Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom, which provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center “up to the day the buildings fell down.” On the weekend of September 8-9, 2001, WTC tower 2 (the south tower) was powered down – meaning there was no electrical supply for 36 hrs from floor 50 and up… “Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors, and many, many ‘engineers’ coming in and out of the tower.” Marvin Bush was in New York on 9/11.
Now THAT is very interesting. I will be looking deeper into this and will post any findings and any trace of where the info came from.
It is 11 years since the 9/11 attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Also on that day we all heard about the crash of a fourth "hi-jacked" airliner, Flight 93. After some serious digging this article will show what I have found in both the mainstream media and the truther media. I am not stating my opinion (those who know me know how I feel), only stating what I have found.
The official version of the events that Tuesday morning and the United Airlines Flight 93, taken from Wikipedia (I know it's not the best reference, but it was the closest version of the event I found):
United Airlines Flight 93 was a passenger flight which was hijacked by four al-Qaeda terrorists on September 11, 2001, as part of the September 11attacks. It crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, during an attempt by some of the passengers to regain control, killing all 44 people aboard including the 4 hijackers. No one on the ground was injured. The aircraft involved, a Boeing 757-222, was flying United Airlines' daily scheduled morning domestic flight from Newark International Airport in Newark, New Jersey, to San Francisco International Airport in San Mateo County, California.
The hijackers breached the aircraft's cockpit and overpowered the flight crew approximately 46 minutes after takeoff. Ziad Jarrah, a trained pilot, then took control of the aircraft and diverted it back toward the east coast of the United States in the direction of Washington, D. C. The hijackers' specific target is believed to have been the United States Congress.
After the hijackers took control of the plane, several passengers and flight attendants were able to make telephone calls and learn that attacks had already been made by other hijacked airlines on the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon outside Washington, D. C. Some of the passengers then attempted to regain control of the aircraft. During the attempt, however, the plane crashed into a reclaimed strip mine in Stonycreek Township, near Shanksville in Somerset County, Pennsylvania, about 65 miles (105 km) southeast of Pittsburgh and 130 miles (210 km) northwest of Washington, D.C. A few witnessed the impact from the ground and news agencies began reporting the event within an hour.
Subsequent analysis of the flight recorders recovered from the crash site revealed how the actions taken by the passengers prevented the aircraft from reaching the hijackers' intended target. Of the four aircraft hijacked on September 11 – the others were American Airlines Flight 11, American Airlines Flight 77, and United Airlines Flight 175 – United Airlines Flight 93 was the only one that failed to reach its hijackers' intended target.
This was the official version that is given to the SHEEPLE as to the events of Flight 93. Does this sound plausible? I personally find it as a response that a kindergartner would get if they asked the question. All the government answers are so simple that they only incite more questions.
Here is the first piece of evidence for the sheeple to read:
A person using the pseudonym Elizabeth Nelson told The Project Camelot website that she personally heard officials agree on the order to shoot down Flight 93. The decision was apparently made because the plane was flying in a no-fly zone near to Camp David and heading toward Site R, a military facility known as the “backup Pentagon”.
Nelson stresses that at no time was there any talk of “hijackers,” and the plane was shot down purely because communication had been lost and standard operating procedure mandated that the plane be intercepted and destroyed.
Because the woman refuses to provide her real name, the authenticity of her story is very much up for debate, but in a 40 minute MP3 recording Nelson says that she was stationed at Fort Meade under the Kimbrough Ambulatory Care Center Hospital and was training as a radiologic technologist, having finished basic training three weeks prior. On 9/11, her rank was Private First Class.
Nelson relates how 9/11 started as a routine day before a higher ranked soldier suddenly emerged from another room and exclaimed, “Holy shit! I just saw a plane crash into one of the Twin Towers.”
Nelson and her colleagues then gathered around the TV in the hospital lobby before they saw the second plane hit the tower. Despite the fact that the first plane strike was not broadcast on live TV, Nelson was ADAMANT that the soldier was referring to THE FIRST PLANE when he first spoke. Nelson says that when she first saw the live TV pictures, only one tower was on fire, so the soldier could not have been referring to a replay of the second hit. In the interview, Nelson speculates that the first hit could have been broadcast on an internal military channel.PRESIDENT BUSH once famously CLAIMED HE HAD SEEN THE FIRST PLANE TO HIT and thought that it was a case of pilot error, despite there being NO LIVE TV FOOTAGE of the first plane strike.
While the majority of the personnel on the base scrambled to protect the facility as part of standard operating procedure, Nelson and a colleague were offered up by their First Sergeant to act as assistants to the Commander of the Base.
“All the other departments of soldiers – the nursing department, the clerical, administration department – everybody sent their base soldiers there and I didn’t see them anymore. So basically the hospital was not fully active at that point. Everything was on hold,” said Nelson, adding, “And so I remember the room that they took us into. And they told us that we were in charge of, you know, getting coffees, any kind of snacks from the cafeteria – not cafeteria, like from the snack machines or from the place where you can get little snacks – in charge of making photocopies because she and I had the access codes for the rooms, to get in there.”
