What Happened on the Planes
on September 11, 2001?
The 9/11 Commission “Script” Was
Fabricated
This article
was published more than ten years ago, in August 2004 and refutes the 9/11
Commission script as to what actually happened on the planes.
Much of
this detailed information was based on alleged cell phone conversations
between passengers and family members. Yet the technology to use a cell phone
on a plane above 8500 feet did not exist in September 2001.
More Holes in the Official
Story: The 9/11 Cell Phone Calls
“We
Have Some Planes”
The 9/11
Commission’s Report provides an almost visual description of Arab
hijackers.
It depicts in minute detail events occurring inside the cabin of the four
hijacked planes.
In the absence of surviving passengers, this
“corroborating evidence”, was based on passengers’ cell and air phone
conversations with their loved ones. According to the Report, the cockpit voice recorder
(CVR) was only recovered in the case of one of the flights (UAL 93).
Focusing on
the personal drama of the passengers, the Commission has built much of its
narrative around the phone conversations. The Arabs are portrayed with
their knives and box cutters, scheming in the name of Allah, to bring down the
planes and turn them “into large guided missiles” (Report, Chapter 1, http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf ).
The
Technology of Wireless Transmission
The Report conveys the impression
that cell phone ground-to-air communication from high altitude was of
reasonably good quality, and that there was no
major impediment or obstruction in wireless transmission.
Some of the
conversations were with onboard air phones, which contrary to the cell phones
provide for good quality transmission. The report does not draw a clear
demarcation between the two types of calls.
More
significantly, what this
carefully drafted script fails to mention is that, given the prevailing
technology in September 2001, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, to
place a wireless cell call from an aircraft traveling at high speed above 8000
feet:
“Wireless
communications networks weren’t designed for ground-to-air
communication. Cellular experts privately admit that they’re surprised the
calls were able to be placed from the hijacked planes, and that they lasted as
long as they did. They speculate that the only reason that the calls went
through in the first place is that the aircraft were flying so close to the
ground
(http://www.elliott.org/technology/2001/cellpermit.htm)
Expert
opinion within the wireless telecom industry casts serious doubt on “the
findings” of the 9/11 Commission. According to Alexa Graf, a spokesman of
AT&T, commenting in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks:
“it
was almost a fluke that the [9/11] calls reached their destinations… From high
altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience
drops. Although calls are not reliable, callers can pick up and hold calls
for a little while below a certain altitude”
(http://wirelessreview.com/ar/wireless_final_contact/)
New
Wireless Technology
While
serious doubts regarding the cell calls were expressed in the immediate
aftermath of 9/11, a new landmark in the wireless telecom industry has further
contributed to upsetting the Commission’s credibility. Within days of the
release of the 9/11 Commission Report in July, American Airlines and
Qualcomm, proudly announced the development of a new wireless
technology –which will at some future date allow airline passengers
using their cell phones to contact family and friends from a commercial
aircraft (no doubt at a special rate aerial roaming charge)
(see https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2004/07/15/american-airlines-and-qualcomm-complete-test-flight-evaluate-cabin-mobile)
“Travelers
could be talking on their personal cellphones as early as 2006. Earlier this
month [July 2004], American Airlines conducted a trial run on a modified aircraft
that permitted cell phone calls.” (WP, July 27, 2004)
Aviation Week (07/20/04)
described this new technology in an authoritative report published in July
2004:
“Qualcomm
and American Airlines are exploring [July 2004] ways for passengers to use
commercial cell phones inflight for air-to-ground communication. In a recent
2-hr. proof-of-concept flight, representatives from government and the media
used commercial Code
Division Multiple Access (CDMA) third-generation cell phones to place
and receive calls and text messages from friends on the ground.
For the test
flight from Dallas-Fort Worth, the aircraft was equipped with an antenna in the
front and rear of the cabin to transmit cell phone calls to a small in-cabin
CDMA cellular base station. This “pico cell” transmitted cell phone calls from
the aircraft via a Globalstar satellite to the worldwide terrestrial phone
network”
Needless to
say, neither the service, nor the “third generation” hardware, nor the “Picco
cell” CDMA base
station inside the cabin (which so to speak mimics a cell phone communication
tower inside the plane) were available on the morning of September 11, 2001.
