normal crashes in which direct impacts at full speed are not the case. Faulty expectation and faulty argument.

Terral said:
The image of the man standing with his hands folded behind his back says it all! Note that practically everyone else has his face looking ‘away’ from the little hole, because there are obviously NO signs of any 100-Ton Jetliner. Then note the yellow tape on the ground right behind him, which divides the Official Crime Scene (the hole side) from a clean field with no debris just a yard or so behind the man’s feet. The Official Bushie Cover Story says this happened (pic), when we can clearly see no signs of any 100-Ton Jetliner at all.

Ridiculous. Hands behind your back means 'no jet crashed there'? Don't be absurd. You don't get to decide what people were thinking from a photo, Terral. Your comment about a clean field with no debris makes no sense, either. You've already seen photos of debris, which are scattered among an area much larger than right next to the crater. In that same photo, I also cannot make out the man's feet! Does that mean he had no feet?

You also act as if there should be no border to the fire, ever. It has to stop somewhere.....if the area were larger, and stopped somewhere else, you could still say, "See? There's unburnt area next to the burnt area!". Try again.

Terral said:
What we need is some hard evidence for WHY some people continue to believe Flight 93 crashed into this empty field outside Shanksville, Pennsylvania, besides “Because Senor Bushie told me so . . .”. Can anyone here show us just one picture of a real 100-Ton Jetliner crashed in this empty field? No! We have already seen nothing more than an empty hole. Todd, James and their Official Cover Story cohorts are invited to make their “Flight 93 Crashed Here” case using whatever they call ‘credible evidence.’ This side of the debate is not holding his breath. :0)

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Thanks for another 'Senor Bushie' comment that does nothing to make your case. I hope readers can again see the source of your confirmation bias at work. Not only do you think you can read the mind of a man with his hands behind his back in a photograph, but you can also determine the thoughts of people on the internet, all over the world.

I don't believe in psychics or claims of demon possession, so I guess you better come back with real evidence next time.

Btodd

Morcova · Jun 29, 2008

Panzerkampfwagen said:
This thread is further proof that tinfoil hats actually serve to amplify the mind control rays.

....

I'm scared now.

_Zap_ · Jun 29, 2008

I'm now envisioning what it would be like if twoofers ran the criminal justice system.

"We have video footage from three sources showing Mr. Smith murder Mr. Jones. Mr. Smith's fingerprints are on the gun, and powder residue was found on Mr. Smith. We have Mr. Smith's confession on video, and twelve eyewitnesses who all testify that Mr. Smith committed the act."

"Yes, but look, Smith was wearing PURPLE PANTS! Would a murderer wear purple pants? And look, Mr. Jones doesn't even try to dodge the bullet!
And Senor Bushie doesn't even have an alibi for the time of the murder!
NOT GUILTY!"

Terral · Jun 29, 2008

Hi Doug:

Douger said:
Having close up photos of single pieces of wreckage isn't exactly proof, and actually makes it look staged.

Having little pieces of wreckage ‘is’ exactly proof that no real 100-Ton Jetliner crashed in the EMPTY Shanksville field! The Official Bush Administration Cover Story is missing a crashed 100-Ton Jetliner like this one!

Douger said:
I'm not convinced either way.

Not convinced? :0) Doug can go out and find us a picture of Flight 93 crashed in the empty field outside Shanksville, OR he cannot. Period! The first OP picture of the EMPTY HOLE (pic) shows just that. The difference is that I have done my own investigation and have looked at ALL the pictures and the News Reports and verifiable sources to conclude that Flight 93 Never Crashed In This Empty Field Outside Shanksville. To remain unconvinced is to bury your head in the sand (pic) to remain a part of the problem.

Douger said:
There is of course the question of what happened to all those people if the plane didn't crash.

No sir. Not for ‘this’ debate about whether or NOT Flight 93 crashed into this EMPTY FIELD like the Official Bush Administration/DoD Cover Story says! We are talking about a 100-Ton 757-200 Jumbo-Jetliner standing almost 50 feet tall from the tarmac to the tip of the massive tail section that the government says crashed into AN EMPTY FIELD. This is not rocket science . . .

Douger said:
That's kind of hard to explain.

That is because Doug continues to be unconvinced about even the most basic facts for this Flight 93/Shanksville case. If the government says a little jet crashes into an EMPTY FIELD, then I want to see the EVIDENCE to support their story. Please forgive, but your complacent attitude says, “Hey Bush, come over here and delude me!” My suggestion is that you go back up to the Opening Post and try to refute A SINGLE WORD using your version of credible evidence NOT for this 911Truth Discussion, but to convince DOUG of something. Stop waiting for someone to force-feed you like a little baby bird in a nest somewhere and put “Flight 93” and/or “Shanksville” into your own search engine and at the very least look up everything that Senor Bush calls evidence for the 100-Ton Jetliner crashing ANYWHERE. The reason many aspects of these related 911Truth atrocities are ‘hard to explain’ is because the government has been LYING about these things from day one. The reason America is warmongering over in the Middle East has been blamed on what supposedly took place by 19 Bearded Jihadist Radicals (pic) on 9/11!!!! We already know the “Weapons of Mass Deception” Propaganda WAS A LIE to drag us into a preemptive strike of another sovereign nation under God. Our duty as US Citizens is to question the government when the ‘facts’ do NOT match their Cover Story! Take a few minutes and watch these two little videos and decide for yourself.