Nelson and her colleague were sat at the far end of the room and told to face the wall as the meeting of top officials on the base commenced. “And there was probably six or seven men around this very large table, just like you would see in a big office somewhere. And they had this funny phone. It was like a conference-call phone. And I remember them sitting there and they were talking through this phone. And it seemed to me that they were talking to one or two other places,” said Nelson, adding that she suspected the men were in contact with the West Point military base an hour north of New York City.
The men were trying to ascertain what was going on and quickly expressed concern about Camp David and “Site R” and stating words to the effect of, “Protocol is that this is a no-fly zone. We have to take this plane down. Yes, it’s a passenger plane. It needs to be taken down. It’s a no-fly zone.”
According to Wikipedia, Site R, otherwise known as The Raven Rock Mountain Complex (RRMC) or the Underground Pentagon, is a United States government facility on Raven Rock, a mountain in Pennsylvania. The facility houses the ANMCC (Alternate National Military Command Center), JSSC (Joint Staff Support Center), OSD/DHS (Office of the Secretary of Defense/Department of Homeland Security), and the 114th Signal Battalion. RRMC also houses the emergency operations centers for the Army, Navy and Air Force.
“I didn't hear a thing about hijackers,” states Nelson, “We just heard that this plane was flying in a no-fly zone and they couldn’t make contact with the plane, or something like this. There was no communication. Protocol says it has to be taken out. And so I was in this room when the decision was mutually made by the people talking on the phone in the room that I was in, to shoot this plane down.”
“It didn’t feel like anybody knew that there was anything with terrorists,” added Nelson, saying that the officers mentioned the attack on the twin towers but only in the context that they didn’t know where Flight 93 was heading. She got the impression that they were genuinely unaware of the wider 9/11 plot, as would be expected in a compartmentalized structure, and that they were simply following military protocol.
Nelson recalls how she later FELT REVULSION after she saw news reports about how Flight 93 had supposedly been taken down by brave passengers.
“I remember the distinct feeling inside of me of when I saw on the news that there was this story that there were terrorists on this plane, and that the people overtook the pilot and crashed the plane, – I mean, overtook the terrorists and crashed the plane themselves. And how this was leaking out as these people being heroes,” she states.
“And I remember the extreme moral frustration inside of me, of feeling: but THAT'S NOT TRUE! That’s not true at all! WE SHOT THIS DOWN. And a huge conflict inside of me, of knowing that the world is made to believe this story that’s not true.”
Nelson subsequently felt frustrated when anyone talked about the manufactured myth of the Flight 93 heroes.
“I also remember the confronting feeling when I would be around … because there were civilians that worked in the hospital as well. And then when they would talk about the heroes and these things, the conflict that I had inside of myself was wanting to bust out and say: That’s not true!,” she states.
“They didn’t crash the plane. If they would have crashed it, there would have been a skeleton of the plane. There was no… Nothing. It was blown up.”
Nelson speculated that the errant aircraft could have been originally heading for New York City (Building 7?) before the passengers retook control of the aircraft and started aimlessly flying it elsewhere.
“The only thing I can think is if the third plane was also intended for somewhere in the city [New York City] as well, and that the people actually did take over the hijackers and divert the plane so that the plane ended up flying aimlessly someplace else. And of course the people don’t know how to talk over the radio or any of these things. And that’s maybe something that happened,” she states.
The biggest argument against Nelson’s claims is the hard to accept notion that she and another Private were allowed to sit within earshot of top military commanders making monumental decisions about national security. If the commanders had needed people to make photocopies of documents and bring snacks and drinks as Nelson describes, then why not just have them on call in a different room?
One would expect that a military complex would have sophisticated communication connections that would have easily facilitated such a scenario. Then again, if all the other active duty personnel were busy defending the base it could be argued that in the midst of the chaos, Nelson and her colleague were called upon.
Whether or not Nelson’s story is true, the fact that Flight 93 was shot down is one of the most glaring holes in the official 9/11 story. Footage of the crash site showed barely any debris whatsoever. Compare this to any other plane crash in history and the contrast is astounding. The debris field of Flight 93 was eight miles wide – investigators found a second debris field three miles away from the main crash site at Indian Lake, and a third debris field in New Baltimore, eight miles away. This is entirely consistent with the plane having been shot down.
Several eyewitnesses described hearing explosions before Flight 93 crashed and others said they heard missiles. The Flight93Crash website has a compilation of eyewitness reports all attesting to the fact that the plane was shot down.
Donald Rumsfeld himself said that Flight 93 was "SHOT DOWN" in an apparent slip of the tongue on December 24, 2004!
This is an aerial photo entered as evidence to the 9/11 Commission. There is no way a 757 crashed here and left no more debris than this!
Wallace Miller is the county coroner. This front page story in The Tribune-Democrat also shows a photo of pieces of the plane which have worked their way to the surface. This seems so out of the norm because we all know that immediately following any aviation disaster, the FBI and NTSB threaten people with prison if they remove anything from a crash site. Apparently, it's not the same concerning Flight 93.