The 911
Commission points to the clarity and detail of these telephone conversations.
In
substance, the Aviation Week report
creates yet another embarrassing hitch in the official story.
The untimely
July American Airlines / Qualcomm announcement acted as a cold shower. Barely
acknowledged in press reports, it confirmed that the Bush administration had
embroidered the cell phone narrative (similar to what they did with WMDs) and
that the 9/11 Commission’s account was either flawed or grossly exaggerated.
Altitude
and Cellphone Transmission
According to
industry experts, the crucial link in wireless cell phone transmission from an
aircraft is altitude. Beyond a certain altitude which
is usually reached within a few minutes after takeoff, cell phone calls are no
longer possible.
In other words, given the
wireless technology available on September 11 2001, these cell calls could not
have been placed from high altitude.
The only way
passengers could have got through to family and friends using their cell
phones, is if the planes were flying below 8000 feet. Yet even at low
altitude, below 8000 feet, cell phone communication is of poor quality.
The crucial
question: at what altitude were the planes traveling, when the calls were
placed?
While the
information provided by the Commission is scanty, the Report’s timeline does
not suggest that the planes were consistently traveling at low altitude. In
fact the Report confirms that a fair number of the cell phone calls were placed
while the plane was traveling at altitudes above 8000 feet, which is considered
as the cutoff altitude for cell phone transmission.
Let us
review the timeline of these calls in relation to the information provided by
the Report on flight paths and altitude.
United
Airlines Flight 175
United
Airlines Flight 175 departed for Los Angeles at 8:00:
”It
pushed back from its gate at 7:58 and departed Logan Airport at 8:14.”
The Report
confirms that by 8:33, “it had reached its assigned cruising altitude of
31,000 feet.” According to the Report, it maintained this cruising
altitude until 8.51, when it “deviated from its assigned altitude”:
“The first
operational evidence that something was abnormal on United 175 came at 8:47,
when the aircraft changed beacon codes twice within a minute. At 8:51, the
flight deviated from its assigned altitude, and a minute later New York air
traffic controllers began repeatedly and unsuccessfully trying to contact it.”
And one
minute later at 8.52, Lee Hanson receives a call from his son Peter.
[Flight UAL
175] ”At 8:52, in Easton, Connecticut, a man named Lee Hanson received a
phone call from his son Peter, a passenger on United 175. His son told him: “I
think they’ve taken over the cockpit—An attendant has been stabbed— and someone
else up front may have been killed. The plane is making strange moves. Call
United Airlines—Tell them it’s Flight 175, Boston to LA.
Press
reports confirm that Peter Hanson was using his cell (i.e it was not an air
phone). Unless the plane had suddenly nose-dived, the plane was still at high
altitude at 8.52. (Moreover, Hanson’s call could have been initiated at
least a minute prior to his father Lee Hanson picking up the phone.)
Another call
was received at 8.52 (one minute after it deviated from its assigned altitude
of 31,000 feet). The Report does not say whether this is an air phone or a
cell phone call:
Also at
8:52, a male flight attendant called a United office in San Francisco, reaching
Marc Policastro. The flight attendant reported that the flight had been
hijacked, both pilots had been killed, a flight attendant had been stabbed, and
the hijackers were probably flying the plane. The call lasted about two
minutes, after which Policastro and a colleague tried unsuccessfully to contact
the flight.
It is not
clear whether this was a call to Policastro’s cell phone or to the UAL
switchboard.
At 8:58, UAL
175 “took a heading toward New York City.”:
“At 8:59,
Flight 175 passenger Brian David Sweeney tried to call his wife, Julie. He left
a message on their home answering machine that the plane had been hijacked. He
then called his mother, Louise Sweeney, told her the flight had been hijacked,
and added that the passengers were thinking about storming the cockpit to take
control of the plane away from the hijackers.
