Flight 93 was shot down over Pennsylvania, and this is the biggest 9/11 cover up of them all.

Flight 93 crashed over Pennsylvania, and this is the biggest 9/11 cover up of them all. This is an analysis of how Mineta alone could have changed everything with his testimony to cover up the fact that Flight 93 met US aircraft and was shot down. There was no stand down order, just an order to take down any non responding aircraft.

After the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush gave the military orders to intercept and shoot down any commercial airliners that refused instructions to turn away from Washington.
Later, in an interview on Meet the Press,VP Dick Cheney would state "I wholeheartedly concurred in the decision he made, that if the plane would not divert, if they wouldn't pay any attention to instructions to move away from the city, as a last resort our pilots were authorized to take them out."
This would mean that when Cheney was asked if the order still stands, it means that the order to take down those planes was in effect. However....

www.911dossier.co.uk...

Testimoy of Norman Mineta on about Cheney's actions is revealing. Mineta said he arrived at the Presidential Emergency Operating Center (PEOC) at 9:20 a.m. where he observed the Vice President talking to a young airman.

Mineta: There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out.The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?"

And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Well, at the time I didn't know what all that meant"

I cannot find anything about who the 'young man' is, so the only one who is giving a time is Mineta.

If times are consistent, this time table means he is referring to the Pentgon plane. But what if Mineta is changing the timeline? There is no way that anyone would second guess what Cheney said, because the plane was not shot down. This would mean that Cheney was enforcing the 'standdown' in his response.This is where the story ends and the government wants it that way. When in fact , what he was stating was that the order was in effect and the plane was to be shot down. It later was.

Why would he, Mineta, do this? To cover up the fact that we shot down a civilian aircraft filled with Americans. Look into Mineta's background and you will find he is the perfect candidate for something such as this. He is the only democrat in Bushs cabinet, and the only holdover.
He was also Army Intel, and a VP at Lockheed Martin. This was not your average guy, yet so much rides on his three simple lines of testimony.

Now, at 10:06:05 United Airlines Flight 93 crashes near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, in Somerset county, about 80 miles southeast of Pittsburgh. This is about 15 minutesoutside of DC. An eyewitness reports seeing a white plane resembling a fighter jet circling the site just after the crash.
The F-16's from Langley AFB arrived in Washington D.C at 9:49 a.m. The F-16 has a top speed of 1500 MPH.

After the Pentagon gets hit by American Airlines Flight 77 at 9:37, there is only one airliner left in the sky with its transponder signal off, and once again heading directly for Washington D.C., and that is United Airlines Flight 93.

Now, Flying at top speed these F-16’s could have intercepted United Airlines Flight 93 in under 8 minutes according to numerous reports. Why didn’t these F-16’s try to intercept United Airlines Flight 93? How could they not go after the last threat? The fact is that they did


It is also interesting to note that the F-16's were not carrying missles, although accounts vary, and were armed only with 20 mm cannons. This may lead to explain why debris was found over a very wide area, and that the engines suddenly stopped. The roar of the engines may have masked the 20mm of the F-16's, but would have shredded the engines. If they did not have live missles, there would be no other way and would leave a trail of debris.

and then there are these facts

archive.democrats.com...

* THE DEBRIS FIELD. The reclaimed mine where the plane crashed is composed of very soft soil, and searchers say much of the wreckage was found buried 20-25 feet below the large crater. But despite that, there was also widely scattered debris in the immediate vicinity and further afield. Considerable debris washed up more than two miles away at Indian Lake, and a canceled check and brokerage statement from the plane was found in a deep valley some eight miles away that week.


* THE ENGINE. While the FBI and other authorities have said the plane was mostly obliterated by the roughly 500 mph impact, they also said an engine - or at least a 1,000-pound piece of one - was found "a considerable distance" from the crater. Stuhl, the Shanksville mayor, said it was found in the woods just west of the crash. That information is intriguing to shoot-down theory proponents, since the heat-seeking, air-to-air Sidewinder missiles aboard an F-16 would likely target one of the Boeing 757's two large engines.



