Former George Bush Chief Economist Says 911 Was An Inside Job

a reply to: Informer1958

Your absolutely right, I watched the broadcast myself the morning of 911 and the Mayor said there was a bomb threat on flight 98 and it had landed in Cincinnati airport and was being taxi to a nearby hanger to unload all the passengers.

The Mayor said they had bomb sniffing dogs surrounding they plane as he was speaking.

Furthermore there was Airport authorities confirming the Mayor statements.

Now, for the rest of the story.

A Boeing 767 out of Boston made an emergency landing Tuesday at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport due to concerns that it may have a bomb aboard, said Mayor Michael R. White. White said the plane had been moved to a secure area of the airport, and was evacuated.

United identified the plane as Flight 93. The airline did not say how many people were aboard the flight.

The fact they reported the aircraft was a Boeing 767, should have set off the alarm bells because United 93 was a Boeing 757. Let's continue:

Later, we would learn that this 767 was Delta flight 1989. It had originated from the same Boston airport as United 93, but was cleared by inspectors after landing at Hopkins. It had not been hijacked, and there was no bomb. And United 93, by the way, was a 757.

Rumor Two: United 93 deboarded at NASA Glenn Research Center and its passengers were taken away in an unmarked shuttle.

Evidence For: Newspaper articles published after 9/11 suggest there were two planes, not one, that were forced to land in Cleveland. One was Delta 1989. The other is often referred to as "Flight X" but is assumed by many to be United 93.

The Web site 911review.org cites real articles from the Plain Dealer, Akron Beacon Journal and USA Today to establish these facts:

> A plane landed in Cleveland at 10:10 a.m.

> Delta 1989 landed here at 10:45 a.m., and its 69 passengers and nine crew members were loaded onto buses and taken to Federal Aviation Administration headquarters at Hopkins.

In other words, 9/1 conspiracy theorist confused Delta 1989, as United 93. Now, about that second plane.

> At 11:15 a.m., 200 passengers from the other plane were taken to NASA Glenn, whose employees had already evacuated, to be interviewed by FBI agents.

(While United 93 is known to have carried 37 passengers and seven crew members, conspiracy theorists are quick to point out that if the passengers and crew of all four flights that crashed on 9/11 had been consolidated at some secret location, the number would be right about 200.)

Bloggers claims that eyewitnesses saw civilians being loaded onto military bus ses at NASA Glenn. They were whisked away to some undisclosed location, never to be seen again.

Now, for the rest of the story about the passengers that 9/11 conspiracy theorist claimed were passengers of United 93.

What about the so-called Flight X?

"A KC-135 had to come back to the hangar," says Wessel, as if realizing for the first time that this aircraft may have caused some undue confusion. A team of scientists from the Johnson Space Center in Houston had flown to Cleveland on this KC-135 to conduct micro-gravity experiments. (Also known as "the vomit comet," KC-135's are used to simulate weightlessness. The plane soars to high altitudes, then falls back toward the ground, giving passengers a few seconds of zero-G experience. Scenes for the Tom Hanks movie Apollo 13 were filmed in one.)

The visiting scientists could not return to Houston as scheduled on 9/11 once the FAA ordered all planes to land. "After the facility closed, we had to take those scientists to a hotel." The scientists, dressed as civilians, were boarded onto shuttle buses.

In other words, 9/11 conspiracy theorist had confused scientist of a KC-135 as passengers of United 93.

a reply to: skyeagle409

I am calling your News Source a fallacy. And why am I saying it, is because you gave no sources, for your information.

In other words, 9/11 conspiracy theorist had confused scientist of a KC-135 as passengers of United 93.

The OS conspiracy theorist are the one's confused. Making up garbage posting fallacies, without posting their sources.

Here on ATS everyone wants to see sources from people who post such information.

With no credible sources, then this information that you just posted is not credible or believable.

I had to tell many OS conspiracy theorist to post credible sources or something to back up their claims.

a reply to: Informer1958

I am calling your News Source a fallacy.

That won't fly because you cannot change the facts of history. How about calling Delta Airlines and United Airlines because I am very sure they can confirm what I have posted about Delta 1989 and United 93.[

In fact, I am very sure that United Airlines will confirm that United 93 crashed near Shanksville.

United Airlines Confirms the Loss of United 93

Black Box from United 93 Found

Dispatcher honored for Flight 93 efforts

Friday, December 07, 2001
By Ernie Hoffman, Post-Gazette Staff Writer

The Westmoreland County 911 dispatcher who took a cell phone call from a frantic passenger aboard hijacked United Airlines Flight 93 says he was just doing his job when he tried to calm the man and obtain more information about what was happening aboard the jetliner.

old.post-gazette.com...