At 9:00, Lee
Hanson received a second call from his son Peter:
It’s getting
bad, Dad—A stewardess was stabbed—They seem to have knives and Mace—They said
they have a bomb—It’s getting very bad on the plane—Passengers are throwing up
and getting sick—The plane is making jerky movements—I don’t think the pilot is
flying the plane—I think we are going down—I think they intend to go to Chicago
or someplace and fly into a building—Don’t worry, Dad— If it happens, it’ll be
very fast—My God, my God.
The call
ended abruptly. Lee Hanson had heard a woman scream just before it cut off. He
turned on a television, and in her home so did Louise Sweeney. Both then saw
the second aircraft hit the World Trade Center.50 At 9:03:11, United Airlines
Flight 175 struck the South Tower of the World Trade Center. All on board,
along with an unknown number of people in the tower, were killed instantly.”
American
Airlines Flight 77
American
Airlines Flight 77 was scheduled to depart from Washington Dulles for Los
Angeles at 8:10… ”At 8:46, the flight reached its assigned cruising
altitude of 35,000 feet.”
At 8:51,
American 77 transmitted its last routine radio communication. The hijacking
began between 8:51 and 8:54. As on American 11 and United 175, the hijackers
used knives (reported by one passenger) and moved all the passengers (and
possibly crew) to the rear of the aircraft (reported by one flight attendant
and one passenger). Unlike the earlier flights, the Flight 77 hijackers were
reported by a passenger to have box cutters. Finally, a passenger reported that
an announcement had been made by the “pilot” that the plane had been hijacked….
On flight AA
77, which allegedly crashed into the Pentagon, the transponder was turned off
at 8:56am; the recorded altitude at the time the transponder was turned off is
not mentioned. According to the Commission’s Report, cell calls started 16
minutes later, at 9:12am, twenty minutes before it (allegedly) crashed into the
Pentagon at 9.32am:
” [at 9.12]
Renee May called her mother, Nancy May, in Las Vegas. She said her flight was
being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the rear of the plane.”
According to
the Report, when the autopilot was disengaged at 9:29am, the aircraft
was at 7,000 feet and some 38 miles west of the Pentagon. This happened
two minutes before the crash.
Most of the
calls on Flight 77 were placed between 9.12am and 9.26am, prior to the
disengagement of automatic piloting at 9.29am. The plane could
indeed have been traveling at either a higher or a lower altitude to that
reached at 9.29. Yet, at the same time there is no indication in the Report
that the plane had been traveling below the 7000 feet level, which it reached
at 9.29am.
At some point
between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the
solicitor general of the United States. [using an airphone]
(Report p 7,
see http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf )
United
Airlines Flight 93
UAL flight
93 was the only one of the four planes that, according to the official story,
did not crash into a building. Flight 93 passengers, apparently:”alerted
through phone calls, attempted to subdue the hijackers. and the hijackers
crashed the plane [in Pennsylvania] to prevent the passengers gaining
control.” ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_flight_93 ). Another
version of events, was that UAL 93 was shot down.
According to
the Commission’s account:
“the first
46 minutes of Flight 93’s cross-country trip proceeded routinely. Radio
communications from the plane were normal. Heading, speed, and altitude ran
according to plan. At 9:24, Ballinger’s warning to United 93 was received in
the cockpit. Within two minutes, at 9:26, the pilot, Jason Dahl, responded with
a note of puzzlement: “Ed, confirm latest mssg plz—Jason.”70 The hijackers attacked
at 9:28. While traveling 35,000 feet above eastern Ohio, United 93
suddenly dropped 700 feet. Eleven seconds into the descent, the FAA’s air
traffic control center in Cleveland received the first of two radio
transmissions from the aircraft….”
At least ten
cell calls are reported to have taken place on flight 93.
The Report
confirms that passengers started placing calls with cell and air phones shortly
after 9.32am, four minutes after the Report’s confirmation of the plane’s
attitude of 35,000 feet. In other words, the calls started some 9
minutes before the Cleveland Center lost UAL 93’s transponder signal
(9.41) and approximately 30 minutes before the crash in Pennsylvania (10.03)
“At 9:41,
Cleveland Center lost United 93’s transponder signal. The controller located it
on primary radar, matched its position with visual sightings from other
aircraft, and tracked the flight as it turned east, then south.164 “
This
suggests that the altitude was known to air traffic control up until the time
when the transponder signal was lost by the Cleveland Center. (Radar and visual
sightings provided information on its flight path from 9.41 to 10.03.)
