"WMR has received another confirmation, bringing the total number to three, that United Flight 93, hijacked on the morning of September 11, 2001, was shot down over rural Pennsylvania by U.S. Air Force jets scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland. There are also reports that one F-16 scrambled from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia returned to base minus one air-to-air missile but the National Security Agency CRITIC report specified the interceptors that downed United 93 took off from Andrews.
The third confirmation, as were the first two, is from a National Security Agency (NSA) source. In fact, a number of personnel who were on watch at the Meade Operations Center (MOC), which is a floor below the NSA's National Security Operations Center (NSOC), were aware that United 93 was brought down by an Air Force air-to-air missile. Personnel within both the MOC and NSOC have reported the doomed aircraft was shot down.
The 9/11 Commission, which is now known to have been influenced by Bush adviser Karl Rove and its Executive Director Phil Zelikow, never interviewed the on-duty signals intelligence personnel who were aware that United 93 was brought down by Air Force jets. The cover-story is that passengers on board the plane struggled with hijackers and flew the plane directly into the ground near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Investigators have stressed that the 8-mile debris field left by the doomed aircraft proves the government's story is a hoax."
Don't impeach Bush or Cheney...arrest them for war crimes and send them to the Hague.
if the plane was shot down. there was no barbara olson call. the debris was over eight miles of area. what in the world does this signify? I have no clue. there must have been terrorists in the fighter jet that hijacked the entire relativity of the space time continuum!
that's it. any one who can allow any other conspiracy theory should not be tolerated. Elmer Fudd , head of homeland insecurity must issue an orange and purple alert until the treasonous persons who are destroying the democratic processes via main scream murderer has had time to analyze this false information. hannity, o'reilly, limpbow, etc. will give the real scenario on right ( not wrong ) swing radio.
wolfie howls at the mooooooon.
by
Wolfie (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 395 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 12:57:08 AM
by Dr. Steven E. Jones, Dr. Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, and James R. Gourley,
If you're tired of waiting over 6 years for the NIST WTC 7 Report, have questions about the NIST Report on WTC 1 & 2 and want the scientific community to know about and address these 14 points, then please
Lemme get this straight.....the plane was shot down. The hole in the ground is small but big enough for the plane to go nose first straight in and disappear with very little debris. What kind of ammo was used? A single bullet to the head of the pilot? That wouldn't work. A Stinger? Nope, that would've made a huge mess....and no tiny hole. This doesn't match up with what has been claimed thus far. Sounds like lies are being stacked on lies.
by
Tony Forest (4 articles, 10 quicklinks, 115 diaries, 974 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 4:33:18 AM
Competing with what you have just posted is a conspiracy theory that points an accusing eye at the delays in the response of requests to the Air Force to scramble jets to respond to the 911 crisis and the delay in the Air Force response to get jets in the air to the point where everything was over before the USAF could respond. To which I have often responded that those delays make sense from a number of standpoints that arent necessary to elaborate on here.
If you are going to put forward this theory of yours, you need to research that theory and debunk it, if you can.
by
Steven Leser (179 articles, 29 quicklinks, 30 diaries, 1203 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 9:21:45 AM
Has anyone asked the candidates if they'd convene a real, independent 911 Commission? As huge and diverse as the "911 Truth Movement" is, it remains a circulation of information within a "choir". The question should be asked of the candidates again and again and .... so that, ultimately, the question itself becomes "news". Surely there's SOMEBODY that's high profile enough to pose the question in a public forum.
by
Bill Willers (7 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 34 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 10:18:32 AM
Such a lurid claim as this needs calm scrutiny. Frankly, the author needs to show some credibility.
1. The claim that there is an 8 mile debris field is news to me. I would like to see where this information comes from. Can the author please document this?
2. I am certainly not a defender of nor admirer of Vice President Cheney. Nor am I convinced the story is true. However, if it were true, and if I had been in his position at that moment, or if you were, we might certainly make the decision to shoot down the airliner if we could, if we already knew that the hijackers were on a suicide mission to crash the plane into a strategic target. What other choice would we have? Let the airliner crash into another populated building in a major metropolitan city?
by
Carl H. Carlson (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 11:03:01 AM
...is that we keep all fronts in 911 Truth alive. Because we really do not have a "fair and balanced" media, we have to resort to "tabloiding" the topic to keep it on the mind's of concerned people.
By far and away, the most convincing evidence for conspiracy exists at Ground Zero (WTC). But without the edges of the conspiracy showing their thinness, media needs only focus on repeating the lies about one site, rather than all three.
