Why Flight 93?

[wtcconspiracy]

Welcome wtcconspiracy;

Seeing that this is a thread about flight 93 you should stick to that subject. Dealing with too much at once only leads to derails and threads in the trash.

Now specifically what is your concerns with flight 93?

ok with flight 93 i just watched the documentary flight 93 a portrait of courage...i made this quote on loose change forum so i will copy and paste it...sorry to be lazy but its to the point i wanna make


my original quote....i am user benjaminwebb1983 on there

I am just watching a documentary called The Untold Story of Flight 93- A Portrait of courage. Mine is one with 100 minutes of extras so if anyone else has a copy not the same, the part I am mentioning may not be at same point. But about 9 minutes into mine it says "At 9:27 AM Tom Burnett placed his first phone call to his wife, Deena". She states Tom told her the flight was being hijacked. This is interesting because I just saw on the same DVD 5 minutes into it they said the 9/11 commission report says flight 93 hijacked at 9:28 AM, and even at 9:26 AM the pilot on flight 93 was sending a message to ground control asking them to confirm there 9:23 AM message saying "Beware cockpit intrusion, two aircraft hit wtc". So are we supposed to believe that at 9:26 AM this flight was flying as normal. Then at 9:27 AM it had been taken over already. In a minute the hijackers had control of the plane. But the times dont match at all. Because how could Tom Burnetts call have been placed at 9:27 if flight was not hijacked until 9:28.
Just thought this was interesting.

 

[johnny karate]

But what you need to ask yourself is: What does that mean?

Does it mean A) That somewhere along the line, the times got confused? or B) There is a massive conspiracy at work here, the perpetrators of which forgot to synchronize their watches?

Considering all the evidence, which seems more plausible?

 

[DGM]

ok with flight 93 i just watched the documentary flight 93 a portrait of courage...i made this quote on loose change forum so i will copy and paste it...sorry to be lazy but its to the point i wanna make


my original quote....i am user benjaminwebb1983 on there

I am just watching a documentary called The Untold Story of Flight 93- A Portrait of courage. Mine is one with 100 minutes of extras so if anyone else has a copy not the same, the part I am mentioning may not be at same point. But about 9 minutes into mine it says "At 9:27 AM Tom Burnett placed his first phone call to his wife, Deena". She states Tom told her the flight was being hijacked. This is interesting because I just saw on the same DVD 5 minutes into it they said the 9/11 commission report says flight 93 hijacked at 9:28 AM, and even at 9:26 AM the pilot on flight 93 was sending a message to ground control asking them to confirm there 9:23 AM message saying "Beware cockpit intrusion, two aircraft hit wtc". So are we supposed to believe that at 9:26 AM this flight was flying as normal. Then at 9:27 AM it had been taken over already. In a minute the hijackers had control of the plane. But the times dont match at all. Because how could Tom Burnetts call have been placed at 9:27 if flight was not hijacked until 9:28.
Just thought this was interesting.

Interesting but reporting of times can easily be wrong. Flip around in the morning from news stations to news stations. You'll find the times can be off considerably. I don't think they synchronized with the atomic clock.

 

[Gravy]

Welcome to the forums, wtcconspiracy.

and i dont know why my post is disrespectful to flight 93 victims....

Because it questions the mountain of evidence – including the phone calls from the passengers, the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder information, the flight manifest, the hijackers' actions leading up to the hijacking, the physical evidence of the aircraft, the positive IDs of the passengers' remains and belongings, the air traffic control evidence, the eyewitness accounts, etc., without presenting any contradictory evidence.

Questioning is one thing, but arguments from incredulity and ignorance will not be accepted here. Here's a flight 93 evidence summary of mine. Actually, I've got a ton of stuff to add to it, but I just haven't gotten around to it. There's a lot of material there. Please try to absorb it, and remember that these events happened to real people in the real world.

Speaking of which, you may as well read my flight 77 page also. Your idea that it didn't hit the Pentagon is pure fantasy, and is very disturbing to the people who experienced the event.