One of the things that has caused a great deal of confusion and speculation about the crash of Flight 93 is the "entry," if you will, of the plane into the ground. Flight 93 slammed into the ground at approximately 585 mph. The easiest way I can describe it is to picture a bed with a blanket on the mattress. The mining company basically lifts the blanket, meaning a large area of top soil, extracts the ore and then lays the blanket back down. The result is that when Flight 93 hit the ground, it didn't break up like you see in other aviation disaster photos. After looking at footage of a United Air Lines crash, from back in the early 90s; it's something you don't forget. There was a great deal of wreckage everywhere, but the fuselage, while visible, was buried into the ground.
Interview number one, August 2, 2005 with Kirk Swauger, Somerset Bureau Chief, The Tribune-Democrat newspaper, Somerset, Pennsylvania. This is the conversation as it took place. At one point in this interview, Devvy stepped outside to get an item from his rental SUV. Dane was listening to Swauger speak with Wallace Miller, the county coroner. Dane was somewhat disturbed by the end of Swauger's conversation with Miller, although he could not hear Miller's comments on the other end of the phone. However, in light of their interview later that morning with Miller, it makes you wonder about Swauger's closing phone comments:
"I don't think so. No, I, nor would I. I mean, you know, that's not good."
Interview number two, August 2, 2005 with Wallace Miller, Somerset County Coroner. Mr. Swauger called Miller while Dane and Devvy were in his office. He must have also called him again after they left, because the minute they walked into Miller's office, he jumped right down Devvy's throat. Miller knew exactly who Devvy and Dane were before they could say a word. Miller's attitude and speech was belligerent and was found to be quite disturbing, considering how very graciously Deevy and Dane were treated by everyone else they spoke with in that area.
Concluding this interview, Dane and Deevy were shocked that the county coroner on such a highly publicized aviation disaster had prepared no reports. Miller stated emphatically that he had no reports and made it clear that even if he did, he would refuse to make them available. Having done a number of investigations on site, Devvy had never run across this problem. Sure, you have to buy the autopsy and toxicology reports, and they aren’t cheap, I checked into it, but they are a matter of public record unless sealed by the court. For the county coroner who did the Flight 93 crash site for recovery of remains, any autopsies and DNA, not to have prepared a single report defies credibility. It also makes you wonder what is being hid?
As referenced earlier, the August 2, 2005 issue of The Tribune-Democrat’s front page story has a photo of the bureau chief (Swauger) holding pieces of the plane he retrieved from the crash site the day before during a walk through with Miller. There was a very interesting reference contained in that story on page A4:
As a follow up, on August 22, 2005, Devvy phoned Miller to ask him about this reference to caskets filled with remains that are unidentified at an undisclosed location. Surprisingly, Miller answered the questions in a pleasant tone. He said that the reason these remains were unidentified was due to environmental degradation. I have a problem with this because we know that DNA tests have been highly successful even on bones that are decades old. I also have to wonder if those bones/remains might contain some chemicals that are better left buried. Could they have traces of the powder in the missiles used by the USAF? The fact that these remains are clumped together and located in some undisclosed location must be very upsetting to the families of Flight 93.
As Dane is also a pilot, they then proceeded to the Somerset County Airport to pick up sectional maps to see the normal flight paths for civilian and military in relation to the actual crash site. While chatting with the gentleman who ran the airport and his friend, it became apparent that the a whole lot of people in Somerset and out lying areas are very angry about "conspiracy theories" regarding Flight 93 being shot down or never crashing where it did. One thing this airport manager made very clear: the white jet people saw was a corporate jet that was in the area and was asked by the local control tower via an FAA request to get over the site and get them the exact coordinates. He said people around there "are sick and tired of the conspiracy theories that this white jet shot down Flight 93."
The next interview (three) was in Shanksville with the former Mayor, Ernest Stull; he lost his bid for reelection in November 2004. Mr. Stull, like many others, was very wary of strangers requesting an interview. These folks are very gun shy because they have been used by the media and the resentment is as thick as syrup. After a few minutes, Ernie began to speak with and answer questions. One thing became very apparent during the interview with Ernie: He was very angry that an unidentified German film company had taken his comments out of context and that at one point last year, he and his attorneys were ready to get on a plane to Germany to file suit against that organization. Since the web site maintained by this German film company was pulled from the Net earlier this year, it is apparent that they backed down rather than get sued.
Ernie recommended to Dane and Devvy to proceeded to find Nevin Lambert's farm house. This very humble, hard working farmer was standing facing Flight 93 as it came barreling towards him and his farm house. Had the plane not gone into the ground in front of that tree line, it most likely would have hit Nevin and his house, because as he said during a very lengthy interview, he was rooted to the spot and thought he couldn't have moved even if he wanted to, he was that shocked. Nevin Lambert, besides Nena Lensbouer who was delivering sandwiches to the scrap yard that overlooks the site, are probably the 'best' eye witnesses to the approach of the plane, how out of control it was and the eventual crash.
