Flight 93 Crash Site Had Just Been Filled In, Could they have been burying evidence?

It's well reported that the area where Flight 93 crashed was a reclaimed coal mine. See, for example, this article:
http://www.sptimes.com/News/091201/Worldan...e_sky__th.shtml

I've just come across an interesting new bit of information which relates to this, in a book about the Flight 93 crash called From Tragedy to Triumph by David McCall. The author quotes Mike Shepley, who worked for a company that operated next to the site of the crash. Shepley says: "The area in which the plane hit had just been backfilled." (p. 38)

This seems like a remarkable coincidence. If you look at photos of the Flight 93 crash scene: http://killtown.911review.org/flight93/gallery.html, it doesn't look like a plane has crashed at all. It looks more like a bomb was planted in the ground and set off at the time the plane was supposed to have crashed. Could a bomb have been planted while they were recently filling in this old area of coal mine?

Could other fake evidence, such as small pieces of metallic debris, have been buried along with a bomb? For example, local coroner Wally Miller said the crash scene looked "like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?p...A56110-2002May8

I've read quite a lot of witnesses describe a strong stench of jet fuel near the crash scene. So perhaps a tank of jet fuel was buried there along with the bomb too.

Sound plausible?

Nevermind, I thought the article said it was backfilled recently. I suppose if it was backfilled before the crash then that would be an odd coincidence indeed.

This post has been edited by Alabaster on Jul 18 2006, 07:41 PM

I think you misunderstand my posting. Shepley said that the area where Flight 93 supposedly crashed had been filled in just before 9/11. What a coincidence! Couldn't the black boxes have been planted in the ground at this point? After all, in his book Among the Heroes (p. 217), Jere Longman says they were recovered 15 and 25 feet below ground in the crater where the plane supposedly crashed. Yet black boxes are mounted in the tail of a plane. So if the official story is correct, this would mean the nose of Flight 93 would have had to have burrowed about 200 feet into the ground! And also, as the black boxes are mounted right next to each other in the plane, how on earth did they come to be 10 feet apart underground?

I think you misunderstand my posting. Shepley said that the area where Flight 93 supposedly crashed had been filled in just before 9/11. What a coincidence! Couldn't the black boxes have been planted in the ground at this point? After all, in his book Among the Heroes (p. 217), Jere Longman says they were recovered 15 and 25 feet below ground in the crater where the plane supposedly crashed. Yet black boxes are mounted in the tail of a plane. So if the official story is correct, this would mean the nose of Flight 93 would have had to have burrowed about 200 feet into the ground! And also, as the black boxes are mounted right next to each other in the plane, how on earth did they come to be 10 feet apart underground?

Yep sorry about that, I ammended my first post. I must be getting sleepy, I can't concentrate on what I'm reading.

Considering the coincidence and the evidence this is highly plausible.

I don't think that would mean the front of the plane would have to be deeper than that. The plane explodes when it hits as it digs into the ground, leaving the tail at that location. I think a part of the plane hit there, but it exploded in mid-air. With all the theories out there, you have to remember one thing, what's the easiest and safest way as to not have any holes in covering their tracks ? If many pieces are added that create more work than needed, then unless the theory has good reasons as to how it would help maintain a concrete plan, it would only open it to detection. Not saying any one is right or wrong, just pointing that out.

This post has been edited by Logic on Jul 19 2006, 12:41 AM

This is odd because the mine was susposedly closed in 1996 and there is grass over the entire area, so it looks like nothing recent happened there.

There is also the odd '94 aerials that show a marking coincidentally similar to the crater:


http://killtown.911review.org/flight93/gallery.html

UNLESS that very spot was which would make it the biggest coincidence of all coincidences!

One news report described the dirt was "composed of very soft black soil," but the closeup crater pics show everything outside the crater looks like old dirt:

Yep, if this guy is correct about the area being filled just before 9/11 then I don't this could have been when the mine was reclaimed, as this appears to have been a few years earlier.

It's possible that the author is just misquoting what Shepley said. All the same, I think this would be worth looking into further. There might have been some smaller excavation going on around this area, which was filled in before 9/11. It would certainly help explain things. For example, it was reported that "searchers said much of the wreckage was found buried 20 to 25 feet below the large crater."
http://www.s-t.com/daily/09-02/09-11-02/a01lo008.htm

This included the black boxes. I would think it would have been a lot easier for the 9/11 perpetrators to have this evidence planted before 9/11 than have to sneak it into the crater afterwards, when there were some 200 people working the area. (Presumably at least some of these 200 people were normal, decent people, not belonging to the rogue network!)

So keep an eye out for any more references to this.

Problem with the bomb and debris planted theory:

http://www.gnn.tv/videos/62/UA_93_The_Road_to_Shanksville

This 20 minute documentary has interviews with witnesses who say they saw a plane go down, and or a plane fly by with a millitary jet nearby. Also, people who go by the bomb in the group, missile hitting the ground or cleveland theory forget that there was an 8 to 9 mile wide debris field. Some said they saw flaming debris fall into a nearby lake.

I don't know what to make of these pictures:
http://911myths.com/html/flight_93_links.html

To me the missile theory is the most plausible, but the mainstream insists that theory is bunk. Noone can explain the 9 mile wide debris.

I just emailed Jim Parsons, Investigative Reporter from WTAE TV, to ask him if he knows anything more about this.

let me guess, now its a national monument, and can never be dug up?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-0...-pa-field_x.htm

I just emailed Jim Parsons, Investigative Reporter from WTAE TV, to ask him if he knows anything more about this.

Nice one

If it's any use, I've got a book about the Shanksville crash called Courage After the Crash by Glenn J. Kashurba. He quotes Somerset County Solicitor Dan Rullo saying that the site of the crash was "a strip cut that was owned by Svonavec Coal Company and then leased to a company called PBS. It had been reclaimed. What that means is the earth has been excavated down to the coal vein, the coal has been removed, and the earth has been replaced and planted over." (p. 121)

An article in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review said: "The crash site is a former strip mine owned by PBS Coal Co. and is known locally as the Diamond T. Mine."
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_12940.html

And the Daily American said: "Svonavec Inc. ... owns about 270 acres at the crash site and the impact area itself."
http://www.dailyamerican.com/articles/2005...news/news01.txt

So if any work was done in the area before 9/11, they ought to have a record of it.