Bizzare findings of Flight 93 crash in PA on 9-11

[Laura Bush murdered her boy friend]

Sept. 11 crash remains shrouded in mystery, Pennsylvania coroner says

TIFFANY CRAWFORD Canadian Press Monday, March 29, 2004

VANCOUVER (CP) - The fate of United Airlines Flight 93, the last of
the four hijacked planes to crash on Sept. 11, 2001 remains shrouded
in mystery and controversy. The famous cell phone calls from brave
passengers on the plane that crashed in a Pennsylvania field painted a
heroic story of people storming the cockpit to sacrifice themselves
for others. The chief coroner who investigated the crash scene
recorded a less appealing different image.

"There was, in my conclusion, no way we could ever know who they were
that charged that cockpit," Wallace Miller told students at the B.C.
Institute of Technology.

The American coroner was spoke at the B.C. Institute of Technology in
Burnaby Saturday. He detailed the grisly task he had recovering the
remains of crash victims for their families.

Miller, the director of a family-run funeral home and elected county
coroner for Somerset, Pa., said only eight per cent of the wreckage
was recovered. Everything else was vaporised, he said.

"We found remains 50 feet deep," he said of the massive crater the
plane left on impact.

The debris field spanned about 2.5 square kilometres of wooded area.
Victim recovery efforts were hampered because most of the salvageable
human remains were in the treetops. <snip>

http://www.canada.com/news/national/story.html?id=33d9fbe7-9a40-4099-a9f4-e2eeafa96b46

-------------------------------------------------------------------

WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
VAPORIZE?? And how did most of the human remains end up in treetops?
Has that ever happened before? Sounds to me like there were
explosives on board that went off on impact.

PS - and please note that this article is in a canadian paper. The
american press won't touch anything that contradicts the "official"
story on 9-11.

[Roncy]

<Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
...

> The American coroner was spoke

"was spoke?" It might have seemed more credible if this al-qaenadian moron
used grammar.

[Ragnar]

<Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
...

> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
> VAPORIZE??

Please provide your plane crash investigation credentials. How do you know
it couldn't happen?

> And how did most of the human remains end up in treetops?

See above.

[Lyle]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:28:05 +0900, "Ragnar" >
wrote:

>
><Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
...
>
>> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
>> VAPORIZE??
when it is a fully fueled airliner. havent you ever heard of
explosions that turned big items into dime size leftovers, hence
vaporize. Wether it burnt or melted away same thing. i think you have
your head shoved so far up your own ass you crap out your mouth.
>
>Please provide your plane crash investigation credentials. How do you know
>it couldn't happen?
>
>> And how did most of the human remains end up in treetops?
>
>See above.
>
>

[copertopkiller]

"Ragnar" > wrote in message
...
>
> <Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
> ...
>
> > WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
> > VAPORIZE??
>
http://www.flight93crash.com/

[mellstrr]

<Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
...
> Sept. 11 crash remains shrouded in mystery, Pennsylvania coroner says
>
> TIFFANY CRAWFORD Canadian Press Monday, March 29, 2004
>
> VANCOUVER (CP) - The fate of United Airlines Flight 93, the last of
> the four hijacked planes to crash on Sept. 11, 2001 remains shrouded
> in mystery and controversy. The famous cell phone calls from brave
> passengers on the plane that crashed in a Pennsylvania field painted a
> heroic story of people storming the cockpit to sacrifice themselves
> for others. The chief coroner who investigated the crash scene
> recorded a less appealing different image.
>
> "There was, in my conclusion, no way we could ever know who they were
> that charged that cockpit," Wallace Miller told students at the B.C.
> Institute of Technology.
>
> The American coroner was spoke at the B.C. Institute of Technology in
> Burnaby Saturday. He detailed the grisly task he had recovering the
> remains of crash victims for their families.
>
> Miller, the director of a family-run funeral home and elected county
> coroner for Somerset, Pa., said only eight per cent of the wreckage
> was recovered. Everything else was vaporised, he said.
>
> "We found remains 50 feet deep," he said of the massive crater the
> plane left on impact.
>
> The debris field spanned about 2.5 square kilometres of wooded area.
> Victim recovery efforts were hampered because most of the salvageable
> human remains were in the treetops. <snip>
>
>
http://www.canada.com/news/national/story.html?id=33d9fbe7-9a40-4099-a9f4-e2
eeafa96b46
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> WTF is going on here?

It's obvious by the replies to this thread, for the most part. Anything that
doesn't square with the American version of events is immediately (stupid,
loony, bull****, take your pick).

Nevermind that the same replies don't refute anything in the article
whatsoever...just "attack the messenger".

<shrug>

mellstrr--what're you gonna do?