The crash site is located on strip mining land surrounded by rolling hills with lots of trees, farms, livestock and corn. Standing with Nevin and listening to him replay the events that morning really drives home how horrible it must have been, not just for Nevin, but for everyone who was in a position to see the plane or heard the impact and then saw the big fire balls. It's almost difficult to conjure up such images and the aftermath of running to where these good people saw a huge commercial jet liner crash in such a lovely, serene surrounding. It’s quite obvious that such horror will never be forgotten by those who saw it first hand.
Please note: It was agreed to not print what Nevin conveyed to Dane and Devvy regarding his conversations and visits with Lisa Beamer and other family members of those murdered on Flight 93. Devvy's word is his bond and all of that text has been deleted from the interview. Nevin was truly generous with his time given that Dane and Devvy were perfect strangers who showed up at his front door without any notice. One thing Nevin made very clear: there were two F-16s that flew over the crash site, but that they did not arrive until four hours after he watched the plane crash. He was quite clear that it was four hours and not at the time of the crash.
First, the people all around that area are some of the nicest folks you ever want to meet. Everyone that was spoken with from hotel employees, gas station personnel, restaurant servers - all very kind and gracious. But, the one thing that is there is resentment. Just about everyone spoken with resent the theories about what happened and that they're lying to cover up something. These are decent, God fearing folks who have a moral code they stick by and are offended that outsiders think they would lie - especially about Flight 93.
What happened that day in the beautiful, rural section outside Shanksville, Pennsylvania, deeply affected a huge number of people. Even four years later, you can see the terror on the faces of those who saw the plane as they recount the events from those who were part of search and rescue or just giving support to everyone in the immediate area. Individuals like Nevin Lambert, so close to the impact area, had no power or phones for six weeks because the plane took out an entire row of power lines. It was no picnic for anyone. Those roads leading into this remote spot are narrow and winding, so getting equipment in there must have been a night mare.
Second, one cannot completely discount the eye witness accounts of seeing smoke coming from the plane and the indisputable fact that debris from the plane was found at distances from the impact site cannot be explained by just the plane going into the ground, as most of it simply disintegrated upon impact due to the speed and condition of the soil. There are too many individuals who have no stake in lying about seeing what they saw and are offended when people suggest they are lying. Some eye witnesses saw smoke and parts of the plane fall, others did not. This does raise questions that beg for answers.
It was widely reported by "mainstream" media, that the go ahead to shoot down Flight 93 HAD BEEN MADE:
"The president made the decision ... that if the plane would not divert, if they wouldn't pay any attention to instructions to move away from the city, as a last resort, our pilots were authorized to take them out," Vice President Dick Cheney told NBC's "Meet the Press" program Sunday."
There is something not right about the county coroner, Wallace Miller, never filing a single report as the coroner of record. During the testy interview with him, he denies making any reports to his client, the FBI. Miller was acting in his official capacity as the county coroner and he didn't file one single report after doing months of work at that crash site? No photos? Nothing but some documentation on DNA testing? I'm afraid I don't believe this for a second.
The bureau chief for The Tribune-Democrat, Kirk Swauger and Wallace Miller came across as very good friends. Swauger's comments to Miller on the phone regarding Miller speaking with Dane and Devvy bother me, i.e., "I don't think so. No, I, nor would I. I mean, you know, that's not good." What wouldn’t Swauger do while Dane and Devvy were there and what’s not good? As someone who has done enough diggings for the truth, I cannot help but see a big, red flag here and it has to do with any evidence that points to damage to the plane before it smashed into the ground and any contamination of remains due to an external, pre-crash event. It’s not unreasonable to ask reasonable questions.
There is no question that Flight 93 crashed outside Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
There appears to be credible eye witness accounts seeing parts of the plane breaking up before impact. The location of parts of the plane being retrieved raises valid questions. The only way to get the truth is for the 9-11 families to demand the truth from Congress. Average people like me, even filing a Freedom of Information Act request, are not going to be able to break the wall to get to the truth. Only the families who lost loved ones on 9-11 can apply the right kind of pressure. If the decision was made to shoot down the plane, then America can deal with it, but we the people will not accept lies.
There was another witness that was standing in the field in which the crash happened and that was Lee Purbaugh. He saw what happened with his own eyes. He was the only person present in the field where, at 10:06am, the aircraft hit the ground.
