Hijacker Crashed Flight 93 on 9/11

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

[Dr. Marten]

>>That story doesn't jibe with me.

It's Jive, man. Jive! hehe..

[Palladin]

The revisionists are hard at it trying to erase the heroism, self-sacrifice, and glorious American spirit that prevailed on 9-11, not only in Shanksville, but also in NYC and DC.

After all, they must make us forget the events of that day in order to get Gore/Hillary/Dean or some other Commie into the White House in 2004.

[BibChr]

Once again, the AP struggles mightily to find a cloud in the silver lining...

...and fails.

Dan

[Delta 21]

[Swordmaker]

Otherwise, we have had to believe that the hijackers INTENDED to crash the plane in an empty field.

Or we have to conclude that there was an invisible US Government installation on that empty field that was successfully destroyed. Right, sure.

[Area Freeper]

This version is just as heroic.

...in a "Jessica Lynch sort of way."

[ChemistCat]

And you got your degree in physics...where?

[Delta 21]

[Swordmaker]

Ayling admitted that it was now possible to control an aircraft in flight from either the ground or in the air. This was confirmed by expert witnesses at the inquiry who testified that airliners could be controlled by electro-magnetic pulse or radio frequency instrumentation from command and control platforms based either in the air or at ground level.

This is not evidence, Marianne. This is self-serving gobbledegook.

Controlling those aircraft for hundreds of miles at thousands of feet of altitude would require a very powerful transmitter.. no, FOUR very powerful transmitters. . . or a chase plane with the controllers behind each aircraft. If powerful transmitters were used, their presence on the airwaves would have been noted by numerous receivers in the area. To properly control the aircraft AND hit their targets, would require a feedback system of some kind, probably visual, to the hypothetical remote pilots. This is not your average remote control system used by model airplane enthusiasts.

Interfacing a sophisticated remote control system to an aircraft not designed for such is also a difficult task... these planes were in daily use by the airlines that owned them. There was no available window of opportunity to install such a system... and it would have been noticed by any crews using or servicing the aircraft.

Then, Marianne, there is the question of the passengers and crews. If they did not die in the attacks, where are they? Are we to assume they have been kidnapped, spirited away for either summary execution or have they, as part of a grand conspiracy, been given new identities and lives? Some of these "remote missile" conspiracy theorists hold the planes were never occupied. What about the ground crews that enplaned all those passengers... were they in on the conspiracy? Where did the body parts and DNA that matched the victims come from, if they weren't there.

There is more evidence that the events of 9/11 happened the way they were reported than that Captain Donn de Grande exists or his "72 hour marathon" investigation ever took place outside of the mind of the author of this article.

[Afronaut]

Anyway you look at it our goverment failed us big time on 9/11. And now they are hidding the facts. The plane was shot down. Simple. Passengers could have fought but I do not think they crashed the plane into a field. I guess I am an Axhole for believing that. The Goverment never lies...

[MattAMiller]

I don't see how this could diminish their heroism. I'd always assumed the plane had been crashed after it became clear the passengers where going to take it over.

[MattAMiller]

Going full throttle straight into the ground will spread wreakage around. The speed can also tear apart the airframe in flight.

[MattAMiller]

Initial news reports are often inaccurate. In fact they are to be taken with very large grains of salt. Remember the initial reports that Regan hadn't been shot?

[A CA Guy]

Either way the heroic passengers caused that plane to never reach it's target.

[Ann Archy]

I detest Robert Mueller. Next to Tenet, he's W's Weakest Link.

[MattAMiller]

Sounds like you fancy yourself a tough minded defender of truth and will latch on to any detail to burnish your credentials. The story about the passangers reaching the cockpit was never reported as hard truth and I'd bet that most people never even heard it. It was speculation that got a moderate amount of media attention.

I myself was under the impression that it had been debunked soon after 9/11.

[MattAMiller]

So you think they the passengers suck because they didn't make it to the cockpit? I think what they did was heroic regardless.

[He Rides A White Horse]

WASHINGTON - U.S. investigators now believe that a hijacker in the cockpit aboard United Airlines Flight 93 instructed terrorist-pilot Ziad Jarrah to crash the jetliner into a Pennsylvania field because of a passenger uprising in the cabin.

Which diminishes nothing.........

[Paleo Conservative]

I don't believe the Clinton-Afflicted Air Force had its ducks in a row nor adequate warning to be shooting anything down that day...not over the mainland of the U.S. of A.

The news articles I read said that the planes sent to intercept the airliners were unarmed and it would have been necessary for the Air National Guard pilot to ram the airliners with their fighters. Also most of the Air National Guard pilots were also airline pilots.

[He Rides A White Horse]

minutes before Flight 93 hit the ground, one of the hijackers "advised Jarrah to crash the plane and end the passengers' attempt to retake the airplane."

Mission aborted Sand Nazi.