[db]

Ragnar wrote:
>
> <Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
> ...
>
> > WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
> > VAPORIZE??
>
> Please provide your plane crash investigation credentials. How do you know
> it couldn't happen?

You're asking the wrong person; ask the investigators.
Plane crashed have occured before, so quit a bit is known about plane
crashes.


db

[Laura Bush murdered her boy friend]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 07:47:13 GMT, "Roncy" >
wrote:

><Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
...
>
>> The American coroner was spoke
>
>"was spoke?" It might have seemed more credible if this al-qaenadian moron
>used grammar.
>

Is that all you got? A spell flame?

[David Lednicer]

Read the book "Destination Disaster" about the THY DC-10 crash outside
Paris. This aircraft hit a forest at high speed. There was very little
wreckage any bigger than a piece of notebook paper.

[Laura Bush murdered her boy friend]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:28:05 +0900, "Ragnar" >
wrote:

>
><Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
...
>
>> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
>> VAPORIZE??
>
>Please provide your plane crash investigation credentials. How do you know
>it couldn't happen?
>

Why don't you tell us one other time that a commercial jet crashed and
was VAPORIZED???

[Laura Bush murdered her boy friend]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 06:58:26 -0500, "mellstrr" >
wrote:


>
>It's obvious by the replies to this thread, for the most part. Anything that
>doesn't square with the American version of events is immediately (stupid,
>loony, bull****, take your pick).
>
>Nevermind that the same replies don't refute anything in the article
>whatsoever...just "attack the messenger".

That's all the bush-lovers have is personal attacks. They know damn
well the official version of 9-11 is a pack of lies.

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 09:56:36 -0700, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
<> wrote:

>On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:28:05 +0900, "Ragnar" >
>wrote:
>
>>
>><Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
...
>>
>>> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
>>> VAPORIZE??
>>
>>Please provide your plane crash investigation credentials. How do you know
>>it couldn't happen?
>>
>
>Why don't you tell us one other time that a commercial jet crashed and
>was VAPORIZED???

Air Midwest Flight 5481

http://www.news14charlotte.com/content/top_stories/?ArID=19389

Please point out anything that looks like an aircraft in the
photograph accompanying the article.

Find a picture of the Payne Stewart Learjet crash and point out
anything that looks like an aircraft.

Find a picture of the crash of the Concorde a few years ago and point
out anything that looks like an aircraft.

There are lots of other examples.

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 06:58:26 -0500, "mellstrr" >
wrote:


>It's obvious by the replies to this thread, for the most part. Anything that
>doesn't square with the American version of events is immediately (stupid,
>loony, bull****, take your pick).
>
>Nevermind that the same replies don't refute anything in the article
>whatsoever...just "attack the messenger".

And Melanie pipes up with nothing.

[tim gueguen]

<Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
...
> Sept. 11 crash remains shrouded in mystery, Pennsylvania coroner says
>
> Miller, the director of a family-run funeral home and elected county
> coroner for Somerset, Pa., said only eight per cent of the wreckage
> was recovered. Everything else was vaporised, he said.
>
> "We found remains 50 feet deep," he said of the massive crater the
> plane left on impact.
>
> The debris field spanned about 2.5 square kilometres of wooded area.
> Victim recovery efforts were hampered because most of the salvageable
> human remains were in the treetops. <snip>
>
>
http://www.canada.com/news/national/story.html?id=33d9fbe7-9a40-4099-a9f4-e2eeafa96b46
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
> VAPORIZE??

What preytell do you think happens when an aircraft hits the ground at high
speed from relatively high altitude? Perhaps he shouldn't have used the
term vaporize, but the end result is the same, a plane ripped mainly into
tiny little bits, with a few larger bits surviving. From what I've read
people in Lockerbie, Scotland are still finding the occasional bit of Pan Am
Flight 103, more than 15 years after it was blown up.

> And how did most of the human remains end up in treetops?
> Has that ever happened before?

Of course.
http://wildcat.arizona.edu/papers/old-wildcats/fall94/September/September9,1994/01_2_m.html

>Sounds to me like there were
> explosives on board that went off on impact.
>
Sounds to me like you don't know anything about plane crashes, or explosives
either. Certainly the folks at the NTSB would have found explosives traces
on the wreckage when it was examined. Of course its likely you believe they
too were in on whatever plot it is you believe in this week.

> PS - and please note that this article is in a canadian paper.

The staff of which would likely laugh at you if they read your post.

tim gueguen 101867

[tim gueguen]

"mellstrr" > wrote in message
...
>
> <Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
> ...
> > Sept. 11 crash remains shrouded in mystery, Pennsylvania coroner says
> >
> > TIFFANY CRAWFORD Canadian Press Monday, March 29, 2004
> >
> > VANCOUVER (CP) - The fate of United Airlines Flight 93, the last of
> > the four hijacked planes to crash on Sept. 11, 2001 remains shrouded
> > in mystery and controversy. The famous cell phone calls from brave
> > passengers on the plane that crashed in a Pennsylvania field painted a
> > heroic story of people storming the cockpit to sacrifice themselves
> > for others. The chief coroner who investigated the crash scene
> > recorded a less appealing different image.
> >
> > "There was, in my conclusion, no way we could ever know who they were
> > that charged that cockpit," Wallace Miller told students at the B.C.
> > Institute of Technology.
> >
> > The American coroner was spoke at the B.C. Institute of Technology in
> > Burnaby Saturday. He detailed the grisly task he had recovering the
> > remains of crash victims for their families.
> >
> > Miller, the director of a family-run funeral home and elected county
> > coroner for Somerset, Pa., said only eight per cent of the wreckage
> > was recovered. Everything else was vaporised, he said.
> >
> > "We found remains 50 feet deep," he said of the massive crater the
> > plane left on impact.
> >
> > The debris field spanned about 2.5 square kilometres of wooded area.
> > Victim recovery efforts were hampered because most of the salvageable
> > human remains were in the treetops. <snip>
> >
> >
>
http://www.canada.com/news/national/story.html?id=33d9fbe7-9a40-4099-a9f4-e2
> eeafa96b46
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > WTF is going on here?
>
> It's obvious by the replies to this thread, for the most part. Anything
that
> doesn't square with the American version of events is immediately (stupid,
> loony, bull****, take your pick).
>
No, we use these terms because the terminally clueless like you and "Laura"
post such ridiculous speculations.

> Nevermind that the same replies don't refute anything in the article
> whatsoever...

What preytell is to be refuted in the article? Its "Laura" who is reading
things into what is quoted in the article, like the idea that a violent
airplane crash is insufficient to turn a plane into tiny little bits.

tim gueguen 101867

[BUFDRVR]

>WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
>VAPORIZE??

Since their full of fuel and headed, under power, straight at the ground. This
crash site was like no other in history, including several cases of spatial
disorientation.

> And how did most of the human remains end up in treetops?

Well, I find it hard to believe *most* remains wound up in the trees, but if
the aircraft began to come apart before impact due to structural failure
(because of severe overspeed), its highly possible that some victims exited the
aircraft prior to impact at an extremely high rate of speed. Not unlikely that
their remains would be shot up in the air, in fact that has happened in
numerous aviation accidents. In addition, even those that remained with parts
of the fuselage, upon impact at high speed, could be ejected *up* and away from
the impact point(s). This is also not uncommon.

>Has that ever happened before? Sounds to me like there were
>explosives on board that went off on impact.

You wouldn't need any explosives to increase the damage from impacting the
ground at or near mach, in fact I'm betting under 500 pounds of explosives
would have made no appreciable difference.

>The
>american press won't touch anything that contradicts the "official"
>story on 9-11.

I fail to see how this story contradicts the facts at all.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

[The CO]

"tim gueguen" > wrote in message
news:2wnac.50477$QO2.43514@pd7tw1no...

> Sounds to me like you don't know anything about plane crashes, or
explosives
> either. Certainly the folks at the NTSB would have found explosives
traces
> on the wreckage when it was examined. Of course its likely you
believe they
> too were in on whatever plot it is you believe in this week.

Of course there were explosives on board. It's called Jet Fuel. :^)
Slam it into the ground at 500knots plus in a combustible metal
container
with an ignition source and it goes off pretty nicely. Remember that
aircraft
are mostly *empty space* and combustible organic material and
combustible
*metal*. Aircraft are mostly aluminium - which *burns* quite readily if
you get it
hot enough in the presence of an oxidiser. (Oxygen in the air in this
case )


> > PS - and please note that this article is in a canadian paper.
>
> The staff of which would likely laugh at you if they read your post.

It's all just crap from a whacko.