Moreover,
there was no indication from the Report that the aircraft had swooped down to a
lower level of altitude, apart from the 700 feet drop recorded at 9.28. from a
cruising altitude of 35,000 feet:
“At 9:32, a
hijacker, probably Jarrah, made or attempted to make the following announcement
to the passengers of Flight 93:“Ladies and Gentlemen: Here the captain, please
sit down keep remaining sitting.
We have a
bomb on board. So, sit.” The flight data recorder (also recovered) indicates
that Jarrah then instructed the plane’s autopilot to turn the aircraft around
and head east. The cockpit voice recorder data indicate that a woman, most
likely a flight attendant, was being held captive in the cockpit. She struggled
with one of the hijackers who killed or otherwise silenced her.
Shortly
thereafter, the passengers and flight crew began a series of calls from GTE
airphones and cellular phones. These calls between family, friends, and
colleagues took place until the end of the flight and provided those on the
ground with firsthand accounts. They enabled the passengers to gain
critical information, including the news that two aircraft had slammed into the
World Trade Center.77…At least two callers from the flight reported that the
hijackers knew that passengers were making calls but did not seem to care.
The
hijackers were wearing red bandanas, and they forced the passengers to the back
of the aircraft.80 Callers reported that a passenger had been stabbed and that
two people were lying on the floor of the cabin, injured or dead—possibly the
captain and first officer. One caller reported that a flight attendant had been
killed.81 One of the callers from United 93 also reported that he thought the
hijackers might possess a gun. But none of the other callers reported the
presence of a firearm. One recipient of a call from the aircraft recounted
specifically asking her caller whether the hijackers had guns.
The
passenger replied that he did not see one. No evidence of firearms or of their
identifiable remains was found at the aircraft’s crash site, and the cockpit
voice recorder gives no indication of a gun being fired or mentioned at any
time.
We believe
that if the hijackers had possessed a gun, they would have used it in the
flight’s last minutes as the passengers fought back.82 Passengers on three
flights reported the hijackers’ claim of having a bomb. The FBI told us they
found no trace of explosives at the crash sites. One of the passengers who
mentioned a bomb expressed his belief that it was not real. Lacking any
evidence that the hijackers attempted to smuggle such illegal items past the
security screening checkpoints, we believe the bombs were probably fake. During
at least five of the passengers’ phone calls, information was shared about the
attacks that had occurred earlier that morning at the World Trade Center. Five
calls described the intent of passengers and surviving crew members to revolt
against the hijackers. According to one call, they voted on whether to rush the
terrorists in an attempt to retake the plane. They decided, and acted. At 9:57,
the passenger assault began. Several passengers had terminated phone calls with
loved ones in order to join the revolt. One of the callers ended her message as
follows:
“Everyone’s
running up to first class. I’ve got to go. Bye.” The cockpit voice recorder
captured the sounds of the passenger assault muffled by the intervening cockpit
door. Some family members who listened to the recording report that they can
hear the voice of a loved one among the din.
We cannot
identify whose voices can be heard. But the assault was sustained. In response,
Jarrah immediately began to roll the airplane to the left and right, attempting
to knock the passengers off balance. At 9:58:57, Jarrah told another hijacker
in the cockpit to block the door. Jarrah continued to roll the airplane sharply
left and right, but the assault continued. At 9:59, Jarrah changed tactics and
pitched the nose of the airplane up and down to disrupt the assault. The
recorder captured the sounds of loud thumps, crashes, shouts, and breaking
glasses and plates.
At 10:00:03,
Jarrah stabilized the airplane. Five seconds later, Jarrah asked, “Is that it?
Shall we finish it off?” A hijacker responded, “No. Not yet. When they all
come, we finish it off.” The sounds of fighting continued outside the cockpit.