"There was an incredibly loud rumbling sound and there it was, right there, right above my head — maybe 50ft up," says Purbaugh, who works at a scrapyard overlooking the crash site. "It was only a split second but it looked like it was moving in slow motion, like it took forever. I saw it rock from side to side then, suddenly, it dipped and dived, nose first, with a huge explosion, into the ground. I knew immediately that no one could possibly have survived." Apart from, here and there, a finger, a toe or a tooth, all that remained of the 44 souls aboard, churned into the soil or hanging from the branches of nearby trees, were small pieces of tissue and bone. The plane was also pulverised, reduced to tiny fragments of metal. "I issued the death certificates," says Miller (mentioned above as the county coroner), who is also the local undertaker. "I put down 'murdered' for the 40 passengers and crew; 'suicide' for the four terrorists." But Miller, who worked closely with the FBI during the 13 days that they investigated the crash site, admits that, in the end, he cannot prove what happened; he can only infer it. Neither he nor anybody else knows what exactly caused Flight 93 to go down and, as Miller puts it, "bring the world's troubles crashing down on our doorstep". Or, if there are people who do know, they are not telling. The shortage of available facts did not prevent the creation of an instant legend — a legend that the US government and the US media were pleased to propagate, and that the American public have been eager, for the most part, to accept as fact. The legend goes like this: the passengers on the hijacked United flight, alerted on their mobile phones to the news of the other three hijacked planes, decide that if they are not going to save themselves at least they will do the patriotic thing and spare the lives of those who are the terrorists' intended targets; so they charge down the aisle, storm the cockpit, where a terrorist is at the controls, and, in the ensuing struggle, force the plane down.President George Bush, Attorney General John Ashcroft, the head of the FBI Robert Mueller, and numerous other senior government officials who have saluted the "heroes" of Flight 93, have consistently, and repeatedly, advanced this version of events. So have the big national newspapers and all the big national television stations. The New York Times, normally a model of legalistic precision, published this extraordinarily woolly sentence on 22 September upon learning, from unnamed "official" sources, that the plane's cockpit voice-recorder had registered "a desperate and wild struggle" aboard. "And while it [the recorder] did not provide a clear or complete picture," The New York Times read, "it seemed certain that there was a chaotic confrontation that apparently led to the crash of the jet." Vanity Fair magazine, going on little more information than was available to The New York Times, went ahead and published a highly detailed story on Flight 93, which, the magazine said, "may be remembered as one of the greatest tales of heroism ever told". Vanity Fair did recognise, though, that any suggestions as to what actually happened to force the plane down had to be, by necessity, "pure conjecture". Two months later, Newsweek got hold of what it was told was a partial transcript of the voice-recorder and, upon that basis, narrated the story of "the Heroes of Flight 93" in even more vivid, drum-rolling, Hollywoodesque detail than Vanity Fair had done. The passengers were "citizen soldiers... who rose up, like their forefathers, to defy tyranny", intoned Newsweek. "In daring and dying, the passengers and crew of Flight 93 found victory for us all." The transcript that Newsweek obtained did indicate that fighting had taken place aboard, curses had been uttered, prayers raised up both to the Muslim and the Christian god. But for all the drama of the story, Newsweek did not draw attention to the fact that, in truth, they were guessing as to how or why the plane had crashed; that they did not know whether the passengers had even made it into the cockpit; that they had no clue what happened during Flight 93's decisive, desperate last eight minutes. Which is not to assert that the "hero" story is untrue, or even implausible. Maybe the legend does indeed correspond perfectly to the facts. And certainly, based on the records of telephone calls made from the plane, there is no disputing that a number of the passengers did indeed intend carry out actions of great courage. But what those actions actually turned out to be is not known — or known only to a small group of people with a clear picture of what happened in the skies over Shanksville on the morning of 11 September, people in the US military who tracked the plane's last moments as well as people familiar with, but unwilling to reveal, the full contents of the material gleaned from the cockpit voice-recorder, which was retrieved in "perfect working order" after the crash. The absence of official information has led to lively and often well-informed debate in the unofficial medium of the Internet (see www.flight93crash.com ). But there are also a number of individuals in the aviation industry convinced that there do exist other plausible interpretations of what actually happened. Because there are, most certainly, a number of important unanswered questions — questions based on evidence, as well as on a manifest absence of candour on the part of the authorities — which the national US media, typically so sceptical and inquisitive, have shown a curious reluctance to ask. But of course not, after all they are owned by the big corporations that are the puppet masters of those in D. C. The alternative theories, both of which have been denied by the US military and the FBI, are that Flight 93 was brought down by a US government plane; and that a bomb went off aboard (passengers had said in phone calls that one of the hijackers had what appeared to be a bomb strapped to him). If doubts remain despite the denials, if conspiracy theories flourish, it is in large part because of the authorities' failure to address head-on questions centring on the following four conundrums. The wide displacement of the plane's debris, one explanation for which might be an explosion of some sort aboard prior to the crash. Letters — Flight 93 was carrying 7,500 pounds of mail to California — and other papers from the plane were found eight miles away from the scene of the crash. A section of one engine weighing one ton was found 2,000 yards away. It was the single heaviest piece recovered from the