A NATION CHALLENGED: THE PENNSYLVANIA CRASH; 44 Victims Are Remembered, and Lauded

SHANKSVILLE, Pa., Sept. 17— The families of those who died aboard United Airlines Flight 93 gathered in the mountains of southwestern Pennsylvania today, in a place that is already being described as a sacred battleground in the war against terrorism.

They stood on a hillside and looked down at the crater that was carved in the grassy field when the plane carrying their loved ones crashed here last Tuesday morning, killing all 44 people on board.

The survivors sobbed, and prayed and held onto one another. They laid flowers, teddy bears, photographs and baseball caps atop hay bales piled on the hillside in memory of the dead.

www.nytimes.com...

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: HorusChrist

. . . oops W Bush ordered all the evidence destroyed, everything at ground zero. Coverups always prove guilt . . .

I would like to see the evidence. Please post that evidence here for all to see.

Like I said, evidence was destroyed, which proves coverup, which disproves your official theory.

originally posted by: HorusChrist

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: HorusChrist

he said it long ago in 2003 and him working for W shows he is justinto disinfo. He is also anti-union which means he wants us to stay divided and conquered. It is a union of states in the first place.

Please clarity what you mean by "... him working for W..."

Did you not read any of this thread? Not even the thread title?

Sounds like you knew Osama worked for W aka was in on the conspiracy, or else you never would have made that mistake. A Freudian slip if you will. Remember to stay on script.

a reply to: Informer1958

Liz Foreman, was the individual who ran the initial story about Flight 93 that day. She retracted it a short time later when she realized it was wrong. Only 911 conspiracy theorists who choose to remain uninformed about reality believe Flight 93 landed in Cleveland.

a reply to: HorusChrist

Like I said, evidence was destroyed, which proves coverup, which disproves your official theory.

Apparently, some of the WTC steel was used in the construcition of the USS New York.



We can now take a look here.

Why did NIST not Consider a “Controlled Demolition

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

www.webcitation.org...

There is no evidence that demo explosions occurred at ground zero.

a reply to: Informer1958

The OS conspiracy theorist are the one's confused. Making up garbage posting fallacies, without posting their sources.

With no credible sources, then this information that you just posted is not credible or believable.

Kind of like the kettle calling the pot.
After 14 years the conspiracy theorist have not been able to get anything to stick.
When you turn off your computer this conspiracy goes with it.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Again you present stale and out of date disinformation. The Mayor never changed his story, but Miller did. The Mayor was shown on German TV, years ago.

Miller changed his story very quickly, but by the time Christopher Bollyn interviewed him in 2012, the cat was out of the bag. Miller changed his story because the FBI "persuaded" him to be a team player.

Old and grossly inaccurate is all you have.

a reply to: samkent

Kind of like the kettle calling the pot.
After 14 years the conspiracy theorist have not been able to get anything to stick.
When you turn off your computer this conspiracy goes with it.

LOL, Troll much?

a reply to: skyeagle409

That won't fly because you cannot change the facts of history. How about calling Delta Airlines and United Airlines because I am very sure they can confirm what I have posted about Delta 1989 and United 93.[

In fact, I am very sure that United Airlines will confirm that United 93 crashed near Shanksville.

Your information won't fly without a source period.

You do know they are under gag orders to not discus anything related to 911.

a reply to: Salander

Again you present stale and out of date disinformation. The Mayor never changed his story,...

Let's take another look.

Mayor Ernie Stull

"My statements were taken completely out of context. Of course there was an airplane. It's just that there wasn't much left of it after the explosion. That's what I meant when I said 'no airplane'. I saw parts of the wreckage with my own eyes, even one of the engines. It was lying in the bushes."

www.spiegel.de...

In other words, the Mayor of Shanksville states that his comments were taken out of context and he also confirms that an aircraft did in fact, crash at the crash site of United 93.

...[but Miller did....

Coroner, Wally Miller's statements were also taken out of context and he slammed 9/11 conspiracy theorist on video for doing just that.

... The Mayor was shown on German TV, years ago.

German TV deliberately distorted the mayor's comments as well, as evident by the fact that Mayor Stull states that his comments were taken out of context.

Miller changed his story very quickly,...

Apparently, you missed the video where he slams 9/11 conspiracy theorist for taking his statements out of context. Let's take a look here.

a reply to: Informer1958

our information won't fly without a source period.

That won't fly. It is history already. We can start here.

Photo: Delta 1989 Lands at Cleveland Airport

Delta 1989

The Delta pilot denied any cockpit intrusion and stated that everyone on board was fine. It was later confirmed that the transmission had come from United Airlines Flight 93 which was in the same vicinity as Delta 1989, and would later crash into a field in Shanksville,

en.wikipedia.org...