I have not seen the movie, Flight 93, for the very reason that I do not believe that "cellphones" work on passenger aircraft, and I also do not believe a passenger jet can collide at one point in the ground while also spreading debris across 8 miles. I think the earliest information as to the absurdity of the Flight 93 story was published on "LetsRoll911.org," which, while disappointing, made alot of sense to me.
Another morsel of information on the whole idea that the Northeast corridor could have been "gamed" by Washington insiders is the fact that the Strategic Air Command (SAC) was disbanded by Defense Secretary Richard Cheney. This left the FAA, Air Force and NORAD in charge of deciding amongst themselves whether a threat exists and what to do about it. When SAC presided over the airspace, everyone knew where they would be getting their orders from. Once the authority was placed back into the executive Whitehouse, the system would be that much easier to "game."
I don't think there's any serious debate against the idea that Dick Cheney "gamed" the air defense infrastructure on 9/11. If there is, please let me know and I can cough up the information that closes the door on that little bit of mythology.
What folks in 911 Truth don't realize is that it's not an information issue that we are dealing with here...it's a Communication issue. And this issue cuts at the heart of human perception and the ability of the human nervous system to tolerate cognitive dissonance long enough to listen to a potentially important piece of information.
Generally speaking, cognitive dissonance causes the human brain to simply shut down and shut-out the dissonant information. Only those who have been trained by professionals, or circumstances, can see through the conflicting messages, the smoke and mirrors, to what is relevant. Not to say that we do not get it "wrong" sometimes or that investigation isn't important. But I do mean to suggest that we have our hands and heads around information that is absolutely toxic to the credibility of the whole of Washington culture. As such, this is an emotion-laden issue that will require some communication skill to untangle.
I think the folks at "911WeKnow" have started us on the right path. The presenter of the information sounds like every person's fantasy-mother as she speaks difficult truths to our childlike mind's. Presenting difficult information by understanding the communication problem the information presents is more effective than just doing a "core dump" into the public domain.
Please remember that as we go after the remaining 15% who want to believe in lies rather than believe that they could be responsible for their own realities.
by
Richard Volaar (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 30 diaries, 114 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 11:14:20 AM
I disagree. If you post easily debunked posits it discredits
any legitimacy the movement might have. I am officially on the fence regarding anything more than the administration being negligent on the warnings and then manipulating the aftermath to attack Iraq.
This kind of hurling crap against the wall and seeing what sticks will not help. Of that I assure you.
by
Steven Leser (179 articles, 29 quicklinks, 30 diaries, 1203 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 11:36:20 AM
Third NSA Source Confirms: Flight 93 Shot Down By Air Force
"I am officially on the fence regarding anything more than the administration being negligent."
Mr. Leser, please take the time to watch this brief youtube video and then ask yourself what was it that caused those huge explosions? Secondly, how did these men know that Building 7 was about to come down? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58h0LjdMry0&NR=1
What is most troubling and this has been validated, the Bush administration had been spying on the American people three months prior to 9/11. And now, after such a horrendous attack and if this administartion is so dam! worried about "keeping us safe" why are the borders of this country so porous? Why? Beacuse it was never about "terrorism." It's been one huge scam.
We needed a new Pearl Harbor in order to start the illegal war in both Afghanistan and Iraq. The Caspian Sea pipline and taking control of the flow of Middle Eastern oil as to then dictating policy in the region. 9/11 was the PNAC plan and a credulous America cowering in fear fell for the lies. Meanwhile our liberties are being taken away from us right under our noses. What a brilliant plan! Keep the sheeple fearful and then take away their freedoms i.e. habeas corpus.
America, we hardly new ya!
by
Munich (0 articles, 39 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 580 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 2:30:05 PM
...which is why the Catholic Church and other men in funny hats have been able to get huge swaths of people to believe incredibly stupid s*t for over 2,000 years.
So, by your standard, no one should ever present any information since the gold standard is, "easy debunkability."
Truth is controversial since, by its very nature, requires no defense from anyone at any time. It doesn't even require a democratic majority to believe in it in order for it to be what it is.
by
Richard Volaar (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 30 diaries, 114 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 3:34:44 PM
I can't believe it. Are you ignoring people like Mike Ruppert and Indira Singh? Besides the fact that the official story is full of holes, do you think that any kind of Boeing that isn't carrying bombs could take down one of those buildings? Measured in BTUs, there is not enough energy in the aircraft to knock down the buildings. Period. There has to be an additional energy source.
by
GitarChris (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 103 comments)
on Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 10:03:03 PM
"What folks in 911 Truth don't realize is that it's not an information issue that we are dealing with here...it's a Communication issue."