crash, and the biggest, apart from a piece of fuselage the size of a dining-room table. The rest of the plane, consistent with an impact calculated to have occurred at 500mph, disintegrated into pieces no bigger than two inches long. Other remains of the plane were found two miles away near a town called Indian Lake. All of these facts, widely disseminated, were confirmed by the coroner Wally Miller. The location of US Air Force jets, which might or might not have been close enough to fire a missile at the hijacked plane. Live news media reports on the morning of 11 September conflict with a number of official statements issued later. What the government acknowledges is that the first fighters with the mission to intercept took off at 8.52am; that another set of fighters took off from Andrews Air Force base near Washington at 9.35am — precisely the time that Flight 93 turned almost 180 degrees off course towards Washington and the hijacker pilot was heard by air-traffic controllers to say that there was "a bomb aboard". Flight 93, whose menacing trajectory was made known by the broadcast media almost immediately, did not go down for another 31 minutes. Apart from the logical conclusion that at least one Air Force F-16 — 125 miles away in Washington at 9.40am, meaning 10 minutes away from Flight 93 (or less if it flew at supersonic speed) — should have reached the fourth of the "flying bombs" well before 10.06am, there is this evidence from a federal flight controller published a few days later in a newspaper in New Hampshire: that an F-16 had been "in hot pursuit" of the hijacked United jet and "must have seen the whole thing". Also, there was one brief report on CBS television before the crash that two F-16 fighters were tailing Flight 93. Vice-President Dick Cheney acknowledged five days later that President Bush had authorised the Air Force pilots to shoot down hijacked commercial aircraft. One telephone call from the doomed plane whose contents do not entirely tally with the hero legend and which is accordingly omitted in the Independence Day-type dramas favoured by the US media. The Associated Press news service reported on 11 September that eight minutes before the crash, a frantic male passenger called the 911 emergency number. He told the operator, named Glen Cramer, that he had locked himself inside one of the plane's toilets. Cramer told the AP, in a report that was widely broadcast on 11 September, that the passenger had spoken for one minute. "We're being hijacked, we're being hijacked!" the man screamed down his mobile phone. "We confirmed that with him several times," Cramer said, "and we asked him to repeat what he said. He was very distraught. He said he believed the plane was going down. He did hear some sort of an explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane, but he didn't know where. And then we lost contact with him."According to the information that has been made known, this was the last of the various phone calls made from the airplane. No more calls were received from the plane in the eight minutes that remained after the man in the toilet said that he had heard an explosion. Eyewitness accounts of a "mystery plane" that flew low over the Flight 93 crash site shortly after impact. Lee Purbaugh is one of at least half a dozen named individuals who have reported seeing a second plane flying low and in erratic patterns, not much above treetop level, over the crash site within minutes of the United flight crashing. They describe the plane as a small, white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings. Purbaugh, who served three years in the US Navy, said he did not believe it was a military plane. If it indeed was not, one suggestion made in the Internet discussion groups is that US Customs uses planes with these characteristics to interdict aerial drug shipments. Either way, the presence of the mystery jet remains a puzzle. How has the US government and its various agencies responded to doubts raised by the above questions? In the following ways: The paper debris eight miles away, the FBI says, was wafted away by a 10mph wind; the jet-engine part flew 2,000 yards on account of the savage force of the plane's impact with the ground. The FBI conclusion: "Nothing was found that was inconsistent with the plane going into the ground intact." Aviation experts I have contacted are very doubtful about this. One expert expresses astonishment at the notion that the letters and other papers would have remained airborne for almost one hour before falling to earth. The Air Force jets were on their way but failed to make it on time, according to General Richard Myers, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. Fighters did finally approach Flight 93, he acknowledges, "moments" before it crashed, but did not shoot it down. Which begs the question why they were unable to arrive sooner to intercept an aircraft that clearly had terrorists aboard and that was flying straight for Washington more than one hour after another United Airlines plane had crashed into the second World Trade Centre tower. The report in the New Hampshire newspaper, and the one on CBS, have not been explained, and the air-traffic controllers in Cleveland who tracked the last minutes of Flight 93 on radar have been forbidden by the authorities to speak publicly about what they saw on their screens. Neither the FBI nor anyone else in authority has explained the reported 911 phone call from the plane toilet, even though it appears to be the last of the phone calls made from the plane and even though it conveys the far from insignificant claim that there was an explosion on board. The FBI has confiscated the tape of the conversation and the operator Glen Cramer has received orders not to speak to the media any more. The explanation furnished by the FBI for the mystery plane, whose existence it initially denied, serves less to reassure than to reinforce suspicions that a cover-up of sorts is under way, that the government is manipulating the truth in a manner it considers to be palatable to the broader US public. The FBI has said, on the record, that the plane was a civilian business jet, a Falcon, that had been flying within 20 miles of Flight 93 and was asked by the authorities to descend from 37,000ft to 5,000ft to survey and transmit the co-ordinates of the crash site "for responding emergency crews". The reason, as numerous people have observed, why this seems so implausible is that, first, by 10.06am on 11 September, all non-military aircraft in US airspace had received loud and clear orders more than