Gov’t Story A FRAUD

Flight 93 Smoking Gun

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

_Zap_ · Jun 29, 2008

Terral said:
Hi Doug:

Having little pieces of wreckage is exactly proof that no real 100-Ton Jetliner crashed in the EMPTY Shanksville field! The Official Bush Administration Cover Story is missing a crashed 100-Ton Jetliner like this one!

Not convinced? :0) Doug can go out and find us a picture of Flight 93 crashed in the empty field outside Shanksville, OR he cannot. Period! The first OP picture of the EMPTY HOLE (pic) shows just that. The difference is that I have done my own investigation and have looked at ALL the pictures and the News Reports and verifiable sources to conclude that Flight 93 Never Crashed In This Empty Field Outside Shanksville. To remain unconvinced is to bury your head in the sand (pic) to remain a part of the problem.

No sir. Not for this debate about whether or NOT Flight 93 crashed into this EMPTY FIELD like the Official Bush Administration/DoD Cover Story says! We are talking about a 100-Ton 757-200 Jumbo-Jetliner standing almost 50 feet tall from the tarmac to the tip of the massive tail section that the government says crashed into AN EMPTY FIELD. This is not rocket science . . .

That is because Doug continues to be unconvinced about even the most basic facts for this Flight 93/Shanksville case. If the government says a little jet crashes into an EMPTY FIELD, then I want to see the EVIDENCE to support their story. Please forgive, but your complacent attitude says, Hey Bush, come over here and delude me! My suggestion is that you go back up to the Opening Post and try to refute A SINGLE WORD using your version of credible evidence NOT for this 911Truth Discussion, but to convince DOUG of something. Stop waiting for someone to force-feed you like a little baby bird in a nest somewhere and put Flight 93 and/or Shanksville into your own search engine and at the very least look up everything that Senor Bush calls evidence for the 100-Ton Jetliner crashing ANYWHERE. The reason many aspects of these related 911Truth atrocities are hard to explain is because the government has been LYING about these things from day one. The reason America is warmongering over in the Middle East has been blamed on what supposedly took place by 19 Bearded Jihadist Radicals (pic) on 9/11!!!! We already know the Weapons of Mass Deception Propaganda WAS A LIE to drag us into a preemptive strike of another sovereign nation under God. Our duty as US Citizens is to question the government when the facts do NOT match their Cover Story! Take a few minutes and watch these two little videos and decide for yourself.

Govt Story A FRAUD

Flight 93 Smoking Gun

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

I just love the way you skip over all of the posts that prove your theory is a complete piece of garbage.

Ryal Kane · Jun 29, 2008

The other big problem I have with conspiracy theorists is that they only ever try to poke holes in things. They never offer a coherent alternative. It's the same with Creationists.

Terral, can you, in a paragraph of two hundred or so words your own words, offer your alternative theory on the events of 9/11? No who dunnit rants, just what you think occurred.

Terral · Jun 29, 2008

Hi Vylo:

Vylo said:
Ah, the internet age. I managed to hunt down the phone number of the eye witness who saw the plane fall out of the sky. Am I allowed to post it here?

Post anything here you wish, but the reason Vylo is talking about using eyewitness testimony is because you have no physical evidence that a real 100-Ton Jetliner crashed in this empty field. Right? :0)

Vylo said:
Also found the number of the second eye witness who said he could almost count the rivets on the plane.

Just show us your evidence that Flight 93 crashed anywhere. If your eyewitness testimony is true, then you also have evidence to support their words. Right? Of course. Those of you chit-chatting on this thread should think about using your search engines to hunt down just ONE picture of a crashed 100-Ton Jetliner for this case. My OP presentation uses evidence to support the case for No Flight 93 crashing in this empty field! If you cannot come up with evidence to support an opposing hypothesis (none exists), then the chances of my explanation being right are very high indeed. Just point out the errors in my case and haul out your evidence and perhaps we will have something to debate. GL.

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Terral · Jun 29, 2008

Hi Panzerk:

Panzerkampfwagen said:
This thread is further proof that tinfoil hats actually serve to amplify the mind control rays.

No sir. Your one-liner whining proves that Panzerk has no case for anything. So, you really believe that a 100-Ton Jetliner crashed in this empty field:

Please point out the crashed 100-Ton Jetliner at your earliest convenience. Thanks a bunch . . .

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Flight 93 Never Crashed In The Empty Shanksville Field

Caught Between Barack and a Hard Place

Senior Member

Stick with the King!

Senior Member

Stick with the King!

Senior Member

Stick with the King!

Regular Member

phased plasma rifle in 40-watt range

Es braust unser Panzer im Sturmwind dahin.

phased plasma rifle in 40-watt range

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Senior Member

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency