Theory 4: Flight 93 was Staged
There is a lot of controversy surrounding the theory that United Airlines Flight 93 was staged. Public were made to believe that flight 93 crashed into a field in Pennsylvania at 10:03 am on September the 11th 2001. But there are a lot of questions and facts that support the idea that Flight 93 was staged. These include: why was there little to no wreckage from the plane at the supposed crash site? also why was the aircraft reported by numerous sourced that it had landed in Cleveland approximately 2 hours after the crash? and lastly why is there no fire damage to the area around the crash ?
Firstly Flight 93 would have weighed approximately 127 tons when it crashed, according to New York Times reporter and author Jere Longman. And yet numerous individuals, including some of the first people to arrive on the scene, have described the lack of anything resembling plane wreckage at the alleged crash site.
Assistant Fire Chief Rick King, who drove the first fire truck to reach the site, recalled thinking when he arrived: "Where is this plane? And where are the people?" King saw "thousands of tiny pieces scattered around--bits of metal, insulation, wiring--but no fuselage, no wings, only a smoking crater and charred earth." He sent his men into the woods to search for the fuselage, but they kept coming back and telling him, "Rick, there's nothing."
How could a plane have crashed and left absolutely no plane wreckage ? I makes no sense that there is no wreckage from the plane at the crash site but yet wreckage from the 'alleged' plane is found miles away from the crash site.
Part of a plane's engine, weighing about 1,000 pounds was found approximately 600 miles from the crash site. There is no logical answer as to why the wreckage was found so far away from the crash site. This makes people question the idea that flight 93 could have been shot down in the air this would give some explanation as to why the remains of the plane were scattered around.
Firstly Flight 93 would have weighed approximately 127 tons when it crashed, according to New York Times reporter and author Jere Longman. And yet numerous individuals, including some of the first people to arrive on the scene, have described the lack of anything resembling plane wreckage at the alleged crash site.
Assistant Fire Chief Rick King, who drove the first fire truck to reach the site, recalled thinking when he arrived: "Where is this plane? And where are the people?" King saw "thousands of tiny pieces scattered around--bits of metal, insulation, wiring--but no fuselage, no wings, only a smoking crater and charred earth." He sent his men into the woods to search for the fuselage, but they kept coming back and telling him, "Rick, there's nothing."
How could a plane have crashed and left absolutely no plane wreckage ? I makes no sense that there is no wreckage from the plane at the crash site but yet wreckage from the 'alleged' plane is found miles away from the crash site.
Part of a plane's engine, weighing about 1,000 pounds was found approximately 600 miles from the crash site. There is no logical answer as to why the wreckage was found so far away from the crash site. This makes people question the idea that flight 93 could have been shot down in the air this would give some explanation as to why the remains of the plane were scattered around.
- The location of an engine: ~ 2000 feet away
- The Indian Lake marina, ~ 3 miles away
- The New Baltimore, ~ 8 miles away
In all of the photos of the crash site the grass surrounding the area does not seem to have any fire damage at all. Which is very unlike the rest of the attacks on that morning. With the attack at the WTC they caused huge explosions and the towers collapsed because of fire damage, which makes it hard to believe that Flight 93 could have crashed without starting a huge fire. According to the National Transport Safety Board, Flight 93 had about 37,000 pounds of fuel remaining when it crashed which would have been around 77% of its fuel load at take off. So of course when the plane crashed there should have been s substantial amount of Jet fuel spilled into the ground around the crash site shouldn't there ? Apparently not. Six days after 9/11 the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protecting began taking soil samples at the crash site, to test for jet fuel and hazardous materials. Also at least 3 tests were sunk into the ground to test for sings of water contaminations. Two weeks after the tests began, DEP spokeswoman Betsy Mallison reported that "no contamination had be discovered" she continued "whether it burned away or evaporated, much of the jet fuel assumed to have spilled at the site seems to have dissipated". But if the fuel has burned away this would have caused major fires and explosions which would have caused large fires surrounding the area of the crash which did not happen.
Wallace Miller the coroner of Somerset Country, Pennsylvania was one of the first at the scene he told author David McCall: "I got to the actual crash site and could not believe what I saw. ... Usually you see much debris, wreckage, and much noise and commotion. This crash was different. There was no wreckage, no bodies, and no noise. ... It appeared as though there were no passengers or crew on this plane."
The average specifications of a Boeing 757 is a wingspan of 124.10 feet and a tail hight of 44.6 feet yet the crater that was left by the crash was 30-40 feet long, 15-20 feet wide and 18 feet deep, and supposedly the plane was swallowed by the ground. How is it that a plane that large could leave a crater that small it isn't possible something has happened that we haven't been told about ?
Lastly to support the idea that Flight 93 was staged is the fact that approximately 2 hours after the crash it was reported the United Airlines Flight 93 had landed safety in Cleveland at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport. This was reported in more than one news report.
"A Boeing 767 out of Boston made an emergency landing Tuesday at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport due to concerns that it may have a bomb aboard, said Mayor Michael R. White. White said the plane had been moved to a secure area of the airport, and was evacuated. United identified the plane as Flight 93. The airline did not say how many people were aboard the flight." This adds evidence to the theory that flight 93 was staged because the same plane could not lad safety at an air port and 2 hours prior crash into a field and evaporate.
"A Boeing 767 out of Boston made an emergency landing Tuesday at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport due to concerns that it may have a bomb aboard, said Mayor Michael R. White. White said the plane had been moved to a secure area of the airport, and was evacuated. United identified the plane as Flight 93. The airline did not say how many people were aboard the flight." This adds evidence to the theory that flight 93 was staged because the same plane could not lad safety at an air port and 2 hours prior crash into a field and evaporate.