Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

All things 9/11
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

Unread post by rachel »

I happened on this, which got me looking at some video from Shankville.

https://jaimee911.weebly.com/flight-93---a-hoax.html
FLIGHT 93 - A HOAX?

While there was three successful terrorist attacks on September 11, there was also one unsuccessful attack - United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed into a rural field in Pennsylvania before it reached it target. However, there is a lot of speculation about whether or not this was a real crash or if it was actually a hoax. There is a lot of conclusive evidence that would help to prove this theory such as the fact the damage at the scene is not severe enough to be caused by a crash as extreme as the alleged Flight 93 crashing into a field, as well as the interesting information about the debris, and lack of debris, at the scene. One of the most major points that brings back suspicions that the whole attack being a hoax is reports of the same aircraft being in the air in another vicinity, after the supposed crash was reported.

Wallace Miller was the coroner at the scene of the crash, and he found it "eerie" that there was not a single drop of blood to be seen. There was also no independent source that identified clear remains of any of the passengers. This is extremely hard to comprehend, as the crash site was a clear, open field. When the planes crashed into the north and south towers of the World Trade Centre, remains of the victims were found and identified, even among all of the debris from two collapsed buildings and the damage around it. Only eight percent of the remains were found, and although the plane did crash in an extreme way, it is still strange that there was no sign of blood or a large amount of evidence of them. As well as this, because of their extremely fragmented state, there was no way of telling if the passengers were already dead before the plane hit the ground and they were killed by the hijackers while the plane was in the air, or if their cause of death was indeed from the impact of the crash.

The damage at the scene is not consistent with the aircraft. The hole was too small to be caused by a Boeing 757. The wingspan of a Boeing 757 is 124ft, yet the hole at the scene was only 30-40ft in length and 20ft in depth. How can an aircraft so large cause a hole so small? The only explanation is that it was not a Boeing 757 that made the hole. As well as this, there was little to no fire damage at the scene of the crash. When the planes crashed into the Twin Towers, they caused fires which caused the whole building to collapse, yet in a field with dry grass, there was only a small amount of scorching. The fires in New York spread to buildings that weren't even within a very close proximity, yet a plane crashes head first into a field and the surrounding areas are completely untouched. This seems highly suspicious and brings about the theory of it being completely staged or fake.

Not only was the hole inconsistent with the size of the plane, but the debris was too. The crash scene shows that the plane was basically swallowed up entirely by the ground with a little amount of debris at the scene. However, debris from the plane was located many miles from the crash site. A section of the engine weight one ton was found 2,000 yards away, and other pieces of debris were located as far away as 8 miles from the scene in New Baltimore. There were a lot of wreckage found around 3-6 miles from the actual crash site. It does not make sense that a plane crashing head first into a hole that basically swallowed it up does not cause a lot of debris at the scene, but some is found miles away. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the plane crashed into the field as a result of hijackers. If there was debris miles away, it may be possible the plane was shot down while it was in mid-air which caused it to crash into the field; this would make a lot more sense than passengers revolting and causing the plane to crash.

One thing that brings about a lot of suspicion of Flight 93 being staged was the fact there were reports of the same plane being flown, after the reports of the plane crashing into the field were filed. The transponder on Flight 93 was recognized by Air Traffic Control as being airborne as the aircraft submitted a signal after the time of the alleged crash. There is further confirmation that the plane was in the air after the crash as the longitude and latitude given out to Air Traffic Control via radar were located past the alleged crash site at Shanksville. It would be impossible for the Air Traffic Control Centre to receive an altitude or transponder signal if the plane had crashed when and where reports said it did. Not only was it reported in the air shortly after the reported crash time, but there are several news reports of the same flight landing in Cleveland Hopkins International Airport. Mayor Michael R. White said there was a Boeing 767 out of Boston that had made an emergency landed because there were concerns there could have been a bomb on board.

The fact there are inconsistencies in the 9/11 commission's official story in regards to Flight 93 brings about the fact it was all a hoax. The damage at the scene such as remains, debris and the hole size and the fact the same plane was reported flying and landing after the alleged crash makes it possible that the plane was either shot down or bombed in mid air and the debris then fell. This would explain why debris was found miles from the crash site and the hole was not consistent enough to have been caused from impact of a plane diving straight into it. This would also explain how it was hard to find remains of any passengers or any sign of blood - they were killed before they hit the ground. There is a possible theory that the plane did not crash at all and landed safely at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, however the theory of the plane being shot down is a lot more likely.