I mean we should investigate what happened to the lives of those hard working honest american citizens....

Yes, we – the U.S. – and many other countries did investigate, wtc. It was the world's largest criminal investigation. What in the world would make you think that we didn't investigate? Please answer. I really want to know where you got that idea.

The 9/11 Commission report is largely a summary of those investigations. Will you read it before continuing this discussion? If you don't, since you're new at this we're going to have to explain every little thing to you, and that will likely try our patience.

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/the911commissionreportandhearings,congre

Please read it before continuing, okay? Thank you for doing your homework.

 

[Gravy]

Interesting but reporting of times can easily be wrong. Flip around in the morning from news stations to news stations. You'll find the times can be off considerably. I don't think they synchronized with the atomic clock.

I can't speak to Burnett's first call, but on 9/11, cell phone calls were often way off, because they cued up due to system overloads and outages. One woman in New York received a message on her answering machine from her father three days after 9/11, although he had died on 9/11.

 

[gumboot]

Just to offer some speculation, Deena Burnett has provided a "from memory" transcript of each of her conversations. According to her Tom first called her at 09:27EDT, after which she called 9-1-1 at 09:31EDT.

One possible explanation is that the hijackers commenced the hijacking in the cabin before trying to seize the cockpit. Thus Tom's call could have occurred while the hijacking was happening.

Alternatively, Deena could be off by a few minutes in her timeline.

-Gumboot

 

[Slayhamlet]

I'm also curious about wtcconspiracy's reasoning that the takeover of a passenger airplane by 4 hijackers should take substantially longer than a minute. My guess is that it would take somewhere around 30 seconds or less.

 

[T.A.M.]

my main probelm with believing that 9/11 happened how it says is that these 19 men just took over planes like that and flew them so easily and precisely...hitting 3 out of 4 targets....and that the wtc designed to withstand a 707 impact could be destroyed by a 767....yes i know that 707 is lighter but its capable of higher speed and when the ratio is compared the impact of the two has similar effects

Ben

I will list my comments in point form for ease of reading...

1. Depending on your age, it may or may not be easy to do, but you have to think of this scenario with a PRE-9/11 mindset. Prior to 9/11 hijackings, when they rarely occurred, resulted in (A) no loss of control of the plane by the pilot, (B) Demands from the hijackers, (C) landing of the plane. Aircraft personnel as well as passengers knew the best course of action was to comply with the requests of the hijackers, and to wait it out. Given this mindset, and given security measures prior to 9/11, how hard would it have been for a group of men, led by very smart men, pilots, with eternal heavenly bliss as their reward, to purchase tickets for co-ordinated flights, get aboard, take over the planes, and crash them? really?

2. ATC/FAA/Norad had never had to intercept a hijacking (IIRC). The only other intercept that occured prior to 9/11 IIRC was that of the Payne Stewart tragedy. It took them over 80 minutes to intercept that plane, and it had its transponder going continuously...there were possible failures at multiple levels within ATC/FAA/NORAD, but they did the best they could...there was no "stand down".

3. I believe runways for jets the size of 767's is about 150 feet. the width of the WTCs was 208 feet. the area hit at the Pentagon (the side) was 921 feet.

4. The buildings were designed so that they SHOULD survive the impact of a 707. They actually survived for longer than 50 minutes, the impact of a 767, bigger, and going much faster (hence more kinetic energy to be absorbed) than the "in the fog approaching" speed likely allotted for in the initial design specs.

I hope I have helped.

TAM

 

[wtcconspiracy]

well all...I would love to pick this discussion up tomorrow as in UK it is 1:16 AM now and i am up for work in 6 hours.... But I think by having discussions like this we can all learn a lot and I for one am already learning. Thank you for everyones time in discussing certain matters with me. I am by no means closed mind to a conspiracy theory. Just open minded to the possiblity.

Ben

 

[beachnut]

well all...I would love to pick this discussion up tomorrow as in UK it is 1:16 AM now and i am up for work in 6 hours.... But I think by having discussions like this we can all learn a lot and I for one am already learning. Thank you for everyones time in discussing certain matters with me. I am by no means closed mind to a conspiracy theory. Just open minded to the possiblity.