From 911review.org...

Shortly after 911, a flight controller in New Hampshire ignores a ban on air traffic controllers speaking to the media, and it is reported he claims "that an F-16 fighter closely pursued United Airlines Flight 93... the F-16 made 360-degree turns to remain close to the commercial jet, the controller said. 'He must've seen the whole thing,' the controller said of the F-16 pilot's view of Flight 93's crash."

The media then pumps up the country with the story of the passengers taking the cockpit. I am not stating that this did not happen, but the account may vary. It also made for a great media release, so everyone will remember 'lets roll' and not the mystery white plane.

I think it is a pretty good idea of how they could have covered up the intentional shooting and downing of flight 93, and it all revolves around the testimony of one man. There was no stand down, but how else can you sway the public opinion when you want everyone to believe it? You create one conspiracy to hide another.

Mod fix - ex tags

[edit on 23/3/2006 by Umbrax]

Great post one not nearly covered enough IMO

I dont know if many people on ATS will be receptive to this theory since it could clash with ones many hold so dear. Im mean if the Goverment planned all of 9-11 why the heck would the want to shot down on of their own planes and then cover it up.

I dont think its a coincidence that flight 93 just happen to "crash" in a empty field. There was more then enough time to intercept the flight and the order was given. This is also after they figured out what was going on which is important and they still had enough time to intercept.

I can understand why they would shoot it down but could you imagine the backlash if the came out and said, the lawsuits etc.. It would have been unprecedented in US history. This would not have been a accident it would have been the clear choice to kill americans.

Better to make the families think their loved ones died as heros rather then acceptable losses.

i like it, way much.....
they definately wasted one of their own comercials.
And it would look bad to say so in the media, don't you think.

but this scenario is only really plausable in the event that certain U.S bigwigs weren't behind the attack to begin with.
in fact you could probably use it as evidence that it was a serious terrorist attack and not a 'false flag' attack to condemn Afganistan and Iraq.

What i think makes it believable though, is that if this was 'false flag' attack
the Airforce has certainly shown no knowledge of it. but that isn't uncommon, is it?

If 911 was an inside job, then why did they shoot down flight 93? Was it part of the occultic sacrifice?

did all the people that boarded that plane actually die on it?

who shot it down?

why was it shot down where it crashed?

Agreed. Great post. An even that certainly needs more investigation on ATS.

You have voted esdad71 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Originally posted by denythestatusquo


why was it shot down where it crashed?

I think if any fighter pilot was given a order to shoot down a comerical airliner I would think he would also be ordered to try to shoot it down over the most unpopulated area he could find.

Look where this thing crashed


You couldnt ask for a better spot to down it.

[edit on 23-3-2006 by ShadowXIX]

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

Originally posted by denythestatusquo


why was it shot down where it crashed?

I think if any fighter pilot was given a order to shoot down a comerical airliner I would think he would also be ordered to try to shoot it down over the most unpopulated area he could find.

Look where this thing crashed


You couldnt ask for a better spot to down it.

[edit on 23-3-2006 by ShadowXIX]

Okay that is part of it, but what about the occultic side of it?

This is further proof that 9/11 was not an inside job, and that is why it took so long to allow myself to post this. The order was given, it was recieved and it was executed. This is all put in motion however by the testimony of one man, and one man alone.

This is how a conspiracy is created, there is Cheney, the mystery guy and the man giving testimony. The only other people who would know it was shot down, would be the pilot/s. I am sure that there is a document signed by them somewhere we could never find making sure they never talk just like UFO's. That is 3people, and three people alone who could know what really happened. That is how you contain something. That is a conspiracy.






note - The passengers of Flight 93 were heroes, and I in no way want this post to convey otherwise, it was jsut too late.



[edit on 23-3-2006 by esdad71]

Another good point of this Conspiracy esdad71 This would not require hundreds of people to be in on it. The minimum the people that ordered it and the pilots that carried it out. The less people in on a secret the more realistic the chances of keeping it a secret.