Map of the crash site in relation to where the location of the plane via transponder signal
Map of the crash site in relation to where the location of the plane via transponder signal
The crash site in Shankville, Pennsylvania.
The crash site in Shankville, Pennsylvania.

9/11/01 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville


Looking at that video, it suggests to me something falling from the sky did make that hole.

91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0002.png

There is smoke coming out of the hole, which could be staged, but the tree in the background is also smoking, not only that, there looks to be an impact and the limb of the tree have been sheared off. The interesting thing, if that is the case, it doesn't appear to be anywhere visible on the ground.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

Unread post by rachel »

In this grab, it's more clear, the sheared tree limb is caught up in other branches. Not only that, there appears to be a punched in shape around that area.

91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0003.png
A13-85 copy.jpg
A13-85.jpg

To make it clearer what I'm getting at, the dotted line indicates where at least two trees were hit. We see one sheared and smoking, and the other, less clear, but it is bending over to the right, top arrow, from the point of impact. Not only that, we see something of a shadowy hollow where we can imagine branches have been flattened down, the arrows indicating the kind of shape. Going back to the first picture we see the diagonal shadow extending up; it is difficult to say if this is an indication of the size of object or not.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

Unread post by rachel »

If we look at this set of grabs, we see further evidence that whatever caused the hole, it wasn't diggers, it was something hitting the ground. In the previous post we see a telephone pole and a mound to the left of the impact area, these will be useful to get a bearing of the direction of the score shape on the ground in relation to the tree damage.

Image

We see the same telephone pole and a mound in the picture below, it took a little bit of thinking, but they are reversed, meaning the cameraman is looking at the scene from the opposite direction to the above image. So if we were to place the cameraman on the above image, he would be above the trees to the left, seeing first the mound, then the pole, then the damaged trees.

91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0009.png

So from this we can confirm the score shape on the ground is pointing towards the tree damage highlighted earlier. But not only that, if we look at a closeup of the pole, we see the wires are hanging, also sheared. Not only that, there seems a lot of disturbed earth to the right of the road compared to the rest of the tree line we can see.

A13-86.jpg
91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0015.png
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

Unread post by rachel »

We might believe to create the illusion, the authorities got some sort of ploughing equipment to make that hole for the news reports, we might even think they went to the trouble of setting a tree alight, but looking at the tree damage as a whole and the wires that are cut, it doesn't add up. Shanksville for the most part has been memory-holed, so it would seem more plausible, whatever hit the ground in the field that day didn't fit the narrative so it was removed.

91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0007.png
91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0012.png

Looking at the impact damage, the object falls at say a 45 degree angle at speed left of the camera's viewpoint. It hits hard, its pointy front carving that groove turning up the soil and lodging in the ground. But the momentum of the impact is such the back end is carried over the top of the front, releasing the front so it carves the same shape as it is carried out now facing backwards. It's now in a forward roll, the momentum lifts the object from the ground where it continues rolling, the front turning upwards, but the back hits the trees first creating that line of damage before it gets to vertical. The front then slams the trees further up creating the flattened shape we see in the tree shadow.

Image

We can assume it then falls to the ground just in front of the trees, we see the disturbed shape of the road in that area and the ditch. Likely the ditch is prominent as a result of the crash object falling in that location, top right of the next image. We also see logically why the telephone pole cables are cut. The object was therefore dragged out and removed before cameras were allowed to film.

91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0016.png
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

Unread post by rachel »

Again, looking at the following picture, I've pointed out the smaller triangle...

Image

...but there is a bigger one that fits the scale of the ground markings better. The smaller triangle would be the point of impact, the object then twisting slightly to create the larger shape.

91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0003.jpg
91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0003 copy.jpg

It is curious...

Image


Don't know the size, though judging by the other equipment around it, it looks to be in the same ballpark. A quick look at planes of 2001, this one was officially still being used up until 1998. Unofficially how long?

f704015f8bc8ba8415f7cbca8c9dd1f5.jpg

Convair F-106 Delta Dart
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_F-106_Delta_Dart
The Convair F-106 Delta Dart was the primary all-weather interceptor aircraft of the United States Air Force from the 1960s through to the 1980s. Designed as the so-called "Ultimate Interceptor", it proved to be the last specialist interceptor in U.S. Air Force service to date. It was gradually retired during the 1980s, with the QF-106 drone conversions of the aircraft being used until 1998 under the Pacer Six program....

