“A democracy requires free citizens who are willing to say publicly unpopular things to provoke critical debate.”
Robert Reich, Los Angeles Times, May 13, 1998, p. B13

Home » September-11 (2001) and "Terrorist" Hoax » Hardware and Physics » FLIGHT 93 (hoax exposed by Equinox)
FLIGHT 93 Sat, 16 June 2012 23:02 Go to next message
Tufa is currently offline  Tufa
Messages: 517
Registered: November 2010
Location: Lund, SE
Expert Member
Fairy Tail Shanksville
Hardware_and_Physics\Fairy Tail Shanksville.flv

The ridiculous "PLANE PARTS" evidence
A UA 93 compilation of data gathered from UA - 93 researchers.
Equinox- cluesforum member Equinox
Killtown- killtown.blogspot.com.au
Spooked- www.blogger.com/profile/08266697181345871878

[Updated on: Wed, 18 July 2012 11:44]

Report message to a moderator

Re: FLIGHT 93 Sat, 16 June 2012 23:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tufa is currently offline  Tufa
Messages: 517
Registered: November 2010
Location: Lund, SE
Expert Member
1-The Debris Field

Between the four airplanes which allegedly crashed on 911 there should be approximately 9 million parts. 3 million parts each for the 767 and 1.5 million parts for the 757. In addition to the parts there should be 60 miles of wiring for each 757 or 120 miles for both. There is 90 miles of wiring on each 767 which makes 180 miles for both 767's. Wiring is stamped every 12 inches or so with data which includes where it is going, where it is coming from and its maximum load capacity. The reason for this is that wiring is braided into bundles of up to one hundred wires and when you are tracing down a problem you have to know quickly which wire you are looking for and identify it.

Every single part on a Transport Category airplane which means it is certificated to the standards of CFR14 (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 25 of the U.S. Federal Air Regulations and to be certificated either it has to be made by the factory (Boeing) itself or subcontracted to another parts maker. If it is made by another parts maker that parts maker has to be inspected by the FAA and given PMA Parts Manufacturer Authority.

There should be At least 1 million parts scattered in that crash site. There should be body parts at least of 37 passengers, two pilots and five flight crew.

ALSO I'am going to demonstrate different crashes that have the same crash style. Two of the planes have the same downward trajectory and a lower speed. And one has the same speed UA 93,

UA 93-
Crash speed 500 mph.


Pan Am Flight 103

Lockerbie, Scotland - Dec. 21, 1988

Speed: over 500 mph


USAir Flight 427

Aliquippa, PA - Sept. 8, 1994

Speed: 300 mph


United Airlines Flight 585

Colorado Springs, CO - March 3, 1991

Speed: over 230 mph


I now would like too demonstrate the lack of debris in the UA 93 crash site. Compared with REAL plane crash sites of
the same nature.

UA 93


UA 93


UA 93


UA 93


UA 93


UA 93


UA 93


Re: FLIGHT 93 Sun, 17 June 2012 00:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tufa is currently offline  Tufa
Messages: 517
Registered: November 2010
Location: Lund, SE
Expert Member
NBC Shanksville Flight 93
on torrent
Re: FLIGHT 93 Sun, 17 June 2012 04:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tufa is currently offline  Tufa
Messages: 517
Registered: November 2010
Location: Lund, SE
Expert Member
2-The Crater

Let's look at this photo again of the Shanksville crater:

Here's the best possible match of a Boeing 757 with the Shanksvile crater, given the official trajectory of inverted impact, with the plane traveling in the basic direction of the top of the photo:

Notice a wee problem?

Even if we assume the whole plane both blew up into tiny pieces or burrowed into the ground (as the official story holds), the fuselage would have had to have make some sort of crater in the ground where it hit. But there is nothing there where the fuselage should have hit.

This crater is bogus.

This is a nice companion diagram to my earlier proof regarding the Shanksville crater.

Now, the issue is, what attitude was the plane before impact to make this crater, officially?

According the the official NTSB report, the plane impacted the ground in an inverted position, at a 40 degree angle nose down. The upside-down or inverted attitude of the plane is also noted by wikipedia and by "Among the Heroes" (Jere Longman, Harper-Collins 2002, p215).

Thus, the government is telling a story where the plane was inverted before it impacted-- that the plane was upside-down or belly up as it hit the earth.

The tail-mark at the north part of the crater in the aerial picture above supports the upside-down story as well. A tail mark made by a plane going southwards can ONLY be produced at the north side of the crater if the plane was going upside-down when it impacts.

So what does it look like when the plane is going upside-down when it impacts? How would the plane FIT in the crater?

I'm going to use this picture, where the camera is looking down one of the wing scars, to the west. North is to the right and south is to the left. Thus, the plane would come from the right.

Here is a diagram, with a plane superimposed onto the crater, using the picture above. (The tail end of the plane is cut off in this diagram because of size.)

Immediately, you should see there is a problem.

Even if the fuselage impacts at the very north part of the crater, THERE IS NO WAY THE WINGS CAN IMPACT THE GROUND TO PRODUCE THE WING SCARS.

The wings simply do not line up in the right place.

If you move the fuselage so that it impacts the ground further to the left (further southwards), the wing alignment problem is even worse.