Again, Jarrah pitched the nose of the aircraft up and down.At 10:00:26, a passenger
in the background said, “In the cockpit. If we don’t we’ll die!” Sixteen
seconds later, a passenger yelled,“Roll it!” Jarrah stopped the violent
maneuvers at about 10:01:00 and said, “Allah is the greatest! Allah is the
greatest!” He then asked another hijacker in the cockpit,“ Is that it? I mean,
shall we put it down?” to which the other replied, “Yes, put it in it, and pull
it down.” The passengers continued their assault and at 10:02:23, 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 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
counterattack 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. Jarrah’s objective was to crash his airliner into symbols
of the American Republic, the Capitol or the White House. He was defeated by
the alerted, unarmed passengers of United”
The
Mysterious Call of Edward Felt from UAL 93
Earlier
coverage of the fate of UAL 93 was based in part on a reported cell call from a
passenger named Edward Felt, who managed to reach an emergency official in
Pennsylvania. How he got the emergency supervisor’s number and managed to reach
him remains unclear.
The call was
apparently received at 9.58 am, eight minutes before the reported time of the
crash at 10.06 am in Pennsylvania:
“Local
emergency officials said they received a cell phone call at 9.58 am from a man
who said he was a passenger aboard the flight. The man said he had locked
himself in the bathroom and told emergency dispatchers that the plane had been
hijacked. “We are being hijacked! We are being hijacked!” he was quoted as
saying. A California man identified as Tom Burnett reportedly called his wife
and told her that somebody on the plane had been stabbed. “We’re all going to
die, but three of us are going to do something,” he told her. “I love you
honey.”
The alleged
call by Edward Felt from the toilet of the aircraft of UAL 93 was answered by
Glenn Cramer, the emergency supervisor in Pennsylvania who took the call.
It is worth
noting that Glenn Cramer was subsequently gagged by the FBI.” (See Robert
Wallace`s incisive analysis published in Sept 2002 by the Daily Mirror, (http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/WAL403A.html ).
Ironically,
this high profile cell call by Ed Felt, which would have provided crucial
evidence to the 9/11 Commission was, for some reason, not mentioned in the
Report.
American
Airlines Flight 11
Flight 11
took off at 7:59. Just before 8:14. The Report outlines an airphone
conversation of flight attendant Betty Ong and much of the narrative hinges
upon this airphone conversation
There are no
clear-cut reports on the use of cell phones on Flight AA11. According to
the Report, American 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center
at 8.46.
Concluding
Remarks
A large part
of the description, regarding the 19 hijackers relies on cell phone
conversations with family and friends.
While a few
of these calls (placed at low altitude) could have got through, the wireless
technology was not available. On this issue, expert opinion within the wireless
telecom industry is unequivocal.
In other words, at least part of
the Commission’s script in Chapter 1 on the cell phone conversations, is
fabricated.
According to
the American Airline / Qualcomm [2004] announcement, the technology for cell
phone transmission at high altitude will only be available aboard commercial
aircraft in 2006. This is an inescapable fact.
In the eyes
of public opinion, the cell phone conversations on the Arab hijackers is needed
to sustain the illusion that America is under attack.
The “war on
terrorism” underlying the National Security doctrine relies on real time
“evidence” concerning the Arab hijackers. The latter personify, so to speak,
this illusive “outside enemy” (Al Qaeda), which is threatening the homeland.
Embodied into
the Commission’s “script” of 911, the narrative of what happened on the plane
with the Arab hijackers is therefore crucial. It is an integral part of the
Administration’s disinformation and propaganda program. It constitutes a
justification for the anti-terror legislation under the Patriot acts and the
waging of America’s pre-emptive wars against Afghanistan and Iraq.
Michel Chossudovsky’s
book can be order
directly from Global Research. Click image to order
ANNEX
The
9/11 Report’s Footnotes on the Cell Phone Conversations
70. On FDR,
see NTSB report,“Specialist’s Factual Report of Investigation—Digital Flight
Data Recorder” for United Airlines Flight 93, Feb. 15, 2002; on CVR, see FBI
report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec. 4, 2003; Commission review of Aircraft
Communication and Reporting System (ACARS) messages sent to and from Flight 93
(which indicate time of message transmission and receipt); see UAL record, Ed
Ballinger ACARS log, Sept. 11, 2001. At 9:22, after learning of the events at
the World Trade Center, Melody Homer, the wife of co-pilot Leroy Homer, had an
ACARS message sent to her husband in the cockpit asking if he was okay. See UAL
record,ACARS message, Sept. 11, 2001.