Ben

There were 19 terrorist who did 9/11. If you do not understand that, you will be the only person learning about 9/11.

We can all learn

? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

 

[wtcconspiracy]

I will list my comments in point form for ease of reading...

1. Depending on your age, it may or may not be easy to do, but you have to think of this scenario with a PRE-9/11 mindset. Prior to 9/11 hijackings, when they rarely occurred, resulted in (A) no loss of control of the plane by the pilot, (B) Demands from the hijackers, (C) landing of the plane. Aircraft personnel as well as passengers knew the best course of action was to comply with the requests of the hijackers, and to wait it out. Given this mindset, and given security measures prior to 9/11, how hard would it have been for a group of men, led by very smart men, pilots, with eternal heavenly bliss as their reward, to purchase tickets for co-ordinated flights, get aboard, take over the planes, and crash them? really?

2. ATC/FAA/Norad had never had to intercept a hijacking. The only other intercept that occured prior to 9/11 IIRC was that of the Payne Stewart tragedy. It took them over 80 minutes to intercept that plane, and it had its transponder going continuously...

3. I believe runways for jets the size of 767's is about 150 feet. the width of the WTCs was 208 feet. the area hit at the Pentagon (the side) was 921 feet.

4. The buildings were designed so that they SHOULD survive the impact of a 707. They actually survived for longer than 50 minutes, the impact of a 767, bigger, and going much faster (hence more kinetic energy to be absorbed) than the "in the fog approaching" speed likely allotted for in the initial design specs.

I hope I have helped.

TAM

I do have one more thing to say before I leave and it is about flight 175s flght speed. I know this is flight 93 thread but just need to add this point here to clarify something...
Another finding off the net and i quoted on LC forum

This is my quote from there
"""This is Flight 175's descent. Can a plane drop in altitude this fast and still stay in control.
8:58 AM 25,000 Feet
9:00 AM 18,500 Feet
9:02 AM 9,000 Feet

But then it hits the south tower at a height of around 1000 feet at 9:02:40 which means the flight descended over 8000 feet in 40 seconds. Would this not send the plane out of control...

Then the last 52 - 60 miles of the planes journey were cover in 4 mins 40 seconds. This places speed between 668 Mph and 771 Mph Maximum cruising speed for Boeing 767 is 568 MPH and that is at cruising altitude. The plane would go much lower speeds at lower altitudes.

This information is in the NTSB report. A lot of sources say flight 175 hit the south tower at 590 MPH, even NIST says 540 MPH. these speeds are not attainable at the lower altitudes. And a plane going at these speeds would be out of control so badly hitting the tower would have been very hard to do.""""

And this
"""link on wikipedia for flight 175 but i cant add it...not enough posts yet....

Go there and see how wikipedia have now changed the flight speed of united 175 impacting south tower. It now reads as follows

""""[edit] Crash
At 9:03, Flight 175 crashed into the southern facade of Tower 2 of the World Trade Center (south tower), travelling at approximately 545 miles per hour and impacting between floors 77 and 85 with approximately 10,000 gallons of jet fuel.[12] As seen in the image, the plane was banking left upon impact. Onboard were 56 passengers (including the 5 hijackers) and 9 crew members, and none survived. Hundreds more were killed within the tower and from its ensuing explosion, fires, and collapse. Around 600 people were killed instantly or trapped at and above the floors of impact in the South Tower (2 WTC)."""""""""


When I printed out this article on sept 28 2007 it read that the impact was 590 MPH.

Why would this now all of a sudden change as discussions of the flight exceeding maximum speed of a boeing started on a few forums... """



Please once again I am only giving these things I have found so someone can maybe help me in really answering these questions....I just want more information

thanks

Ben


Please people dont get mad at my posts it is just a point i am asking about....

 

[wtcconspiracy]

There were 19 terrorist who did 9/11. If you do not understand that, you will be the only person learning about 9/11.

? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

i dont understand the reference to mouse in my pocket

 

[beachnut]

my main probelm with believing that 9/11 happened how it says is that these 19 men just took over planes like that and flew them so easily and precisely...hitting 3 out of 4 targets....and that the wtc designed to withstand a 707 impact could be destroyed by a 767....yes i know that 707 is lighter but its capable of higher speed and when the ratio is compared the impact of the two has similar effects

Ben

Stand up, cut throats of anyone who resists the hijacking; kill pilots, fly plane into buildings. It is easy to fly a 757/767, I took some kids and they flew without training in a large aircraft simulator into the WTC. Sorry, it is too easy the terrorist actually trained and were "commercial pilot" rated by the FAA. You are not correct; most American kids who can walk and talk and chew gum at the same time COULD fly the jets like 9/11, as good as or better than the terrorist; There are a few pilots, called Pilots for 9/11 Truth, who can not fly as well as the terrorist did, and they have published this fact; Their founder is nuts and has no rational thoughts on 9/11. Too easy, this is why it worked, they used KISS; Keep it simple stupid~!

The 707 impact in the Design of the WTC was a slow speed impact! The impacts on 9/11 were high speed, 7 to 11 times greater KE (kinetic energy)

That means the impact design was like 187 pounds of TNT, but on 9/11 the impacts were like, in energy, 1300 and 2200 pounds of TNT. You are wrong the 707 could weigh as much as a 757/767, and can carry as much fuel. The design also expected the fuel to be low! If you understand flying you would understand the aircraft accident planned for.

You have fallen for the lies of 9/11 truth and mentioned things that are not true.

 

[T.A.M.]

beachnut;

IIRC you are a pilot. Can you answer his question wrt the rapid decent of flight 175...would it have "torn up" the plane, made it go "out of control", etc...

Thanks

TAM

 

[JimBenArm]

i dont understand the reference to mouse in my pocket

It's an American expression. Sometimes when people say "We did this, we did that, blah, blah" when talking about something that the other may not want to be included in, he'll ask "We? You have a mouse in your pocket, or something?"

 

[gumboot]

But then it hits the south tower at a height of around 1000 feet at 9:02:40 which means the flight descended over 8000 feet in 40 seconds. Would this not send the plane out of control...

Oh noes! The plane might get too fast and crash!

Oh wait...

FYI, aircraft can fly at high speeds at low altitude. They will not break up and pilots will not lose control. At least not at the sort of speeds we're talking.

There's a thread somewhere here abouts in which people have posted dozens of videos of various aircraft flying at very high speeds, very low to the ground (much lower than 1,000ft).

-Gumboot

 

[wtcconspiracy]

Stand up, cut throats of anyone who resists the hijacking; kill pilots, fly plane into buildings. It is easy to fly a 757/767, I took some kids and they flew without training in a large aircraft simulator into the WTC. Sorry, it is too easy the terrorist actually trained and were "commercial pilot" rated by the FAA. You are not correct; most American kids who can walk and talk and chew gum at the same time COULD fly the jets like 9/11, as good as or better than the terrorist; There are a few pilots, called Pilots for 9/11 Truth, who can not fly as well as the terrorist did, and they have published this fact; Their founder is nuts and has no rational thoughts on 9/11. Too easy, this is why it worked, they used KISS; Keep it simple stupid~!

The 707 impact in the Design of the WTC was a slow speed impact! The impacts on 9/11 were high speed, 7 to 11 times greater KE (kinetic energy)

That means the impact design was like 187 pounds of TNT, but on 9/11 the impacts were like, in energy, 1300 and 2200 pounds of TNT. You are wrong the 707 could weigh as much as a 757/767, and can carry as much fuel. The design also expected the fuel to be low! If you understand flying you would understand the aircraft accident planned for.

You have fallen for the lies of 9/11 truth and mentioned things that are not true.