The CO

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <sCnac.49767$R27.49190@pd7tw2no>,
"tim gueguen" > wrote:

> "mellstrr" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > <Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Sept. 11 crash remains shrouded in mystery, Pennsylvania coroner says
> > >
> > > TIFFANY CRAWFORD Canadian Press Monday, March 29, 2004
> > >
> > > VANCOUVER (CP) - The fate of United Airlines Flight 93, the last of
> > > the four hijacked planes to crash on Sept. 11, 2001 remains shrouded
> > > in mystery and controversy. The famous cell phone calls from brave
> > > passengers on the plane that crashed in a Pennsylvania field painted a
> > > heroic story of people storming the cockpit to sacrifice themselves
> > > for others. The chief coroner who investigated the crash scene
> > > recorded a less appealing different image.
> > >
> > > "There was, in my conclusion, no way we could ever know who they were
> > > that charged that cockpit," Wallace Miller told students at the B.C.
> > > Institute of Technology.
> > >
> > > The American coroner was spoke at the B.C. Institute of Technology in
> > > Burnaby Saturday. He detailed the grisly task he had recovering the
> > > remains of crash victims for their families.
> > >
> > > Miller, the director of a family-run funeral home and elected county
> > > coroner for Somerset, Pa., said only eight per cent of the wreckage
> > > was recovered. Everything else was vaporised, he said.
> > >
> > > "We found remains 50 feet deep," he said of the massive crater the
> > > plane left on impact.
> > >
> > > The debris field spanned about 2.5 square kilometres of wooded area.
> > > Victim recovery efforts were hampered because most of the salvageable
> > > human remains were in the treetops. <snip>
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.canada.com/news/national/story.html?id=33d9fbe7-9a40-4099-a9f4-e2
> > eeafa96b46
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > WTF is going on here?
> >
> > It's obvious by the replies to this thread, for the most part. Anything
> that
> > doesn't square with the American version of events is immediately (stupid,
> > loony, bull****, take your pick).
> >
> No, we use these terms because the terminally clueless like you and "Laura"
> post such ridiculous speculations.
>
> > Nevermind that the same replies don't refute anything in the article
> > whatsoever...
>
> What preytell is to be refuted in the article? Its "Laura" who is reading
> things into what is quoted in the article, like the idea that a violent
> airplane crash is insufficient to turn a plane into tiny little bits.
>
> tim gueguen 101867
>
>

Actually, it is Judy Diarrhea who is posting under the pseudonym of
"Laura Bush Murdered my Boyfriend."

[Laura Bush murdered her boy friend]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 18:30:20 -0500, wrote:

>On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 09:56:36 -0700, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
><> wrote:

>>
>>Why don't you tell us one other time that a commercial jet crashed and
>>was VAPORIZED???
>
>Air Midwest Flight 5481
>
>http://www.news14charlotte.com/content/top_stories/?ArID=19389
>
>Please point out anything that looks like an aircraft in the
>photograph accompanying the article.
>
>Find a picture of the Payne Stewart Learjet crash and point out
>anything that looks like an aircraft.
>
>Find a picture of the crash of the Concorde a few years ago and point
>out anything that looks like an aircraft.
>
>There are lots of other examples.
>

Hey stupid. We're talking about vaporized, not mangled!!!

[Laura Bush murdered her boy friend]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 23:36:30 GMT, "tim gueguen" >
wrote:


>> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
>> VAPORIZE??
>
>What preytell do you think happens when an aircraft hits the ground at high
>speed from relatively high altitude? Perhaps he shouldn't have used the
>term vaporize, but the end result is the same, a plane ripped mainly into
>tiny little bits, with a few larger bits surviving.

Well "vaporized" is what he said and he's the expert, not you.

[Laura Bush murdered her boy friend]

On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:04:39 +0930, "The CO"
> wrote:

>
>Of course there were explosives on board. It's called Jet Fuel. :^)
>Slam it into the ground at 500knots plus in a combustible metal
>container
>with an ignition source and it goes off pretty nicely. Remember that
>aircraft
>are mostly *empty space* and combustible organic material and
>combustible
>*metal*. Aircraft are mostly aluminium - which *burns* quite readily if
>you get it
>hot enough in the presence of an oxidiser. (Oxygen in the air in this
>case )
>

HAHAHA. Listen to this loonie. Now he's saying airplanes just burn
up all on their own. All that flammable aluminum you know!! HAHA.
You rw nuts will lie about anything.

[Ragnar]

<Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:28:05 +0900, "Ragnar" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> ><Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
> >> VAPORIZE??
> >
> >Please provide your plane crash investigation credentials. How do you
know
> >it couldn't happen?
> >
>
> Why don't you tell us one other time that a commercial jet crashed and
> was VAPORIZED???

Nope, not playing the "divert attention" game with you. I asked you to
provide your crash investigation credentials. How do YOU know that a plane
couldn't do what this one did?

[Pete]

<Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote
> >
>
> Hey stupid. We're talking about vaporized, not mangled!!!
>

And the observations of a 'director of a funeral home' on an airliner crash
are OBVIOUSLY to be taken verbatim and at face value.

Vaporized vs mangled indeed.

Pete

[John A. Weeks III]

In article >, Laura Bush
murdered her boy friend wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:28:05 +0900, "Ragnar" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> ><Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
> >> VAPORIZE??
> >
> >Please provide your plane crash investigation credentials. How do you know
> >it couldn't happen?
> >
>
> Why don't you tell us one other time that a commercial jet crashed and
> was VAPORIZED???

The 737 that crashed into a park in Colorado Springs is a good
example. That crash has never been officially solved since there
wasn't enough left to do much with.

-john-

--
================================================== ==================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ==================

[Fredric L. Rice]

Laura Bush murdered her boy friend <> wrote:

>http://www.canada.com/news/national/story.html?id=33d9fbe7-9a40-4099-a9f4-e2eeafa96b46

>WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes cause 92% of the plane to
>VAPORIZE??

Almost always when it's done at speed and in soggy ground. There have
been airliner crashes that have totally disappeared into swampy areas
where only small percentages of plane remains -- leave alone human
remains -- have been recovered.

F = MA always.

---
Anti-War / Anti-Fascism protest: http://www.linkline.com/personal/frice/awp.htm
Support Halliburton's Troops!

[WaltBJ]

First thing - the cowardice of an anonymous poster is noted.
Second - the ignorance of this poster regarding airplane crashes. The
737 that crashed at Colorado Springs (ISTR) about 5 years ago while
half way around base leg and somehow (rotor cloud? full rudder jam?)
went in at about 90 degrees and very damn little was left. And it was
slow!
Flight 93 went in, inverted, as I remember, at a steep angle and a
high rate of knots, well over 450. As usual, it made a big hole and
blew tiny pieces all over. Remember, it still had most of its fuel
load on board. Next time do some research before coming up with your
very own pet theory.
And yes, I have investigated aircraft accidents, four of them. One was
a very good friend and his F104 disintegrated on impact, with him in
it, at only about 200 knots and close to level flight.
Walt BJ

[mellstrr]

"The CO" > wrote in message
...
>
> "tim gueguen" > wrote in message
> news:2wnac.50477$QO2.43514@pd7tw1no...
>
> > Sounds to me like you don't know anything about plane crashes, or
> explosives
> > either. Certainly the folks at the NTSB would have found explosives
> traces
> > on the wreckage when it was examined. Of course its likely you
> believe they
> > too were in on whatever plot it is you believe in this week.
>
> Of course there were explosives on board. It's called Jet Fuel. :^)
> Slam it into the ground at 500knots plus in a combustible metal
> container
> with an ignition source and it goes off pretty nicely. Remember that
> aircraft
> are mostly *empty space* and combustible organic material and
> combustible
> *metal*. Aircraft are mostly aluminium - which *burns* quite readily if
> you get it
> hot enough in the presence of an oxidiser. (Oxygen in the air in this
> case )
>
>
> > > PS - and please note that this article is in a canadian paper.
> >
> > The staff of which would likely laugh at you if they read your post.
>
> It's all just crap from a whacko.

Comments from the original poster aside accompanying the posted article, I
see no one discussing or refuting the two weird, misplaced tidbits of
information contained herein:

"There was, in my conclusion, no way we could ever know who they were
that charged that cockpit," Wallace Miller told students at the B.C.
Institute of Technology.

Uh, no, Wallace. The plane was smashed to bits. Right?

Was there a reason that we needed to be so redundant? Perhaps it was a badly
written article, and thus, a bad example?

But then there's this:

"The debris field spanned about 2.5 square kilometres of wooded area."

How big is that in miles? I'm not sure, but I'll bet it's bigger than the
generic "size of a couple of football fields across" reference in most of
the other "official stories" I've seen.

And in another "official story", the word "six" is used in relation to
"miles from the crash scene":

http://post-gazette.com/headlines/20010913somersetp3.asp

"Residents and workers at businesses outside Shanksville, Somerset County,
reported discovering clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human
remains. Some residents said they collected bags-full of items to be turned
over to investigators. Others reported what appeared to be crash debris
floating in Indian Lake, nearly six miles from the immediate crash scene.
Workers at Indian Lake Marina said that they saw a cloud of confetti-like
debris descend on the lake and nearby farms minutes after hearing the
explosion that signaled the crash at 10:06 a.m. Tuesday"

Whoo! But hey--if that isn't enough to confound you, get a load of this:
they even had robotics out there, poking around, looking for pieces and
parts:

http://www.postgazette.com/headlines/20010913choppernat3p3.asp

Boy, they musta wanted to find EVERY scrap of that plane. That isn't
unusual, in and of itself, of course. The more pieces of the plane they can
find, the better chance they have of finding a cause.

BUT, why would they go to all that trouble, if the thing was smashed
completely to bits on its only "impact"?

This is what is called a "contradiction":

http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010911somerset0911p4.asp

"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."

Draw your own conclusions.

mellstrr

[Buzzer]

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 20:15:10 -0700, Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
<> wrote:

>HAHAHA. Listen to this loonie. Now he's saying airplanes just burn
>up all on their own. All that flammable aluminum you know!! HAHA.
>You rw nuts will lie about anything.

"0108 crashed 11/10/64 near Glasgow AFB while on low-level mission"

The fuselage and wings had been completely VAPORIZED! There were some
small, melted aluminum "puddles?" left on the ground. Maybe five
pieces would fit in your hand if you could find that many.

Aluminum burns and it isn't really a loonie HAHA situation when you
realize there were real human beings inside of that aluminum frame.

[B2431]

>From: ">Laura Bush murdered her boy friend <>

>
>On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:04:39 +0930, "The CO"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Of course there were explosives on board. It's called Jet Fuel. :^)
>>Slam it into the ground at 500knots plus in a combustible metal
>>container
>>with an ignition source and it goes off pretty nicely. Remember that
>>aircraft
>>are mostly *empty space* and combustible organic material and
>>combustible
>>*metal*. Aircraft are mostly aluminium - which *burns* quite readily if
>>you get it
>>hot enough in the presence of an oxidiser. (Oxygen in the air in this
>>case )
>>
>
>HAHAHA. Listen to this loonie. Now he's saying airplanes just burn
>up all on their own. All that flammable aluminum you know!! HAHA.
>You rw nuts will lie about anything.

Hey, genius, have you ever heard of thermite? One of the components is
aluminum. The other is iron oxide (rust) which provides oxygen. In the case of
a burning airplane the oxygen comes from the air which, mixed with fuel and
aluminum will be extremely hot and not much is likely to survive.

Look up rocket fuels and you'll find some that include aluminum.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Tex Houston]

"WaltBJ" > wrote in message
om...
> First thing - the cowardice of an anonymous poster is noted.
> Second - the ignorance of this poster regarding airplane crashes. The
> 737 that crashed at Colorado Springs (ISTR) about 5 years ago while
> half way around base leg and somehow (rotor cloud? full rudder jam?)
> went in at about 90 degrees and very damn little was left. And it was
> slow!

> Walt BJ

Walt,

That five years or so was March 1991.

Tex

[Retro Empire Deities]

In article >,
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend <> wrote:
>HAHAHA. Listen to this loonie. Now he's saying airplanes just burn
>up all on their own. All that flammable aluminum you know!! HAHA.
>You rw nuts will lie about anything.

And which part does your twisted mind think he is lying about?
Aluminum burning? Nope. It's true. Jet fuel burning? No, that's
true too. It's how the jet engines run.

Come on, out with it. What is he lying about?

-Geoff

[Retro Empire Deities]

In article >,
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend <> wrote:
>
>Well "vaporized" is what he said and he's the expert, not you.

And how is a funeral director an expert on plane crashes?

Do they now require a degree in aerospace engineering in order to
be a funeral director?


-Geoff

[Matt Wiser]

"John A. Weeks III" > wrote:
>In article >,
>Laura Bush
>murdered her boy friend wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:28:05 +0900, "Ragnar"
>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> ><Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote
>in message
>> ...
>> >
>> >> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes
>cause 92% of the plane to
>> >> VAPORIZE??
>> >
>> >Please provide your plane crash investigation
>credentials. How do you know
>> >it couldn't happen?
>> >
>>
>> Why don't you tell us one other time that
>a commercial jet crashed and
>> was VAPORIZED???
>
>The 737 that crashed into a park in Colorado
>Springs is a good
>example. That crash has never been officially
>solved since there
>wasn't enough left to do much with.
>
>-john-
>
>--
>================================================== ==================
>John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
>
>Newave Communications
>http://www.johnweeks.com
>================================================== ==================
Add to that a USAir 737 near Pittsburgh in 1994 IIRC. Same result: near
vertical impact, very little pieces of either plane or those aboard....Theory
was the plane got in a 757's jetwash, the rudder jammed, and, well, you know
the rest....

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

[Matt Wiser]

(WaltBJ) wrote:
>First thing - the cowardice of an anonymous
>poster is noted.
>Second - the ignorance of this poster regarding
>airplane crashes. The
>737 that crashed at Colorado Springs (ISTR)
>about 5 years ago while
>half way around base leg and somehow (rotor
>cloud? full rudder jam?)
>went in at about 90 degrees and very damn little
>was left. And it was
>slow!
>Flight 93 went in, inverted, as I remember,
>at a steep angle and a
>high rate of knots, well over 450. As usual,
>it made a big hole and
>blew tiny pieces all over. Remember, it still
>had most of its fuel
>load on board. Next time do some research before
>coming up with your
>very own pet theory.
>And yes, I have investigated aircraft accidents,
>four of them. One was
>a very good friend and his F104 disintegrated
>on impact, with him in
>it, at only about 200 knots and close to level
>flight.
>Walt BJ
Well, what do you expect from someone who is posting all sorts of conspiracy
trash, and who, if confronted with the facts, will say "You're not looking
at the truth!" Add to that likely political axe(s) to grind with the current
Administration and there you go.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

[Tarver Engineering]

"Matt Wiser" > wrote in message news:406b0694@bg2....
>
> "John A. Weeks III" > wrote:
> >In article >,
> >Laura Bush
> >murdered her boy friend wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:28:05 +0900, "Ragnar"
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> ><Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote
> >in message
> >> ...
> >> >
> >> >> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes
> >cause 92% of the plane to
> >> >> VAPORIZE??
> >> >
> >> >Please provide your plane crash investigation
> >credentials. How do you know
> >> >it couldn't happen?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Why don't you tell us one other time that
> >a commercial jet crashed and
> >> was VAPORIZED???
> >
> >The 737 that crashed into a park in Colorado
> >Springs is a good
> >example. That crash has never been officially
> >solved since there
> >wasn't enough left to do much with.
> >
> >-john-
> >
> >--
> >================================================== ==================
> >John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
> >
> >Newave Communications
> >http://www.johnweeks.com
> >================================================== ==================
> Add to that a USAir 737 near Pittsburgh in 1994 IIRC. Same result: near
> vertical impact, very little pieces of either plane or those
aboard....Theory
> was the plane got in a 757's jetwash, the rudder jammed, and, well, you
know
> the rest....

The rudder stalled on the 737, due to turbulence. (loss of ATC seperation)
There was never a reason outside politics to change the 737 PCUs. I kind of
feel bad for the way the system discredited the engineer that designed the
PCU.

[mellstrr]

"Retro Empire Deities" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Laura Bush murdered her boy friend <> wrote:
> >
> >Well "vaporized" is what he said and he's the expert, not you.
>
> And how is a funeral director an expert on plane crashes?
>

He doesn't claim to be an "expert" on "plane crashes". He states what he saw
at the crash site, offers up some tidbits regarding his experiences during
the identification process, and hypothesizes that "we'll never know who
really stormed the cockpit".

Why are some of you so unnerved by this article that you're going out of
your way to derail the conversation?

Funny how you "Bush apologist-types" all crawl outta the woodwork every time
reasonable queries and articles about Flight 93 show up in these newsgroups.
One would think the very subject makes you exceedingly nervous.

You do realize that the more you do it, the more I'm gonna re-post the
original article. Think of all that extra exposure you're helping it get!

mellstrr--nah, that wouldn't have occurred to you--too simple...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sept. 11 crash remains shrouded in mystery, Pennsylvania coroner says

TIFFANY CRAWFORD Canadian Press Monday, March 29, 2004

VANCOUVER (CP) - The fate of United Airlines Flight 93, the last of
the four hijacked planes to crash on Sept. 11, 2001 remains shrouded
in mystery and controversy. The famous cell phone calls from brave
passengers on the plane that crashed in a Pennsylvania field painted a
heroic story of people storming the cockpit to sacrifice themselves
for others. The chief coroner who investigated the crash scene
recorded a less appealing different image.

"There was, in my conclusion, no way we could ever know who they were
that charged that cockpit," Wallace Miller told students at the B.C.
Institute of Technology.

The American coroner was spoke at the B.C. Institute of Technology in
Burnaby Saturday. He detailed the grisly task he had recovering the
remains of crash victims for their families.

Miller, the director of a family-run funeral home and elected county
coroner for Somerset, Pa., said only eight per cent of the wreckage
was recovered. Everything else was vaporised, he said.

"We found remains 50 feet deep," he said of the massive crater the
plane left on impact.

The debris field spanned about 2.5 square kilometres of wooded area.
Victim recovery efforts were hampered because most of the salvageable
human remains were in the treetops. <snip>

http://www.canada.com/news/national/story.html?id=33d9fbe7-9a40-4099-a9f4-e2
eeafa96b46

-------------------------------------------------------------------

[fudog50]

I'm with you Tarver,

My experience and background is in AAI,,,,what are we doing even
responding to these ridiculous conspiracy theories????

There is a conspiracy theory for every accident, how about JFK JR???

I guess every once in awhile along comes one that is just to tempting
to not bite on????

Anyway, all you have to do is go to the NTSB website and the full
facts are all there,,,like you said,,,rudder stall and reversal...