half an hour earlier to land at the nearest airport; second, such was the density of 911 phone calls from people on the ground, in the Shanksville area, as to the location of the crash site that aerial co-ordinates would have been completely unnecessary; and, third, with F-16s supposedly in the vicinity, it seems extraordinarily unlikely that, at a time of tremendous national uncertainty when no one knew for sure whether there might be any more hijacked aircraft still in the sky, the military would ask a civilian aircraft that just happened to be in the area for help. Most suspicious of all, perhaps, has been the failure of the FBI or anybody else to identify the pilot or the passengers of the purported Falcon, and their own failure to come forward and identify themselves. There was one other plane, a single-engine Piper, in the air as Flight 93 headed to its doom. The pilot, Bill Wright, said that he was three miles away and so close he could see the United markings on the plane. Suddenly he received orders to get away from the hijacked plane and to land immediately. "That's one of the first things that went through my mind when they told us to get as far away from it as fast as we could," Wright later told a Pittsburgh TV station, "that either they were expecting it to blow up or they were going to shoot it down — but that's pure speculation." Everything is speculation — that is the problem with the story of Flight 93. And unless the US government reveals more of what it knows, provides a detailed account of the last 10 minutes in the life of Flight 93 and the 44 people who were aboard, there will not only be scope but sound reasons for the conspiracy theorists to continue to speculate as to what really happened in those last few minutes before the plane plunged into the earth; to cast doubts on the soft-focus legend that the traumatised American public has seized upon so gratefully. Some conspiracy theorists will say that the plane was shot down by a missile, perhaps a heat-seeking missile that honed in on one of the plane's engines — a theory possibly substantiated by the 2,000yd flight of the 1,000lb engine part, but arguably refuted by consistent eye-witness accounts, including Lee Purbaugh's, that when last sighted the plane was not emitting smoke. Others might say, as they have done about a TWA flight that fell to the sea in 1996 after taking off from New York, that the plane was a victim of electromagnetic interference. In the case of the TWA flight, the argument, put forward in a series of exhaustive articles written in the New York Review of Books by the Harvard academic Elaine Scarry, is that it happened accidentally. However, as Scarry's articles relate, documentation abounds showing that the Air Force and the Pentagon have conducted extensive research on "electronic warfare applications" with the possible capacity intentionally to disrupt the mechanisms of an airplane in such a way as to provoke, for example, an uncontrollable dive. Scarry also reports that US Customs aircraft are already equipped with such weaponry; as are some C-130 Air Force transport planes. The FBI has stated that, apart from the enigmatic Falcon business jet, there was a C-130 military cargo plane within 25 miles of the passenger jet when it crashed. According to the Scarry findings, in 1995 the Air Force installed "electronic suites" in at least 28 of its C-130s — capable, among other things, of emitting lethal jamming signals.In decades to come, film-makers, future Oliver Stones, may come up with theories of their own, and the story of Flight 93 may come to acquire the morbid mystique of the Kennedy assassination. None of which is to question the bravery of passengers such as Todd Beamer, who left behind a pregnant widow and two children aged two and three; or Tom Burnett, who had three small daughters and told his wife Deena over the phone, in the face of her anguished protests, that he and his fellow-passengers were "going to do something" because if not the terrorists were "going to run this plane into the ground". Evidently, as the Newsweek article relates, there was fighting of some kind, but as to whether the terrorists held off the passengers or the passengers seized control of the plane, and perhaps even made an attempt to fly it themselves (one passenger aboard was a qualified pilot of small planes), nobody knows — or is willing to admit that they know. If evidence does exist further substantiating the hero narrative, it would be a surprise if the authorities had not released it. Bravery, though, there undoubtedly was. This we do know. As Lee Purbaugh says, and it would be churlish to disagree, "they were heroes on that plane". Such a consensus has been built around this view that the crash site at Shanksville — an anonymous-looking field save for the American flags that flutter all around, the crosses, the pictures of the dead passengers, the messages of goodwill and of good cheer ("Don't mess with the US!") — that it has become a place of pilgrimage, much as has happened with ground zero in New York but on a smaller scale, attracting some 150 visitors from all over the US every day. "In truth," said Wally Miller, who as coroner remains legally in charge of the site, "that field is a cemetery. It should be treated with due respect." What does Miller think happened? Did he attach any credence to the stories doing the rounds, to those — including a number in Shanksville — who dissent from the official version of events? Miller, who has seen as much evidence as anybody at the scene of the crash, does not dismiss the dissidents out of hand. He keeps an open mind. "The order had been given to bring the airplane down," he said. "I do not rule anything out."
Minutes before the 10 a.m. crash, an emergency dispatcher in Pennsylvania received a cell phone call from a man who said he was a passenger locked in a bathroom aboard United Flight 93. The man repeatedly said the call was not a hoax, said dispatch supervisor Glenn Cramer in neighboring Westmoreland County. "We are being hijacked, we are being hijacked!" Cramer quoted the man from a transcript of the call. The man told dispatchers the plane "was going down. He heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him," Cramer said.
"I know of two people - I will not mention names - that heard a missile," [Mayor Ernie Stuhl] said. "They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards. . .This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day." The mayor adds that based on what he knows about that morning, military F-16 fighter jets were "very, very close."