Why keep it quite? surely this would put to rest som eof the conspiracy theories if the government admitted to shooting down flight 93? on the face of it it may look a bit calous but even the thickest of people would understand the need to shoot it down and it being for the better.

Doesnt make sense either way you look at it, although credit to you for a good post

Originally posted by Ernold Same
Why keep it quite? surely this would put to rest som eof the conspiracy theories if the government admitted to shooting down flight 93? on the face of it it may look a bit calous but even the thickest of people would understand the need to shoot it down and it being for the better.

Doesnt make sense either way you look at it, although credit to you for a good post

Do you really think the government gives a rats *** about the conspiracy theories that are being bantied about? The majority of people in the world (a large majority) believe the "official" version of the tragedy so they aren't going to worry about the few that believe the conspiracies.

Saying that, there would be a huge outcry if the public knew that the flight was shot down by the US military. Just imagine if you had family on that flight and found out it was show down. You would always blame the government for your loss and would always wonder if it was necessary.

I have been working on an article on flight 93 for about 3 months now (having some concentration problems). Though my theory varies from yours, we agree on one thing...

the government lied about what happened to Flight 93.

I believe Flight 93 is possibly the single most significant event in all that transpired on 9/11 in which there is a major cover-up by the U.S. government.

Great work on the write up...eventually I'll get mine up as an alternative theory.

You have voted esdad71 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

A majority of people do not even remember there was another flight... Yet it's the only likely conspiracy theory I can allow myself to believe.

I'll bite on this one. If the kid kept saying 30 miles out....20 miles out...10 miles out....you get the point, what was he refering to if he was talking about flight 93? Shanksville, PA is not 10 miles out of any major city....maybe Sommerset, PA which is about as big as 1/10th of Pittsburgh. Even Pittsburgh is 80 miles from Shanksville. So, in conclusion, your theory is a good one but the testimony of the X miles out, really puts a negative on this theory in my opinion.

BTW, I do believe flight 93 was shot down. I just don't think that testimony is any smoking gun.

I agree, Griff. I don't think that testimony has any merit to the issues of what happened to Flight 93. In fact, it's conveniently very distracting.

Nice to see you again Vallhal. Haven't seen you in a while. I'm very interested in your paper when you get done with it. Can you give us a hint about your theory? Or would that spoil things?

It would...pffft. And also I don't want to distract from esdad's work here. I'm very very happy to see a full-blown look at Flight 93 here at ATS. It's one of the more important areas to analyze, and one of the least analyzed for that day's events (as far ATS goes).

It is also very confusing when one assertation says it was 20mm rounds that had to shoot it down, as this thread seems to point out.

But then you have other serious conspiracies that say it was heat seeking missle (which I think Cheney accidentally said was hit by a missle- oops)
in regards to the engine being shredded

I was trying to show that 3 lines of testimony, about a conversation between Cheney and 'a young man", overheard by Mineta, have kept the story and investigation of Flight 93 quiet. There is alot more out there, but no one is looking. They are too busy arguing over the stand down order or WTC 7.

Yes, the distance that Flight 93 was from DC was about 80 miles, but if you change miles to minutes, it fits perfectly. Flight 93 was almost 10 minutes out based on airspeed. So, Did Mineta hear it wrong, or did he change that other simple fact?

Changing this puts the blame on Cheney and the stand down order and leads again to empty conspiracy.

Flight 93 case is at least strange. Why there where no parts, debris typical to that type of crash sites ? All we can se is just a hole in the ground. What happend ? The whole plane just vaporised ? The speed of the plane was so big that there where no parts of it after crash ?
Was this plane shot down ? If so then where are parts that should fall over big area over Pensylvania ?

In this link
aviation-safety.net...
you can find photos from crash sites etc. and it's obvious to me that there should be some parts of flight 93 on crash site...

Strangly there is no photo from flight 93 crash on this site. Why ? Maybe because it didn't crashed ?