...The F-106 was envisaged as a specialized all-weather missile-armed interceptor to shoot down bombers. It was complemented by other Century Series fighters for other roles such as daylight air superiority or fighter-bombing. To support its role, the F-106 was equipped with the Hughes MA-1 integrated fire-control system, which could be linked to the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) network for ground control interception (GCI) missions, allowing the aircraft to be steered by controllers. The MA-1 proved extremely troublesome and was eventually upgraded more than 60 times in service.

Similar to the F-102, the F-106 was designed without a gun, or provision for carrying bombs, but it carried its missiles in an internal weapons bay for clean supersonic flight. It was armed with four Hughes AIM-4 Falcon air-to-air missiles, along with a single GAR-11/AIM-26A Falcon nuclear-tipped semi-active radar homing (SARH) missile (which detected reflected radar signals), or a 1.5 kiloton-warhead AIR-2 (MB-2) Genie air-to-air rocket intended to be fired into enemy bomber formations. Like its predecessor, the F-102 Delta Dagger, it could carry a drop tank under each wing. Later fighters such as the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II and McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle carried missiles recessed in the fuselage or externally, but stealth aircraft would re-adopt the idea of carrying missiles or bombs internally for reduced radar signature.
The two triangle shapes in the trees and the Delta Dart two triangle shapes, one being the tail, match if the plane was rotating sidewards as well as forward after the first impact. Just a thought.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

Unread post by rachel »

I'm not saying it is, I'm just exploring the possibility. To me the shape in the trees looks too big. But if we imagine the shadow shape is due to all the branches being pressed and bent in one direction, then the shape that is seen would be somewhat bigger than the object creating it, though the angles would be the same. And look at the pointiness of the front tip of the Delta Dart compared to the hole in the ground. It's not beyond possibility that the front end hitting the ground could make that hole.

Image

ConvairF-106DeltaDart01.jpg
A13-87.jpg

Convair F-106 Delta Dart 3-View line
Convair F-106 Delta Dart 3-View line

I'll leave this here for now.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

Unread post by rachel »

I'm just going to add a couple of videos. As we see from the wiki spec info, the Convair F-106 Delta Dart could be "steered by controllers" via "the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) network for ground control interception (GCI) missions". If for some reason the plane stopped responding to ground control, what might be the solution to stop it hitting something and causing major loss of life?

Flight 93 Eyewitness Sees A Second Plane, Says Flight 93 Was Shot Down


Earliest video of Flight 93 crash on 9/11
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

Unread post by rachel »

I was thinking about that eyewitness testimony in the last post, there is an element of untruth about it. The eyewitness misses out any reference or description about whatever crashed or how the scene looked, he doesn't confirm a passenger jet at all in his words. This omission is suspicious. The only thing he wants you to take from his testimony is, 1) he was first there, 2) there was another plane in the sky which he gives no description of, 3) another person, at a later date, thinks the second plane was responsible for the undescribed scene on the ground.

I'm not saying what he said isn't accurate, but rather he says very little actually. Either he really does live around that area and saw something and was gagged in what he could report; else he is a planted witness to word his testimony in such a way for the viewer to make assumptions and fill in the blanks and assume the plane on the ground was Flight 93 and it was shot down.

So instead switching to the theory that the crashed plane was actually a version of the Convair F-106 Delta Dart that was in service in 1998, I don't think the scene fits the idea of it being shot down. Rather the shape in the trees seems to suggest a relatively low impact hit. So, a better explanation would be that the Delta Dart was intended to land around that location in Shanksville and one of two things happened. Either the plane was being remotely flown and was coming in to land in that field but overshot; then in trying to get the plane to ground the front was tipped at too steep an angle snagging its nose point in the ground causing the plane to flip over into the trees. As the plane was at landing speed, the wreckage was mostly in one piece, its final resting place being partly on the road. So whatever originally carried the plane to its take-off location could be driven to the crash area, any fire put out, and the plane removed from the scene very quickly.