This is precisely what Jon Gold at 911blogger is attempting to convey. Now it's just getting this reticent and complict corporate media to do their dam job. This is what pisses me off most, knowing the facts are there to report, but this corporate media refuses to do so.
I would imagine this media would like keep all of the pertinent information from the credulous people who continue to believe the "official" story, the one we were spoon fed. Because hey, that is what they we were told and we're suppose to believe it. Why would they lie to us? Really! It's not as though they have an agenda? Or do they!
by
Munich (0 articles, 39 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 580 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 1:19:37 PM
This is like saying "The Democrats need to get one story straight or they lack credibility." There are all sorts of Democrats everywhere. They have different positions. While unity of purpose in general is required (would be nice;), lock step unity is not and will never occur.
The 911 Truth movement is no different. It's a label that you apply. It can refer to a wide variety of orgnaizations that post all sort of things but call it "911 Truth" and it's a convenient target. I'm not saying you're doing that intentionally but that's the outcome whenever it's done.
I want 911 Truth which means I want a real investigation not one coreographed by Phillip Zelikow and managed by two "don't rock the boat" politicians, one with a record of coverups (Hamilton-Irangate).
I don't just want it, I demand it (not that that matters;).
These investigations leave gaping holes. The 911 Commission in particular relied on a director, Zelikow, who had worked in the Bush administration before he assumed the role with the commission and was very close with Condi Rice, who is guilty of lying at least (to the nation-we'd never suspect plans would be used as weapons).
Here's a charge. It's got enough specifics to it to investigate. Why not have an investigation of these specifics and settle the issue?
by
Michael Collins (73 articles, 9 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 238 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 2:32:41 PM
First I had a gut feeling that something was seriously amiss with the "official story" -an informed gut feeling, to be sure, but my own eyes and basic horse sense told me that those towers couldn't have just fallen the way they did. Later I continued to find discrepancies and unanswered questions all pointing in that direction, and the invasion of Iraq confirmed my worst fears about the Neocons' motives.
Of course, I was not encumbered by delusions about what's been going on in this country either, so I didn't have any emotional block, except my outrage!
by
Bia Winter (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 70 comments)
on Monday, April 21, 2008 at 7:27:51 AM
buried in plain sight in this story is another topic no one has mentioned, which in and of itself is reason for suspicion and tantamount to an admission of guilt!
* the Bushitler regime found it necessary to have one (or more) of their own operatives ON the 9/11 commission (Zelikow?) - and to have review and editing power over what was said in the final report...
* the Bushitler regime delayed any investigation and then underfunded it AFTER stacking the panel with it's own co-conspirators... they first wanted Kissinger to head it!
* the Military Industrial Complex is behind the whole affair and their thinking patterns and tracks are evident all along the trail -- when a weapons platform like a jet or helicopter is in danger of being targeted they blow out "chaff" which is designed to confuse the targeting system of the opposing force... A lot of the stories blown out by the propaganda operation behind this are just that... chaff. Glittering debris meant to confuse the folks who are hot on their tail...
by
mrk * (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 278 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 1:14:11 PM
The official 9-11 story line, orchestrated by Zelikow (think shiny brown nose), has turned out to be a pure fairy tale, complete with ghosts and goblins.
Student hijackers on expired visas not on any manifest list, planes and dwindling fires bringing giant skyscrapers straight down into their own footprints at free fall, skip building 7, coming down all by itself in 6.5 seconds and not even getting hit, the stuff a teacher's pet might make up in 3rd grade class for the students to hoop and holler about.
Once the scientific facts are officially revealed to the nation (think controlled demolitions in all 3 buildings) their fairy tale will finally be evaporated in thin air.
by
Gene Cappa (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 62 comments)
on Sunday, April 20, 2008 at 2:57:24 PM
...Pilots for 911 Truth has refused to answer a simple question I put to them, long ago, as to the purpose of putting forward pictures of two different Flight Data Recorders (FDRs) and representing them BOTH as absolutely the same one used in Flight 77 (the one that hit the Pentagon). I have the videos ordered from "Pilots for 911 Truth" that demonstrably show two similar, but different, presentations of the FDR data, but with two different FDR models displayed.
Until they answer my question as to which FDR is which, I wouldn't trust a damn thing they say as a primary source.
So respect healthy skepticism in all these matters. Disinfo takes many forms and has many uses -- not the least of which is simply running out the clock on any investigation.