Air Traffic Controllers Remember 9-11

O'BRIEN: Meanwhile, United Flight 93 appeared on radar screens here. The first call from the pilot, routine. Controllers remember him sounding cheerful. Then at 9:32, they heard the first of four troubling radio transmissions.

KETELL: The first transmission that sounded like struggle in the cockpit. It was pretty clear. And then we had a second transmission, also, that was a struggle in the cockpit, and you could hear the pilots -- what appeared to be the pilots yelling, "get out, get out." And a lot of other noise that appeared to be a struggle.

O'BRIEN: At first, they suspected it was Delta 1989, and their fears grew when it asked to land in Cleveland. As it turns out, the crew was ordered to land by the airline.

Before controllers could check, though, their radar screens pointed them in a different direction. It was United 93 that had abruptly descended and then climbed to 41,000 feet without approval.

transcripts.cnn.com...


KC-135 Confused as United 93

During a recent layover in Cleveland, Loose Change producer Jason Bermas questioned an airport employee about the events of 9/11. "She said, "Well, that one Delta flight was grounded here and another was grounded at NASA Glenn,'" Bermas recalls. "We told her we had heard the plane at NASA was United 93. But then she just went into the official version of events and said it was definitely not United 93. But there was another plane at NASA Glenn that day and no one has ever explained that. I'm hoping a news agency will go over and follow up on that."

256.com...

Bloggers claims that eyewitnesses saw civilians being loaded onto military bus ses at NASA Glenn. They were whisked away to some undisclosed location, never to be seen again.

Now, for the rest of the story.

So what about the so-called Flight X?

"A KC-135 had to come back to the hangar," says Wessel, as if realizing for the first time that this aircraft may have caused some undue confusion. A team of scientists from the Johnson Space Center in Houston had flown to Cleveland on this KC-135 to conduct micro-gravity experiments. (Also known as "the vomit comet," KC-135's are used to simulate weightlessness. The plane soars to high altitudes, then falls back toward the ground, giving passengers a few seconds of zero-G experience. Scenes for the Tom Hanks movie Apollo 13 were filmed in one.)

The visiting scientists could not return to Houston as scheduled on 9/11 once the FAA ordered all planes to land. "After the facility closed, we had to take those scientists to a hotel." The scientists, dressed as civilians, were boarded onto shuttle buses.

256.com...

www.911myths.com...

In other words, 9/11 conspiracy theorist had confused scientist from a KC-135 as passengers of United 93. Now, let's go here.

United 93 Disappears From Radar

"Once [93] disappeared from my scope, I asked another pilot if he could go down and take a look. He said he saw black smoke coming from the area where United 93 lost signal. I heard a confirmation of the crash [from another pilot] as well."

256.com...

Radar and pilot reports confirmed that United 93 crashed near Shanksville, which explains the following text from United Airlines.

Text: United Airlines Statement on Plane Crashes

Following is a statement issued by United Airlines on the crash of Flight 93 near Pittsburgh and Flight 175 in a location that was not immediately disclosed:
United Airlines has now confirmed that two of its aircraft have crashed.

— UA 93, a Boeing 757 aircraft, departed from Newark, N.J. at 8:01 a.m. local time, bound for San Francisco, with 38 passengers on board, two pilots, five flight attendants.

— UA 175, a Boeing 767 aircraft, departed from Boston at 7:58 a.m. local time, bound for Los Angeles, with 56 passengers on board, two pilots and seven flight attendants.

www.washingtonpost.com...

a reply to: skyeagle409

Wikipedia Displays Blatant Disinformation Once Again

Update - 04/13/09
Wikipedia editors have been informed of the below article. They have chosen to delete the disinformation posted, but also have chosen to delete any mention of the Flight Data Recorder and it's analysis. It appears Wiki editors are unable and/or unwilling to address the numerous conflicts within govt data provided by govt agencies unless of course through disinformation. Once exposed? Delete it all as if it doesn't exist. Click here for sources and discussion.

03/19/09 - Wikipedia, a primary on-line resource for diverse information, allows anyone to edit their 'wiki' pages. Many are aware through articles published by Reuters and other news organizations[1] that Wiki is a haven for intelligence agencies who also use it as a means of distributing false and misleading information. Recently it has come to our attention that an edit was made to the "9/11 Conspiracies" page containing factual errors and disinformation regarding Flight Data Recorder (FDR) analysis.

The original entry is as follows:

A June 2007 video, attributed to researcher Calum Douglas of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, presents an analysis of alleged Flight 77 black box data,[141] said to have been obtained from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) under a Freedom of Information Act petition. It states that the approach path and altitude on the Flight Path Animation differs from the mainstream account of the path of Flight 77.

