Hijacker Crashed Flight 93 on 9/11

AP via Yahoo! ^ | 8/7/03 | TED BRIDIS, Associated Press Writer

[Fledermaus]

I always held the view the pilot dived the plane into the ground simply because of the reports and the fact that if the passengers had been successful they could have landed the plane.

If one terrorist told the pilot to crash, I wonder if that was a contingeny plan or they never thought, even taking 4 or more planes, any passengers would fight back.

But then again, the terrorist took many dry runs and picked out these flights for many reasons. The lack of fear of the average passenger they observed over time could have been part of the plan. We know they used the quick deaths of flight attendants and a threat of a bomb to scare the passengers. They even encouraged them to use their phones and call someone to spread more fear and disinformation. Most thought at the time it was a simple hijacking and they'd end up in Cuba or somewhere.

Which shows that whether or not they had a fallback to crash the plane if passengers fought back, those passengers aboard Flight 93 took a chance knowing they would probably be dead regardless. But they knew they would be saving lives on the ground.

[Pukka Puck]

"Both real and fake bombs entail the same risk of detection getting onto a plane."

You cannot be so stupid as to believe this.

[LasVegasMac]

Depends - which one of the Apollo missions?

As I suspected. See ya.

LVM

[Arkinsaw]

What the investigation has revealed is that the two events are causally connnected: the air craft went down because the terrorists did not want to risk losing the aircraft even if it meant never making it to their target etc., etc.

There are some that want to disconnect the two by wordsmithing as if there were no linkage and the terrorists just decided to fly the plane into the ground for no reason at the same time passengers were coincidentally failing in an attempt to attack the cockpit.

[Pukka Puck]

"One of the terrorists told another terrorist (in Arabic) to "crash the plane"."

Yes, he said to crash the plane, he did not say to blow the plane up using the handy strap on bomb we have smuggled onto the plane at great risk for no good reason.

[Pukka Puck]

"Well, if you say so, but I would appreciate something a little more authoritative."

Use your head.

[Arkinsaw]

As I suspected. See ya.

Never fails does it.

[Pukka Puck]

They may have had a bomb.

It does not seem to be the way they took over the planes. They did use small knives. That was their plan. They planned well and their plan worked. They probably said they had a bomb and they probably had something that might have looked like a bomb. That would have helped their plan. They did not need a bomb and trying to bring a bomb on board would have added to their chances of getting caught getting on the airplane, but it is certainly possible that they had a bomb on the plane of planes. It is doubtful that any bombs went off any of the planes prior to the planes crashing into buildings or the earth as the case may be.

Why add extraneous, unnecessary elements?

[Dems_R_Losers]

Come on, people. This was a SUICIDE mission first and foremost. If the passengers had taken over the plane, then the Warriors for Allah would not have gotten their 72 virgins! They didn't give a crap one way or the other about the passengers or where they ended up, as long as they killed themselves and achieved their martyrdom. And they certainly knew they would not have to face an angry boss if they aborted their mission and failed to reach the desired target.

This plane was very late leaving Newark. The terrorists probably knew they had failed one of the key points of the mission, which was to have all the planes crash into their targets at about the same time, for maximum surprise and shock to America. They understood English and surely heard some of the passengers talking about the WTC after they heard about it from their loved ones on the ground that they had called. (And I have always suspected that the four pilots had some contact on the ground that was coordinating and reporting back to whoever was the mastermind.) So they probably already knew they had screwed up a little. Once the passenger revolt started, it was obvious to them that they were not going to reach the target, and so they had to at least complete the mission of their own suicide as soon as possible.

[BigBobber]

The fact that the passengers reported a terrorist with a bomb on Flight 93 clearly troubles you. So you invent a theory that it was just a "fake" bomb. Can you tell me other cases where Islamic terrorists used a fake bomb? I can tell you lots where they used a real bomb.

On 9-11 there was virtually no risk in taking a bomb on a plane. Screeners had NO WAY TO DETECT EXPLOSIVES! The terrorists knew this. Richard Reeves did it a few months AFTER 9-11, when security was even tighter.

Here is your chance to make a billion dollars. The federal government would love you to tell them how to detect bombs on passengers using visual inspection and metal detectors. Because they can't do it.

[Pukka Puck]

"The fact that the passengers reported a terrorist with a bomb on Flight 93 clearly troubles you."

Nope, does not trouble me the least bit. I am sure that the terrorists told the passengers that they had a bomb. I just do not believe that they used a bomb to blow up the plane.

[higgmeister]

On the other hand, all aircraft are subject to balance problems, and if you have a bunch of people suddenly run to the front of the airplane, you're going to throw it out of balance, and an inexperience pilot may not be able to recover--if he cared to...they weren't too worried about safe landings, you know.

Finally somebody got it right!.  That's why
you have to have a loadmaster on a cargo
plane, to keep the load from shifting.  If
you suddenly shift the weight from the back
of an aircraft to the front, the nose goes down.
After the plane tilts 30 to 40 degrees, people
that are not belted into their seats start falling
toward the front of the plane.  All of the
passengers would be thrown toward the
front cabin bulkhead with no way for anyone
to recover (cups, carts and utensils too).
It is clear that at least the "ring leaders" of the
passenger revolt against the highjackers
knew this.  They are true heroes for giving
their lives willingly to save countless others.

[Pukka Puck]

"On 9-11 there was virtually no risk in taking a bomb on a plane."

Look you nitwit, besides explosives, a bomb needs batteries, a switch, and wires running from the battery and switch to the detonator. Those are metal parts, which the screeners were looking for.

The shoe bomber used a primitive fuse and match system that did not work, if you will recall.

[BigBobber]

Fair enough. It's been fun.

I hope the FBI releases more info someday when it is appropriate.

[eno_]

All 9/11 planes hit not much faster than cuising speed - 550mph or so. Not fast enough to rip the planes apart.

[Ciexyz]

I'm confused. If people who heard the tape say it's nearly indecipherable, with static and wind noises, then how can the translators be certain that they heard a specific phrase in Arabic telling the pilot to crash the plane?

[BigBobber]

Sorry, missed this last post of yours.

You are wrong. You don't need any metal to set off a bomb. All you need is detonation cord and a match. This is not a primitive system. It is used all the time in industy and the materials are highly refined.

As an example of setting off explosives with a match, have you heard of a firecracker? It's made with chemicals and paper. No metal.

As for batteries and wires, did you catch the latest FBI warning to airport screeners about AQ hiding bombs and knives in ordinary looking objects?

Stay safe.

[Ciexyz]

I agree with the many comments on this board, that this article holds a derisive tone against the heroic passengers. This is a terribly written article, with a nasty tone to it against the passenger heroes. Where's the proof of the allegations?

[eno_]

You could also probably use the cap that starts model rockets, and a 9v battery.

[Delta 21]