Flight 93 crash fantasy

[SFC Ollie]

LOL, it must have been exactly the same in all the gory details in order for the truthers to believe anything. Oh and don't forget It had to have been planted. You know all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in without anyone seeing them....

Fruitcakes, they must be fruitcakes.

 

[saiweril]

all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in

What millions of parts?

 

[SFC Ollie]

all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in

What millions of parts?

You've seen all the pictures before, why do you even have to ask?

 

[Patriot911]

Flight 1771

I see two glaring differences that doesn't make that crash similar.

1) I see no evidence that most of that plane got buried. You can see that there is TONS of debris strewn on the ground compared to the Shanksville scene which relatively few debris strewn across the ground and the reported reason for that is most of Flight 93 buried into the mushy ground there.

2) the one you posted didn't leave any wing scars in the ground.

Who said there was no evidence above ground? They had people scouring the countryside for days picking up all the debris from Flight 93.

Evidence of the primary debris field.
"There was a crater in the ground that was really burning. There were pieces of fuselage and clothing all over the area, burning, said Peterson. He said he didn't see any debris longer than a couple of feet long.

State Trooper Tom Spallone of Greensburg have confirmed that the plane was United Flight 93, a 757, that departed this morning from Newark en route to San Francisco. It crashed in a ravine near an abandoned strip mine in what some witnesses described as a fire ball. The site is between Shanksville and Bucktown, near Diamond T Coal Co., in Friedens.

Spallone said the plane was still smoldering at 12:30. He said officials were trying to keep people from scene and confirmed that there are no survivors. He said the "debris field spread over an area size of a football field, maybe two footballs fields." The impact of the crash was so severe that the biggest piece of debris he has seen there is no bigger than 2 feet.

As for the presence of "wing scars", what of it? What does that prove? I couldn't see a clear view of the crater from above, so how do you know there were no wing scars?

What this crash DOES show quite clearly is that a plane can come in fast and obliterate itself into a relatively small crater with small pieces of debris all over the place.

So how about it? Is the crash of Flight 1771 close enough to the crash of Flight 93 to show that a plane crash site can indeed look like the one in Shanksville? Or are you going to continue to insist the crash scene couldn't have happened that way.

 

[Patriot911]

I think you got confused with this one. That is part of the cockpit from Pan Am 103 blown up over Lockerbie Scotland. The rest of the pictures are indeed from Shanksville.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I think you got confused with this one. That is part of the cockpit from Pan Am 103 blown up over Lockerbie Scotland. The rest of the pictures are indeed from Shanksville.

OOps... I do that now and then, Sorry.

 

[Patriot911]

OOps... I do that now and then, Sorry.

No worries. Everyone makes mistakes. Even truthtards. They just do it every post.

 

[saiweril]

all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in

What millions of parts?

You've seen all the pictures before, why do you even have to ask?

What is a dumpster full of unidentified rusted scrap metal supposed to prove? You do know the nearest business to the scene was a metal scrap yard, right? What a coincidence, huh? And as been pointed out about this photo, how many pieces do you see that show United Airlines colors?

What was that part about fruitcakes again?

Oh wow, total proof Flight 93 crashed there.

What is this photo supposed to show?

Is there supposed to be plane debris in that photo?

 

[saiweril]

Who said there was no evidence above ground?

Yeah, who said that?

As for the presence of "wing scars", what of it? What does that prove?

Have you ever seen a plane crash leave wing scars before?

What this crash DOES show quite clearly is that a plane can come in fast and obliterate itself into a relatively small crater with small pieces of debris all over the place.

As would be expected. What's your point?

So how about it? Is the crash of Flight 1771 close enough to the crash of Flight 93 to show that a plane crash site can indeed look like the one in Shanksville? Or are you going to continue to insist the crash scene couldn't have happened that way.

How much of 1771 buried?

 

[SFC Ollie]

I'm done wasting my time with you. You see the debris as clear as anyone else does and want to play games. Well numbnuts I have better things to do with my time. Enjoy your game.

 

[saiweril]

I'm done wasting my time with you. You see the debris as clear as anyone else does and want to play games. Well numbnuts I have better things to do with my time. Enjoy your game.

The dumpster photo. I see a bunch of unidentified rusty debris, none with United Airlines colors.

The forest photo. I don't see any plane debris. I see a shovel and white paper.

The cabin photo. The only things I see close to being plane debris are two small silver scraps. What color was Flight 93 again?

Your evidence of millions of United Airlines 757 debris at the scene is failing pretty bad.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Ya' know, it must really suck for these troofer loons to live their lives in total fear and paranoia....I actually feel a lil' sorry for 'em.

 

[saiweril]

Ya' know, it must really suck for these troofer loons to live their lives in total fear and paranoia....I actually feel a lil' sorry for 'em.

The people with fear and paranoia are the ones who only respond with ad hom attacks. I would expect more from a Ranger.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Ya' know, it must really suck for these troofer loons to live their lives in total fear and paranoia....I actually feel a lil' sorry for 'em.

I don't, I'm ready to give up on them as hopeless and let the guys in the white coats worry about them.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Ya' know, it must really suck for these troofer loons to live their lives in total fear and paranoia....I actually feel a lil' sorry for 'em.

The people with fear and paranoia are the ones who only respond with ad hom attacks. I would expect more from a Ranger.