71. On FDR,
see NTSB report,“Specialist’s Factual Report of Investigation—Digital Flight
Data Recorder” for United Airlines Flight 93, Feb. 15, 2002; on CVR, see FBI
report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec. 4, 2003; FAA report,“Summary of Air
Traffic Hijack Events: September 11, 2001,” Sept. 17, 2001; NTSB report, Air
Traffic Control Recording—United Airlines Flight 93, Dec. 21, 2001.
72.The 37
passengers represented a load factor of 20.33 percent of the plane’s seating
capacity of 182, considerably below the 52.09 percent for Flight 93 on Tuesdays
in the three-month period prior to September 11 (June 11–September 4, 2001).
See UAL report, Flight 93 EWR-SFO load factors, undated. Five passengers
holding reservations for Flight 93 did not show for the flight.All five were
interviewed and cleared by the FBI. FBI report,“Flight #93 ‘No Show’ Passengers
from 9/11/01,” Sept. 18, 2001.
73. INS
record,Withdrawal of Application for Admission for Mohamed al Kahtani,Aug. 4,
2001.
74. See FAA
regulations,Admission to flight deck, 14 C.F.R. § 121.547 (2001);UAL records,
copies of boarding passes for United 93, Sept. 11,2001.One passenger reported
that ten first-class passengers were aboard the flight. If that number is
accurate, it would include the four hijackers. FBI report of investigation,
interview of Lisa Jefferson, Sept. 11, 2001;UAL record, Flight 93 passenger
manifest, Sept. 11, 2001.All but one of the six passengers seated in the
first-class cabin communicated with the ground during the flight, and none
mentioned anyone from their cabin having gone into the cockpit before the
hijacking.Moreover, it is unlikely that the highly regarded and experienced
pilot and co-pilot of Flight 93 would have allowed an observer into the cockpit
before or after takeoff who had not obtained the proper permission. See UAL
records, personnel files of Flight 93 pilots. For jumpseat information, see UAL
record,Weight and Balance Information for Flight 93 and Flight 175, Sept. 11,
2001;AAL records, Dispatch Environmental Control/Weekly Flight Summary for
Flight 11 and Flight 77, Sept. 11, 2001.
75. Like
Atta on Flight 11, Jarrah apparently did not know how to operate the
communication radios; thus his attempts to communicate with the passengers were
broadcast on the ATC channel. See FBI report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec. 4,
2003.Also, by 9:32 FAA notified United’s headquarters that the flight was not
responding to radio calls.According to United, the flight’s nonresponse and its
turn to the east led the airline to believe by 9:36 that the plane was
hijacked. See Rich Miles interview (Nov. 21, 2003); UAL report, “United
dispatch SMFDO activities—terrorist crisis,” Sept. 11, 2001.
76. In
accordance with FAA regulations, United 93’s cockpit voice recorder recorded
the last 31 minutes of sounds from the cockpit via microphones in the pilots’
headsets, as well as in the overhead panel of the flight deck. This is the only
recorder from the four hijacked airplanes to survive the impact and ensuing
fire.The CVRs and FDRs from American 11 and United 175 were not found,and the
CVR from American Flight 77 was badly burned and not recoverable. See FBI
report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,”Dec. 4, 2003; see also FAA regulations, 14
C.F.R. §§ 25.1457, 91.609, 91.1045, 121.359; Flight 93 CVR data. A transcript
of the CVR recording was prepared by the NTSB and the FBI.
77. All
calls placed on airphones were from the rear of the aircraft. There was one
airphone installed in each row of seats on both sides of the aisle.The airphone
system was capable of transmitting only eight calls at any one time. See FBI
report of investigation, airphone records for flights UAL 93 and UAL 175 on
Sept. 11, 2001, Sept. 18, 2001.
78.FAA audio
file, Cleveland Center, position Lorain Radar; Flight 93 CVR data; FBI report,
“CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec. 4, 2003.