I actually did not say 707 could weigh as much as 767. what I said is what the 707 lacked for in weight it made up for in higher speed with reference to the amount of force the plane would have impacted the building. And the building was designed to take direct hit from fully loaded 707...well what I wonder why total building collapse as well. Anyways as much as I am enjoying my conversation tonight I really must go now as I will have trouble waking up in about 5 hours. But thanks to you all for the lively conversation tonight. I hope I have not offended anyone with my views or questions. And I do look forward to coming back again.

Ben

 

[wtcconspiracy]

It's an American expression. Sometimes when people say "We did this, we did that, blah, blah" when talking about something that the other may not want to be included in, he'll ask "We? You have a mouse in your pocket, or something?"

Thank you for explaining this. I do use the word we a lot. I understand now what the reference means.

Ben

 

[JimBenArm]

Thank you for explaining this. I do use the word we a lot. I understand now what the reference means.

Ben

You're welcome. And welcome to the forum!

Also, it's late. Get to bed!

 

[beachnut]

This is my quote from there

"""This is Flight 175's descent. Can a plane drop in altitude this fast and still stay in control.
8:58 AM 25,000 Feet
9:00 AM 18,500 Feet
9:02 AM 9,000 Feet

I could drop 15,000 feet in a minute. Yes, these descent are possible. If some said they can not, they are liars. But 5,000 feet per minute is high, normal is 1500, or 2500 fpm. But who said the terrorist were good pilots; they all crashed!

But then it hits the south tower at a height of around 1000 feet at 9:02:40 which means the flight descended over 8000 feet in 40 seconds. Would this not send the plane out of control...

I doubt the 8000 feet, you need to source this; But it is possible.

Then the last 52 - 60 miles of the planes journey were cover in 4 mins 40 seconds. This places speed between 668 Mph and 771 Mph Maximum cruising speed for Boeing 767 is 568 MPH and that is at cruising altitude. The plane would go much lower speeds at lower altitudes.

The top speed was 590 mph, you need to check your numbers. The planes had plenty of power to exceed their maximum speed, they were crashing anyway, who cares if they mess up the planes.

This information is in the NTSB report. A lot of sources say flight 175 hit the south tower at 590 MPH, even NIST says 540 MPH. these speeds are not attainable at the lower altitudes. And a plane going at these speeds would be out of control so badly hitting the tower would have been very hard to do.""""

No, the planes were not out of control, the planes were only exceeding their maximum design speed for a short period, and they were going kind of straight for the buildings no fancy maneuvers. It is easy to go too fast, flight 175 may of had problems turning or doing anything as it was at it's top speed of 590 mph, but it seems the building was in the way. If 175 had lost control, it was bad that it hit the building, and the terrorist was close enough on his aim for any control problems messing up his intent. If you think he was drifting the wrong way, he may of been pushing on the wheel with a left bank, which would actually drift him to the right! You need to pull to get a good turn, not push; unless you want a reverse turn.

And this

"""link on wikipedia for flight 175 but i cant add it...not enough posts yet....
Go there and see how wikipedia have now changed the flight speed of united 175 impacting south tower. It now reads as follows

""""[edit] Crash
At 9:03, Flight 175 crashed into the southern facade of Tower 2 of the World Trade Center (south tower), traveling at approximately 545 miles per hour and impacting between floors 77 and 85 with approximately 10,000 gallons of jet fuel.[12] As seen in the image, the plane was banking left upon impact. Onboard were 56 passengers (including the 5 hijackers) and 9 crew members, and none survived. Hundreds more were killed within the tower and from its ensuing explosion, fires, and collapse. Around 600 people were killed instantly or trapped at and above the floors of impact in the South Tower (2 WTC)."""""""""

So?

When I printed out this article on sept 28 2007 it read that the impact was 590 MPH.

Why would this now all of a sudden change as discussions of the flight exceeding maximum speed of a Boeing started on a few forums... """

The terrorist exceeded the max speed on the jets a few time for a few seconds to 20 seconds at the end. So, I have had pilots chase me in large aircraft and they went too fast@! Their aircraft lost some skin but there was no big crash!

Please people dont get mad at my posts it is just a point i am asking about....

sure, did you find the mouse yet?