Hey, you don't see this RANGER shitting on the memories of all who died on that day by spouting off with bullshit conspiracy crap.......THERE WAS NO CONSPIRACY other than the conspiracy of those terrorists who pulled off the attack.

You people have yet to come up with even one example of solid evidence.....NOT ONE....Everything you loons throw up is completely debunked......You people throw up conspiracy BS from complete nutjobs you people claim are experts......Do you understand how many people it would have taken to pull off such a conspiracy, from the top government to the local levels.......You're talking thousands and, you can't come up with even ONE of those thousands who would be willing to talk and admit.

You people are dirt......You're shitting on all those who died......You're shitting on my fellow brothers and sisters in arms who have given life and limb to fight the scourge of terrorism since that day.

Get a fuckin' life, and professional help for your paranoid delusions!

 

[DiveCon]

LOL, it must have been exactly the same in all the gory details in order for the truthers to believe anything. Oh and don't forget It had to have been planted. You know all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in without anyone seeing them....

Fruitcakes, they must be fruitcakes.

don't insult fruitcakes like that

Alton Brown would be SO disappointed by that

 

[Patriot911]

Who said there was no evidence above ground?

Yeah, who said that?

As for the presence of "wing scars", what of it? What does that prove?

Have you ever seen a plane crash leave wing scars before?

What this crash DOES show quite clearly is that a plane can come in fast and obliterate itself into a relatively small crater with small pieces of debris all over the place.

As would be expected. What's your point?

So how about it? Is the crash of Flight 1771 close enough to the crash of Flight 93 to show that a plane crash site can indeed look like the one in Shanksville? Or are you going to continue to insist the crash scene couldn't have happened that way.

How much of 1771 buried?

Thanks for proving my point, saiweril. I knew you would dismiss evidence that your claim was wrong simply because you didn't want to accept the fact you were wrong. You were shown an accident with an almost identical outcome, yet you still insist that Flight 93 couldn't have crashed there. That is just amazingly retarded.

You dismiss evidence of pictures taken at Shanksville because you "can't identify the parts". Who can? Are you claiming someone came in moments before the collapse and distributed 11 dumpsters worth of debris and then buried a bunch of plane parts into a 45' hole and then covered it back up?

This is why truthtards are beneath contempt. They dismiss evidence for retarded reasons because it is not, nor has it ever been about the truth for them. It is about pushing an agenda. It is about using the deaths of three thousand Americans to push their anti-government / anti-Jew / anti-<insert favorite boogie man here>.

See, this is how it went.

Never been a plane crash like Flight 93.

Yes there has. Here it is.

Flight 93 didn't have any debris and there are "wing scars".

Flight 93 had debris.

No it didn't. I demand proof!

Here's photo evidence of the crash scene with debris scattered all over it.

None of the parts say "Property of United Airlines" or is painted in UAL colors and I don't know specifically what plane parts they are.

See how retarded that line of reasoning is? One by one your lies are shot down, yet you continue to make up excuses so you don't have to accept the truth. That, saiweril, is what makes you a truthtard.

 

[Patriot911]

LOL, it must have been exactly the same in all the gory details in order for the truthers to believe anything. Oh and don't forget It had to have been planted. You know all those millions of parts from Flight 93 must have been trucked in without anyone seeing them....

Fruitcakes, they must be fruitcakes.

don't insult fruitcakes like that

Alton Brown would be SO disappointed by that

OOOOH!!! Yeah, don't mess with Brown. He will fricassee you in a heartbeat! I don't know what all is involved when you fricassee someone, but it sounds painful! Gotta be worse than waterboarding!

 

[saiweril]

Who said there was no evidence above ground?

Yeah, who said that?

Have you ever seen a plane crash leave wing scars before?

As would be expected. What's your point?

So how about it? Is the crash of Flight 1771 close enough to the crash of Flight 93 to show that a plane crash site can indeed look like the one in Shanksville? Or are you going to continue to insist the crash scene couldn't have happened that way.

How much of 1771 buried?

Thanks for proving my point, saiweril.

The only points proven are that you sidestep questions, misinterpret things and run with it, and can't tell when you've been proven wrong.

How about you go back and answer my questions to see what I mean?

 

[Patriot911]

Yeah, who said that?

Have you ever seen a plane crash leave wing scars before?

As would be expected. What's your point?


How much of 1771 buried?

Thanks for proving my point, saiweril.

The only points proven are that you sidestep questions, misinterpret things and run with it, and can't tell when you've been proven wrong.

How about you go back and answer my questions to see what I mean?

What is the point? You've aready proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that you will just ignore what was said and come up with lameassed excuses like "the debris wasn't painted in UAL colors".

You started by claiming you never found a crash that looked like Flight 93. I showed you one.

You claimed there was nothing outside the crater in the Flight 93 crash. You were proven wrong.

You pretended the evidence was invalid because you couldn't identify parts. Never mind that some of the pictures were used to actually convict a man to life in prison which means the pictures heald up to the standards of evidence to be used in a court of law.

So yes. We could go down this path of me showing you evidence, you dismissing evidence based on your opinion or a retarded reason, me showing you how retarded your reasons are and then answering your questions yet again. But what is the purpose? You're obviously not going to change your mind. You are clearly not here for the truth and are willing to lie your ass off to prove it. We know that. We can see that. And now so can anyone else reading this thread. That was my purpose. To expose you as the unthinking and uncaring person you are; someone willing to dismiss the evidence to push the agenda and damn the consequences.