Flight 93, the Movie, disinfo?

On Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday (January 30-February 1, 2006), A&E, the Arts and Entertainment Network will air a brand-new made-for-television movie entitled Flight 93
The website says it will air five times and gives other promo info:
www.aetv.com...

As many of you know, Flight 93 is the plane that went down in a field in Pennsylvania on 9/11/2001 rather than it targeted destination--thought to be the White House or US Capitol.
From the website

On September 11, 2001, United Airlines Flight 93, bound for San Francisco, was scheduled to depart Newark International at 8:01 a.m. But airport construction and heavy runway traffic forced a wait of 41 minutes.

The plane did not lift off until 8:42 a.m.

News accounts and experts credit the delay as the primary reason why Fight 93 was the only one of that day’s four deadly flights to fail its appalling mission.

By the time Flight 93 was airborne, the other hijacked jets in the tightly planned attacks had already taken off and were closing in on their targets.

*snip*
The Newark delay was critical. It put Flight 93 on an entirely different – and historic – course.

Once the four terrorists took over their plane, passengers and crew were able to phone friends, family and emergency officials to report the hijacking. During those calls, passengers learned about the horrific events in New York and in Washington. The news had already saturated the airwaves. It was clear that the attacks were coordinated and their plane was part of the plan. The realization motivated passengers and crew to band together and fight.

The courageous men and women aboard Flight 93 hatched a hasty, desperate plan to attack the terrorists and try to prevent them from hitting their selected target, probably the White House or the US Capitol.

*snip*
At 10:06, Flight 93 crashed in a field near a wooded area in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, in Somerset County, a scant 20 minutes by air from the White House. All 33 passengers and 7 crew members were killed. Tragically, the people on board had achieved their goal.

www.aetv.com...

I think it would be interesting if members of the ATS community who have the chance will watch this movie and discuss it in relation to what is known or remembered to have happened on that fateful day...and compare it to what this movie portrays.
Are we witnessing disinformation about 9/11???

[edit on 28-1-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

It is also being made into a "major motion picture", I saw the trailer for it last night at the movies.

The website is up, Flight 93 ; the movie.

I don't really like the idea of people making money off 9/11. :down:

-- Boat

[edit on 28-1-2006 by Boatphone]

Thank you for posting this!

If indeed there are questionable happenings around Flight 93 (and I remember that there were) and if I'm reading this movie promo correctly, it would appear, on the surface, to be an attempt concrete the 'official story'; an attempt to re-write history.

I will definitely watch it and hope others do as well.

Mmmmm... a piece of fiction, as the actual events on the aircraft could never be known. I expect it to be a bit of a tear-jerker flag waving story of everyday American heros battling evil hijackers, sacrificing themselves to protect the American way. Of course, I'm only speculating, as will this movie

I am a big fan of non-fiction and i presume this will be fiction. So i opted not to watch it.

I should watch it, though. It should be great entertainment.

It'll be interesting to see if they include the two military jets that were in the area when the flight crashed.

I posted this story over a year ago, I have know idea if it is true or not.
But here it is anyway.

Flight 93 Shot Down by the Happy Hooligans

Major Rick Gibney did as he was ordered and did nothing criminal. He was merely following orders,
They, the Happy Hooligans, a unit of 3 F-16 aircraft, were ordered to head toward Pennsylvania. At 0957 they spotted their target; After confirmation orders were received, A one Major Rick Gibney fired two sidewinder missiles at the aircraft and destroyed it in mid flight at precisely 0958;

---------------------------------------------

Rick Gibney - 119th Fighter Wing - Happy Hooligans

Rick Gibney, as identified on
The F-16 Vipers Pilots Association

F-16 Viper Association Pictures

[edit on 28/1/2006 by Sauron]

One thing that I have been wondering about is why all this stuff about 9/11 lately. It seems like im seeing more and more of it all the time from Tv to message boards that i visit. I hope nothing happens soon, since ive been reading a few things that might take place on this board. Im gonna check out this movie but I doubt it will be anything that good. More fiction then anything else..

I think the greatest area of research we are begged to make centers around Flight 93. So that's what I've been doing for quite some time now. I don't suspect I'll have anything new that you couldn't find at any other site looking into the 9/11 events, but at least it will be a compendium of various facts, issues, gaps, and anomalies surrounding this flight - here at ATS.

Long story short, my opinion is that the flight was shot down (which was the appropriate call to make). But then there were certain issues the government decided to lie about in order to have to not answer certain questions.

And that would be way wrong.

I've got a few more sources I'm reading right now, and then I'll start posting some stuff. Like I said, it's nothing new most likely, but it will be something here at ATS.

From the preview statements you posted, DTOM, I believe this will be disinfo. That's my personal opinion.

I have one question thou about this flight. If 911 was all a big plan and the towers were blown down by the government they why would they shoot down flight 93?

Originally posted by North Rider
I have one question thou about this flight. If 911 was all a big plan and the towers were blown down by the government they why would they shoot down flight 93?

Well, obviously I don't necessarily agree with all of that. So my statements stand alone.

BUT, if we were going to speculate and you knew that there were plans to attack the WTC towers, the Pentagon, and the White House - I'm betting the White House would be the one you'd protect, even if the others weren't.