A variation on the above is instead of a remote landing gone wrong, the pilot was forced to eject for some reason, so the plane was ditched in the field and the pilot used his ejector seat, everything else matching the above.
Ejection seats
The first ejection seat fitted to early F-106s was a variation of the seat used by the F-102 and was called the Weber interim seat. It was a catapult seat which used an explosive charge to propel it clear of the aircraft. This seat was not a zero-zero seat and was inadequate for ejections at supersonic speeds as well as ground level ejections and ejections at speeds below 120 knots (140 miles per hour; 220 kilometres per hour) and 2,000 feet (610 metres). The second seat that replaced the Weber interim seat was the Convair/ICESC (Industry Crew Escape System Committee) Supersonic Rotational B-seat, called the supersonic "bobsled", hence the B designation. It was designed with supersonic ejection as the primary criterion since the F-106 was capable of Mach-2 performance. Fighter pilots viewed high speed ejections as the most important. Seat designers viewed an ejection at low altitude and slow speed as the most likely possibility. The ejection sequence with the B-seat was quite complicated and there were some unsuccessful ejections that resulted in pilot fatalities. The third seat, that replaced the Convair B-seat, was the Weber Zero-Zero ROCAT (for Rocket Catapult) seat. Weber Aircraft Corporation designed a "zero-zero" seat to operate at up to 600 knots (690 miles per hour; 1,100 kilometres per hour). High-altitude supersonic ejections were rare and ejections at relatively low altitudes and low speeds were more likely. The Weber "zero-zero" seat was satisfactory and was retrofitted to the F-106 after 1965.
Finally, the broken branch that is seen on fire is likely the tail's point of impact corresponding to where the jet plane's exhaust/afterburner hit. This is likely what caused the branch to ignite.

Image

The thing is, because the authorities now had an unexplained plane crash, they needed an excuse for it, so they couldn't use the plane that was intended for Building 7. They put out multiple stories until they decided on what the "official narrative" should be.

As I say, this is just giving a reasonable account to fit the available evidence, it might be that the plane was in some way related to what was intended to happen to Building 7 anyway. Its loss causing the delay in the building "being pulled" resulting in the BBC reporting the event before it happened.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

Unread post by rachel »

So the next bit is an aside. While posting up the 1996 Valujet 592 Plane Crash thread with video by chalkbodyoutline, I happened to see it was part of a playlist. I watched the next available video in the series, I don't think to the end as it sparked my interest in something else that led me to create this thread. But let me show this seemingly unrelated thing.



Around 9:30 minutes Drew talks about the following clip and the overlay of occult symbols. I've pulled the original to Faketube because if anything in this thread is likely to be deleted it is probably this video.


This is an upload of an apparently ordinary baseball game which aired on 26 June 2013, and for some reason an occult symbol overlay was shown. The commentator says "I have no idea what that means...Apparently the baseball gods did know." - I'll let you watch Drew's video to see how he links it to other things.

ScreenShot-VideoID-_6Sskp3pHCQ-TimeS-40.png

But this is the still, and imagine if it was actually only meant to be at say 3% opacity, in that case it would create a ghost image which no one would consciously see.

So what is this got to do with the Shanksville crash? Well I spotted a shape of a ladder (this might interest you @Unreal), I was thinking it might be a rope ladder, but the more I look the more I see other things, and having a day ago watched Drew's Progressive Psyche Overlay video, I wonder if it's some sort of witchcraft overlay so people don't see what appears to be plainly in sight in the background.



Else it might be nothing, just compression artefacts... Anyway, here goes. The ladder is over to the left. If you look at the man on the far left, above him appears to be a "S" or "8", and then to the right the ladder going up into the trees. But it gets more interesting...

91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0017.png
91101 Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville-0017.jpg

As I'm posting this up, I'm seeing more odd shapes. To begin, see the three arrows to the left pointing at the ladder shape. Then the horizontal dotted line underlines what appears to be a line of text. There seems to be an "E", "G", "S", maybe an "END" to the right. Then below it seems to be an "8" or DNA twist shape, and then finally to the left of that, a Mithra head, like the Statue of Liberty.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 1612 times

Re: Flight 93 Crash in Shanksville

Unread post by rachel »

So to finish off for the time being, this is what I mean...Is it shadows, is it an overlay, or is it just random light?

A13-90.jpg
OIP.jpg
Post Reply