[I]nvestigators also are combing a second crime scene in nearby Indian Lake, where residents reported hearing the doomed jetliner flying over at a low altitude before "falling apart on their homes."
"People were calling in and reporting pieces of plane falling," a state trooper said. Jim Stop reported he had seen the hijacked Boeing 757 fly over him as he was fishing. He said he could see parts falling from the plane.
Finding the flight data recorder had been the focus of investigators as they widened their search area today following the discoveries of more debris, including what appeared to be human remains, miles from the point of impact at a reclaimed coal mine.
"Pennsylvania state police officials said on Thursday debris from the plane had been found up to 8 miles away [from the crash site] in a residential community where local media have quoted residents as speaking of a second plane in the area and burning debris falling from the sky."
[F]ederal investigators said on Thursday they could not rule out the possibility that the United jet was shot down. "We have not ruled out that," FBI agent Bill Crowley told a news conference when asked about reports that a U.S. fighter jet may have fired on the hijacked Boeing 757. "We haven't ruled out anything yet."
[I]t was a Canadian general at NORAD who scrambled military jets under orders from Bush to shoot down a hijacked commercial aircraft headed for Washington.
"I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon..."
"If they hadn't shot down the fourth plane [Flight 93] it would've hit the dome," Stone, a Navy officer, said in his opening remarks.
Yet the official story removes all evidence of a shoot down, specifically the phone call reporting an explosion and smoke on board the aircraft while it was in flight, and the same media that carried early reports of evidence of a shoot down now parrots the official version without question.
The important point here isn't the shoot down. Most people would agree that under the circumstances, it was the best course of action. The point is that we are seeing clear evidence of the manipulation of information being fed to the public regarding 9/11.
Watch this time line on the radio traffic reports from the government:
2002:
THE FINAL three minutes of hijacked United Flight 93 are still a mystery more than a year after it crashed in western Pennsylvania - even to grieving relatives who sought comfort in listening to its cockpit tapes in April.
A Daily News investigation has found a roughly three-minute gap between the time the tape goes silent - according to government-prepared transcripts - and the time that top scientists have pinpointed for the crash.
Several leading seismologists agree that Flight 93 crashed last Sept. 11 at 10:06:05 a.m., give or take a couple of seconds.
Family members allowed to hear the cockpit voice recorder in Princeton, N.J., last spring were told it stopped just after 10:03.
The FBI and other agencies refused repeated requests to explain the discrepancy.
But the relatives of Flight 93 passengers who heard the cockpit tape April 18 at a Princeton hotel said government officials laid out a timetable for the crash in a briefing and in a transcript that accompanied the recording. Relatives later reported they heard sounds of an on-board struggle beginning at 9:58 a.m., but there was a final "rushing sound" at 10:03, and the tape fell silent.
Vaughn Hoglan, the uncle of passenger Mark Bingham, said by phone from California that near the end there are shouts of "pull up, pull up," but the end of the tape "is inferred - there's no impact."
Now 2004:
The passengers continued with their assault, trying to break through the cockpit door. At 10:02 a.m. and 23 seconds, a hijacker said, "Pull it down! Pull it down!"
"The hijackers remained at the controls but must have judged that the passengers were only seconds from overcoming them," the report concludes.
"The airplane headed down; the control wheel was turned hard to the right. The airplane rolled onto its back, and one of the hijackers began shouting, 'Allah is the greatest. Allah is the greatest.'
"With the sounds of the passenger counter-attack continuing, the aircraft plowed into an empty field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 580 miles per hour, about 20 minutes' flying time from Washington, D.C."
The story has completely changed. The 10:06 a.m. seismic event has completely disappeared and we are told that maniacal hijackers on the verge of being overwhelmed by passengers counter attacking whilst the plane was flying upside down flew the plane into the ground at 10:03 a.m. with one of them shouting "Allah is the greatest. Allah is the greatest."
Three minutes after 10 a.m., passengers seem to be breaking through the cockpit door, fighting with the hijackers in a futile effort to take back the throttle. "Go! Go!" they encourage one another. "Move! Move!" But the terrorists have flipped the plane upside down. They spin it downward.
"Shall we finish it off?" a hijacker asks in Arabic.
In its final plunge, the hijackers shout over and over in Arabic: "Allah is the greatest! Allah is the greatest!"
What else is the government concealing about 9/11?
Those who died on Flight 93 deserve our greatest respect and our prayers, as well as their families.
REFERENCES:
[WorldNetDaily]
[cnews]
[CBS 58 News]
Wikipedia
Prisonplanet.com
The Tribune-Democrat
Vanity Fair
Newsweek
The New York Times
CBS
New York Review of Books by the Harvard academic Elaine Scarry
[Yahoo News, Tuesday September 11 11:27 PM EDT]
[philly.com]
[pittsburghlive.com]
[Pittsburgh Post Gazette]
[Idaho Observer]
][Reuters
[Philadelphia Daily News, 9/16/2002]
[CNN, 7/23/2004]
[SFGate, 4/13/2006]
www.flight93crash.com
Disclaimer - The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
No comments:
Post a Comment