Originally posted by North Rider
I have one question thou about this flight. If 911 was all a big plan and the towers were blown down by the government they why would they shoot down flight 93?

I don't believe in 9/11 conspiracies. But if I did, I'd say perhaps the story of the passengers taking over the plane was correct, so "they" would have wanted to shoot it down to prevent their "hijackers" from being recovered and the operation blown if the plane landed safely.

Originally posted by North Rider
I have one question thou about this flight. If 911 was all a big plan and the towers were blown down by the government they why would they shoot down flight 93?

A possibility:

The plan was for all 4 planes to go down, destroying any and all evidence of terrorists (or lack thereof) or first-hand accounts by survivors. The passengers' revolt was an unplanned eventuality. Perhaps 'they' (the real people behind 9/11) didn't want to take the chance on the passengers being successful and bringing one of the airplanes to a safe landing.

There would be too many possibilities for the real story (you know, the truth) to get out. Whoever was in that plane may have witnessed things that would discount the official story. Or there may have been some kind of evidence aboard the plane, either physical evidence or something the passengers knew, that would contradict the official story.

Whether it is intentional disinformation or not, I think it will be most definitely adhering to the (I believe) non-factual official story. Honestly, no big production company would risk releasing something that didn't adhere to the official story.

It's my belief that if it were a conspiracy, the only conspiracy part of the story is that the government allowed the attack to happen. So, yes, I do think the one probably intended for the White House was shot down.

But this movie is going to be a feel-good "heroes of 9/11" story when none of that probably really happened.

Having seen the movie I wasn't that impressed. While what was going on onboard the aircraft may have been pieced together, what took place on the ground was well documented. I had no problem with the portrayal of incidents that happened on the plane, I think that they could have gone into more detail about what happened on the ground. I took particular offense at the way that the Air Force officer in the White House situation room was portrayed.

As far as Flight 93 being shot down, I don't think it was. It would have been too hard to keep secret. I went on Google Earth and looked for the crash site. Believe it or not I was able to find it. It is alot smaller than I would have thought.


external image

mod edit to resize image

[edit on 10-2-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by JIMC5499


As far as Flight 93 being shot down, I don't think it was. It would have been too hard to keep secret. I went on Google Earth and looked for the crash site. Believe it or not I was able to find it. It is alot smaller than I would have thought.

I agree with you. If they had shot the plane down the aircraft would have been spread all over the place which was not the case.

Look at the 747 over Lockerbie (sp) it was blown up and the wreckage was spread out for miles, that alone shows the aircraft was not shot down.

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by JIMC5499


As far as Flight 93 being shot down, I don't think it was. It would have been too hard to keep secret. I went on Google Earth and looked for the crash site. Believe it or not I was able to find it. It is alot smaller than I would have thought.

I agree with you. If they had shot the plane down the aircraft would have been spread all over the place which was not the case.

Look at the 747 over Lockerbie (sp) it was blown up and the wreckage was spread out for miles, that alone shows the aircraft was not shot down.

You miight want to recheck your facts on the debris field, if a wide area of debris means it was shot down then get ready for a shock.

911research.wtc7.net...
According to the official story Flight 93 crashed after four passengers attacked the hijackers in an attempt to gain control of the airplane.

For a plane that flew into the ground, Flight 93 left a rather widespread debris field. Investigators found a second debris field three miles away from the main crash site at Indian Lake, and a third debris field in New Baltimore, eight miles away. 1 NTSB officials suggested that the debris at these distant locations blew there in the wind after the crash, but eyewitnesses at Indian Lake saw the debris falling out of the sky, like confetti. One of the engines was 600 feet from the main debris field by some accounts and a mile by others[quote/]

Originally posted by North Rider
I have one question thou about this flight. If 911 was all a big plan and the towers were blown down by the government they why would they shoot down flight 93?

One of the theories that was put forward was that all the planes were landed and replaced with other planes, and all the passengers from the four planes were put onto flight 93 and it was shot down to remove witnesses.

This theory sounds reasonable. How many of us would think anything if we were on a plane and forced to land at a military base due to a bomb theat and everyone from these jets were put on a safe plane. That might explain why all four jets had only a few passengers on board so that all of them could be loaded on to one plane.

Originally posted by goose
You miight want to recheck your facts on the debris field, if a wide area of debris means it was shot down then get ready for a shock.

911research.wtc7.net...
According to the official story Flight 93 crashed after four passengers attacked the hijackers in an attempt to gain control of the airplane.

For a plane that flew into the ground, Flight 93 left a rather widespread debris field. Investigators found a second debris field three miles away from the main crash site at Indian Lake, and a third debris field in New Baltimore, eight miles away. 1 NTSB officials suggested that the debris at these distant locations blew there in the wind after the crash, but eyewitnesses at Indian Lake saw the debris falling out of the sky, like confetti. One of the engines was 600 feet from the main debris field by some accounts and a mile by others

Actually the other debris fields support my statement that the aircraft wasn't shot down. In my opinion the aircraft crashed after its structure was overstressed. The only way that an F-16 is going to shootdown an airliner with only its cannon is to shoot out the engines. If that were the case I would expect the engines to still be attached to the aircraft. The statement that one engine was found a distance away from the aircraft tends to support the theory that the aircraft broke up during a fight for control of the plane.