Hey there are a coupla new freaks on here posting buckets of ****,,,
(laura bush, LITTLE HITLER, etc.) too funny!!!!

They are even more entertaining to read than your responses!






On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:26:59 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
> wrote:

>
>"Matt Wiser" > wrote in message news:406b0694@bg2....
>>
>> "John A. Weeks III" > wrote:
>> >In article >,
>> >Laura Bush
>> >murdered her boy friend wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:28:05 +0900, "Ragnar"
>> >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> ><Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote
>> >in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> >> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes
>> >cause 92% of the plane to
>> >> >> VAPORIZE??
>> >> >
>> >> >Please provide your plane crash investigation
>> >credentials. How do you know
>> >> >it couldn't happen?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Why don't you tell us one other time that
>> >a commercial jet crashed and
>> >> was VAPORIZED???
>> >
>> >The 737 that crashed into a park in Colorado
>> >Springs is a good
>> >example. That crash has never been officially
>> >solved since there
>> >wasn't enough left to do much with.
>> >
>> >-john-
>> >
>> >--
>> >================================================== ==================
>> >John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
>> >
>> >Newave Communications
>> >http://www.johnweeks.com
>> >================================================== ==================
>> Add to that a USAir 737 near Pittsburgh in 1994 IIRC. Same result: near
>> vertical impact, very little pieces of either plane or those
>aboard....Theory
>> was the plane got in a 757's jetwash, the rudder jammed, and, well, you
>know
>> the rest....
>
>The rudder stalled on the 737, due to turbulence. (loss of ATC seperation)
>There was never a reason outside politics to change the 737 PCUs. I kind of
>feel bad for the way the system discredited the engineer that designed the
>PCU.
>

[BUFDRVR]

>Funny how you "Bush apologist-types" all crawl outta the woodwork every time
>reasonable queries and articles about Flight 93 show up in these newsgroups.

I addressed every issue in detail. Interesting how you ignored it.....


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

[Tarver Engineering]

"fudog50" > wrote in message
...
> I'm with you Tarver,
>
> My experience and background is in AAI,,,,what are we doing even
> responding to these ridiculous conspiracy theories????
>
> There is a conspiracy theory for every accident, how about JFK JR???

The Democrats want to put that one on Republicans too, but each time they
bring it up I point out the JFK jr. should not have been thinking about a
2000 run at being US Senator from NY.

> I guess every once in awhile along comes one that is just to tempting
> to not bite on????

Sometimes these threads branch off into something a useful point can be made
about. I skipped reading most of the thread because most of the posts are
from the usual flame warriors.

> Anyway, all you have to do is go to the NTSB website and the full
> facts are all there,,,like you said,,,rudder stall and reversal...

Blakey is doing a good job of beating down the red queen.

> Hey there are a coupla new freaks on here posting buckets of ****,,,
> (laura bush, LITTLE HITLER, etc.) too funny!!!!

I am not sure how the American left expects these types to attract military
voters.

> They are even more entertaining to read than your responses!

I am a vast right wing conspiracy.

> On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:26:59 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Matt Wiser" > wrote in message
news:406b0694@bg2....
> >>
> >> "John A. Weeks III" > wrote:
> >> >In article >,
> >> >Laura Bush
> >> >murdered her boy friend wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:28:05 +0900, "Ragnar"
> >> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> ><Laura Bush murdered her boy friend> wrote
> >> >in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> WTF is going on here? Since when do crashes
> >> >cause 92% of the plane to
> >> >> >> VAPORIZE??
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Please provide your plane crash investigation
> >> >credentials. How do you know
> >> >> >it couldn't happen?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Why don't you tell us one other time that
> >> >a commercial jet crashed and
> >> >> was VAPORIZED???
> >> >
> >> >The 737 that crashed into a park in Colorado
> >> >Springs is a good
> >> >example. That crash has never been officially
> >> >solved since there
> >> >wasn't enough left to do much with.
> >> >
> >> >-john-
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >================================================== ==================
> >> >John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
> >> >
> >> >Newave Communications
> >> >http://www.johnweeks.com
> >> >================================================== ==================
> >> Add to that a USAir 737 near Pittsburgh in 1994 IIRC. Same result:
near
> >> vertical impact, very little pieces of either plane or those
> >aboard....Theory
> >> was the plane got in a 757's jetwash, the rudder jammed, and, well, you
> >know
> >> the rest....
> >
> >The rudder stalled on the 737, due to turbulence. (loss of ATC
seperation)
> >There was never a reason outside politics to change the 737 PCUs. I kind
of
> >feel bad for the way the system discredited the engineer that designed
the
> >PCU.
> >
>