The updated edit and disinformation is as follows:

However, this is likely due to the fact that the NTSB animation which has been released is a working copy, in which the post-added animation is incorrectly calibrated to end the animation at the moment the plane hits the Pentagon. Similarly, the last piece of data from the FDR for United Airlines Flight 93 ends 4 seconds before the plane crashed into the ground, when it was still at an altitude of 2,182 feet.[142] A paper written by NASA scientist Ryan Mackey on Flight 77's FDR data suggests that the last piece of data from the FDR was likely from approximately 4 seconds before the aircraft struck the Pentagon, explaining why the last piece of data on the FDR shows the plane at an altitude of 180 feet, even though the NTSB concluded that Flight 77 struck the Pentagon about 6 feet above the ground at a descent rate of about 39 feet per second.[143] In June 2007, the National Transportation Safety Board stated regarding the inconsistency between the FDR data and the reconstructed working animation that, "This working copy was never used for an official purpose; instead, the Safety Board is notifying all recipients of this animation that the record includes an erroneous annotation."[144]

The editor begins the wiki entry with pure speculation as defined by the words, "...this is likely due to...". The editor also fails to acknowledge that the NTSB has released more than an animation. The NTSB have also released CSV files of data and a NTSB Flight Path Study. Neither of which the NTSB contends are "working copies" and both show the aircraft at an altitude too high to hit the light poles and Pentagon. The Wiki editor also conveniently omits pertinent facts when quoting "an erroneous annotation". The reason the NTSB added the disclaimer of "working copy" to their animation is not due to "missing seconds" as deceptively intended by the Wiki editor, the disclaimer is due to an error in their clock annotation which was erroneously labeled as "EDT" instead of "UTC". The NTSB also states their goal is to send the "most complete, accurate information possible" when distributing data through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA). The NTSB does not account for, nor claim, any "missing seconds" from their data provided through the FOIA. Positional Data and plot as provided by the NTSB confirms the fact that there aren't any seconds missing from the NTSB plotted and provided data west of the Pentagon wall. Further inquiry with the Flight Data Recorder manufacturer as explained and recorded in Calum Douglas' presentation referenced above, is further confirmation that such FDR's cannot be missing more than 0.5 seconds. Also, in a poor attempt to set precedent, the anonymous Wiki editor references United 93 Flight Data Recorder for comparison to American 77 FDR explaining that UA93 data stops at 2,182 feet and therefore is also missing 4 seconds of data. However, according to the UA93 data provided by the NTSB, the vertical descent rate is exceeding 1,000 feet per second for the last second of data. If the data were missing 4 seconds as claimed by the anonymous Wiki editor, the data would have stopped near 6,000 feet, not 2,182. The wiki editor fails to understand that, when corrected for local barometric pressure, 2,182 is the ground elevation of the field in Shanksville where UA93 was alleged to have crashed. Anyone with Google Earth can cross check this for themselves. Although there are many other issues with UA93 events as provided by the NTSB FDR data, neither AA77 or UA93 data are "missing [any] seconds".

The editor goes on to source a third party internet forum post as a "paper" and attributes this to the NTSB by stating, "..even though the NTSB concluded that Flight 77 struck the Pentagon about 6 feet above the ground at a descent rate of about 39 feet per second...". The NTSB makes no such conclusion and is further proof the anonymous wiki editor prefers blatant disinformation over actual source. The third party forum post was written based on a hypothetical scenario in response to Pilots For 9/11 Truth Arlington Topography and Obstacles article, it is not consistent with any flight data whatsoever, and is certainly not from the NTSB as claimed by the anonymous wiki disinformation editor.

For further references on debunking the disinformation regarding FDR analysis and other topics, please visit pilotsfor911truth.org...

pilotsfor911truth.org...

Your sources are not to be trusted.

a reply to: Informer1958

Your sources are not to be trusted.

Now, for the rest of the story.

Flight AA77 on 9/11:
New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon

www.journalof911studies.com...

a reply to: skyeagle409

Your sources are "opinionated" and lacks any evidence.

a reply to: Informer1958

That won't fly. Now, let's take a look here.

Photo: American 77 Debris Distribution Proves SoC Flight Path

a reply to: skyeagle409

Your information wont fly. That photo doesn't prove anything.

a reply to: Informer1958

Of course the photo proves something. The directional distribution speaks for itself and also proves that the debris did not belong to a cruise missile. Do you know what made that punch out hole?

Now, let's take a look here. I might add that "Randy Kath informed Commission staff that Dick Sitzman, not with the FAA, was able to track AA77 from two different radar systems."

In other words, American 77 was tracked by radar to the Pentagon, which explains B-757 wreckage inside and outside the Pentagon.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Of course the photo proves something. The directional distribution speaks for itself and also proves that the debris did not belong to a cruise missile. Do you know what made that punch out hole?

That wont fly, the photo in question doesn't show anything but some garbage and nothing else.