79. FBI
reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Todd Beamer,
Sept. 11, 2001, through June 11, 2002; FBI reports of investigation, interviews
of recipients of calls from Sandy Bradshaw, Sept. 11, 2001, through Oct. 4,
2001.Text messages warning the cockpit of Flight 93 were sent to the aircraft
by Ed Ballinger at 9:24. See UAL record, Ed Ballinger’s ACARS log, Sept. 11,
2001.
80.We have
relied mainly on the record of FBI interviews with the people who received
calls. The FBI interviews were conducted while memories were still fresh and
were less likely to have been affected by reading the accounts of others or
hearing stories in the media. In some cases we have conducted our own
interviews to supplement or verify the record. See FBI reports of
investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Todd Beamer, Mark
Bingham,Sandy Bradshaw,Marion Britton,Thomas Burnett, Joseph DeLuca,Edward
Felt, Jeremy Glick,Lauren
Grandcolas, Linda Gronlund, CeeCee Lyles, Honor Wainio.
81. FBI
reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Thomas
Burnett, Sept. 11, 2001; FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients
of calls from Marion Britton, Sept. 14, 2001, through Nov. 8, 2001; Lisa
Jefferson interview (May 11, 2004); FBI report of investigation, interview of
Lisa Jefferson, Sept. 11, 2001; Richard Belme interview (Nov. 21, 2003).
82. See Jere
Longman, Among the Heroes—United Flight 93 and the Passengers and Crew Who Fought
Back (Harper-Collins, 2002), p. 107; Deena Burnett interview (Apr. 26, 2004);
FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Jeremy
Glick, Sept. 11, 2001, through Sept. 12, 2001; Lyzbeth Glick interview (Apr.
22, 2004). Experts told us that a gunshot would definitely be audible on the
CVR. The FBI found no evidence of a firearm at the crash site of Flight 93. See
FBI response to Commission briefing request no. 6, undated (topic 11).The FBI
collected 14 knives or portions of knives at the Flight 93 crash site. FBI
report, “Knives Found at the UA Flight 93 Crash Site,” undated.
83. FBI
response to Commission briefing request no. 6, undated (topic 11); FBI reports
of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Jeremy Glick, Sept.
11, 2001, through Sept. 12, 2001.
84. See FBI
reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from United 93.
85. FBI
reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from United 93. For
quote, see FBI report of investigation, interview of Philip Bradshaw, Sept. 11,
2001; Philip Bradshaw interview (June 15, 2004); Flight 93 FDR and CVR data.At
9:55:11 Jarrah dialed in the VHF Omni-directional Range (VOR) frequency for the
VOR navigational aid at Washington Reagan National Airport, further indicating
that the attack was planned for the nation’s capital.
A
revised version of the article was subsequently published in my book
entitled America’s
“War on Terrorism”, Montreal 2005, which can be
ordered directly from Global Research
From Global Research @ http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-happened-on-the-planes-on-september-11-2001-the-911-commission-script-was-fabricated/5428771
For more information
about the wondrous fantasy flights of 9/11 see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/911
- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section
Hope you like this
not for profit site -
It takes hours of work every day by
a genuinely incapacitated invalid to maintain, write, edit, research,
illustrate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest
Like what we do? Please give anything
you can -
Contribute any amount and receive at
least one New Illuminati eBook!
(You can use a card
securely if you don’t use Paypal)
Please click below -
Spare Bitcoin
change?
Xtra Images – http://pppre.s3.amazonaws.com/3374793288e5880f/b/8bfb32730ffe4e729873155633ae3870.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d6/Mobile_phone_evolution.jpg/220px-Mobile_phone_evolution.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/Architects_%26_Engineers_for_9-11_Truth_Banner.jpg
http://www.bloodforoil.net/i-think-i-voted/i-think-i-voted-sticker-tn.gif
And see
DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and
links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search
engines and helps spread your info further! This site is
published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual
article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder). Reproduction
for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, - if you give attribution to the work &
author and include all links in the original (along with this or a similar
notice).
Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or
mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web –
but remember attribution!
If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too
small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…
Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible
worlds…