Further, it is impossible for the plane to flip backwards as it impacts, to have the wings produce the side scars, particularly when the plane (officially) is going 563 mph.

If anything, the wings are going to slide further southwards as the plane breaks up, and make marks further south of the crater.

I submit this wing alignment problem as rock-solid proof that the official flight 93 crash story is a lie.

Curiously, the wings DO LINE UP with the side scars, if the plane is right side up, as shown below--

However, if the plane was in fact right-side up as it impacted, why a) is the government lying about it, and b) what made the "tail" scar on the northern edge of the crater???

I don't know exactly what happened at this crash scene.

I strongly suspect the crater was made artificially, to make it LOOK as though an airplane crashed there, and then plane debris was strewn around the site. Perhaps a bomb or projectile of some sort was used to create the damage.


  • Attachment: 1-4.jpg
    (Size: 135.97KB, Downloaded 2026 times)
  • Attachment: 2-2.jpg
    (Size: 63.43KB, Downloaded 1952 times)
  • Attachment: 3-3.jpg
    (Size: 38.00KB, Downloaded 2032 times)
  • Attachment: 4-3.jpg
    (Size: 145.39KB, Downloaded 2729 times)
  • Attachment: 5-3.jpg
    (Size: 54.08KB, Downloaded 2006 times)
  • Attachment: 6-2.jpg
    (Size: 57.30KB, Downloaded 2044 times)
Re: FLIGHT 93 Sun, 17 June 2012 04:43 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Tufa is currently offline  Tufa
Messages: 517
Registered: November 2010
Location: Lund, SE
Expert Member
3- Laws of Momentum

Below is an official government photo of the flight 93 crash scene supposedly from 9/12/01. Northwards is to the top of the photo. "Wing" gashes are black marks in the middle of the photo; the central crater is not readily discerned but is between the two wing gashes. Burnt grass and burnt forest is to the south of the crater.


Government photo of the crater looking west along the length of the "wing" gashes. Note the unburnt grass on the right (on the northwards side of the crater).

Another view from a similar angle as in the photo above but further out near the tips of the "wing" gashes. Note the unburnt grass out here.

This aerial photo shows the "tail" scar on the left (northwards) side of the crater:

Diagram of the official crash scene (the top of the diagram is northwards) froma similar view as in the top photo:

Everyone should be able to agree about what I presented above. It is just a description of the crash scene using official photos as evidence.

Now keep in mind, NO LARGE PLANE DEBRIS was found on the ground around the Flight 93 crash site. By large, I mean no intact engines, tail sections, wing sections, no landing gear struts, no intact seats, no pieces of fuselage larger than a few feet across (and only two of these). None of the large debris seen in almost every other plane crash since 9/11.

OFFICIALLY, most of the plane went into the ground in the crater. The black boxes were supposedly found 15 or more feet below ground, along with most of the fuselage. Many people bought this story because there was no significant plane debris outside of the crater.

Again, this is the official story.

Now... we've never seen photos of the excavated crater showing the buried fuselage. The FBI says 95% of the plane was recovered, but we've never seen pictures of this recovered debris.

We've seen 3 pictures of "large" debris, two chunks of fuselage maybe 4 x 4 feet each, and a hunk of engine about 2 x 3 feet supposedly thrust into the ground by the crash. Two of these pieces of debris have signs of being planted, as I have noted before.

Nonetheless, let's try to understand what happened with this crash.

UA93 officially impacted the ground flying inverted at a 40 degree nose-down angle.

If the plane crashes into the ground such that it explodes and burrows into the ground, there should be a significant deflection of debris BACKWARDS (as well as other directions). Remember the video of the F4 crashing into the concrete wall. Much of the plane debris was deflected backwards. But for the flight 93 crash site, the grass wasn't even BURNT on the edge of the north side of the crater!

On the other hand, if the plane crashes and at the same time bounces off the ground, then debris would be flung mainly forward. But then there should be much more big debris.

An analogy here might be useful. Imagine a hose shooting a high-pressure stream of water on a hard flat surface, at a 40 degree angle. You can see the water primarily splashes forward. This is analogous to the plane crashing and the debris bouncing off the ground and spraying forward.

Now, imagine a hose shooting a high-pressure stream of water at a 40 degree angle into a shallow hole in the ground. Now you should see that a lot of water is going to deflect backwards, back towards the hose. This is analogous to the plane crashing and burrowing into the ground and spraying debris backwards.

Physics, simple physics, says the official flight 93 crash story is just WRONG.

  • Attachment: 7-1.jpg
    (Size: 19.96KB, Downloaded 2022 times)
  • Attachment: 8-1.jpg
    (Size: 66.46KB, Downloaded 2025 times)
  • Attachment: 11-1.jpg
    (Size: 49.73KB, Downloaded 1971 times)
  • Attachment: 12-2.jpg
    (Size: 28.50KB, Downloaded 2144 times)
  • Attachment: 13-2.jpg
    (Size: 33.60KB, Downloaded 4192 times)
  • Attachment: 14-2.jpg
    (Size: 56.54KB, Downloaded 1905 times)
Previous Topic: The PLANES idiocy
Next Topic: When the "Plane" hits the Towers
Goto Forum:

[ PDF ]

Current Time: Tue Feb 20 02:09:48 W. Europe Standard Time 2018