Archive of reports inferring most of UA93 was buried

reply to post by Phil Jayhan


"In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."

But not 9/11, huh? You should read the indictment of Mossaoui (excuse the spelling I don't feel like looking it up again).

Originally posted by kiwasabi
How many people actually died on this flight? Aren't the numbers supposedly around 60 per flight? That just doesn't add up...these were cross-country trips on Boeing 757's which carry well over 200 people.

And how often are Boeing 757's actually used for cross-country flights? I thought 747's were mostly used.

I have properly classified the people on Flight 93 as still missing. We can neither confirm or deny their deaths.

Answer to 757 Q: 757's & 767's are the mainstay of American domestic flights and International flights.

Answer to # of passengers and crew: 37 passengers, 7 crew members.

Add to the list of Flight 93 mysteries the fact that the refueler for this flight, at Newark went to have his fuel slip signed and see if they wanted anymore fuel. He found neither the pilot nor the co-pilot in the cabin. Rather, an unknown co-pilot signed his fuel slip.

So we can see that 30 minutes before take off time, the Pilot and Co-pilot are apparently missing, and someone else is in their place.

Cheers-
Phil

reply to post by REMISNE


I have no problems with "facts", per se. However you assume any conclusions you draw from those facts, no matter how disparate or irrelevant or disassociated, automatically assume the mantel of "fact".

Its fine to say "here is my opinion and it is based on the observation of these facts" however, as you are want to do (and you are not alone) you like to pronounce everything as equally beyond challenge as the fact basis itself.

reply to post by hooper



I don't need to read the transcripts for his trial. I went to the FBI website,and if that's not good enough for you, then it would appear that you are one who argues for the sake of arguing rather then discovering truth.

He is NOT wanted by the FBI for 9/11, nor to my knowledge,
has any indictments for Bin ladens role in 9/11 ever been issued.

Cheers-
Phil

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
reply to post by hooper

 

I don't need to read the transcripts for his trial. I went to the FBI website,and if that's not good enough for you, then it would appear that you are one who argues for the sake of arguing rather then discovering truth.

He is NOT wanted by the FBI for 9/11, nor to my knowledge,
has any indictments for Bin ladens role in 9/11 ever been issued.

Cheers-
Phil

You should try and read my posts. I said the indictment, not the transcripts for the trial (he plead guilty and was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole).

So the FBI really doesn't think OBL had anything to do with 9/11? Are you serious? You say that like it was a reasonable assertion and then wonder why you can find no political traction for your "new investigation".

But now that you have made that affirmative statement, please back it up. Please show me something official from the FBI that is declarative rergarding OBL and 9/11.

reply to post by Phil Jayhan


Could you provide a source for this assertion, please?:

Add to the list of Flight 93 mysteries the fact that the refueler for this flight, at Newark went to have his fuel slip signed and see if they wanted anymore fuel. He found neither the pilot nor the co-pilot in the cabin. Rather, an unknown co-pilot signed his fuel slip.

I don't know about United Airline's procedures (next time I see a United pilot, I'll ask), but at my (Major US Airline) no flight crewmember is required to sign the fuel slip.

IF there is a Fuel Quantity guage placarded as 'INOP' then we are required to fill out the back, noting the gallons added, the FOB prior to the start of re-fueling, multiply and add, compare to the FOB entered into the Logbook by previous crew, at end of their leg, and verify a match. On the FMC-equipped airplanes, (like the B-757/767) we always enter fuel uploaded, and it calculates FOB as well. Another check.

WHEN we dispatch for extended overwater operations, THEN a maintanence person is required to sign the fuel slip, after he/she has checked the manual tank readings, using the so-called "fuel sticks" mounted below the tanks. (Magnets float, in the tank, the sticks drop when released, and are 'caught' by magnet, indication fluid level based on graduated markings).


Even back in 2001 we didn't sign the fuel slip. Perhaps UA was 'more old school' back then, but sure would be nice to see sources to be sure.

reply to post by Phil Jayhan


Puzzled, by the assertion that the FBI website does not want UBL for 9/11 attacks, because, from the site, as you posted:

MURDER OF U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; CONSPIRACY TO MURDER U.S. NATIONALS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES; ATTACK ON A FEDERAL FACILITY RESULTING IN DEATH

See the last line?

"ATTACK ON A FEDERAL FACILITY RESULTING IN DEATH"


Does that reference attacks on the two preceding charges?

The first two already mention "MURDER" specifically, of US Citizens, outside the United States.

Then, it mentions the "ATTACK" on a Federal Facility, 'resulting' in death.

I'm not an attorney, so can someone deem whether that last bit is connected to actions he is accused of that occured at Federal Facilities outside the US, but resulting in deaths of persons other than US Citizens?

OR, does that last sentence point toward the events of 9/11, specifically the Pentagon (and, possibly, the WTC buildings)?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Whoops, I may have done it again!

IF my question is answered in the affirmative, then it hopefully remains topical to UAL 93, since ALL four hijackings will no doubt be considered related, as components of the larger event.


[edit on 8 April 2010 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by weedwhacker


Original link:

Strange encounter at Newark Airport

On 9/11, Anthony F. Mazza was working at Newark Airport as a fueler. One of the planes he provided with fuel was United 93. In the cockpit of the plane, he met a person who was apparently neither Leroy Homer, jr, the co-pilot, nor Jason Dahl, the pilot. On Oct. 19, 2001, he was interviewed by the FBI. Here's the FBI report:

Mazza has worked as a fueler for Ogden Aviation Services at Newark International Airport since 1973. Mazza fueled United Airlines flight 93 on September 11, 2001 prior to its departure and crash in western Pennsylvania. Mazza stated that everything seemed normal on the flight including the amount of fuel that was pumped into flight 93's tank.

Mazza stated that prior to the passengers boarding flight 93, he had completed fueling the plane and proceeded to the cockpit to inform the co-pilot of the completed task. This has been the standard operating procedure for United flights out of Newark for many years. Mazza entered the cockpit where he handed the fueling sheet to a young Caucasian male, well groomed, brown hair and a white shirt, who was sitting in the co-pilot's seat. The male responded to Mazza by saying thank you and taking the paper from him. Mazza then departed flight 93 prior to the passengers boarding. Mazza stated that this was approximately 30 minutes prior to the scheduled departure time.

Mazza was interviewed by FAA employee John Patani shortly after the crash in western Pennsylvania. Mazza stated that he reported that there was nothing unusual on the day of the flight and that the plane had been fueled without incident.

On Friday, October 12, 2001 Mazza saw a memorial for the crew of flight 93 and saw pictures of the co-pilot of flight 93. The picture was the actual co-pilot of flight 93, who was Leroy Homer. Mazza stated that he was certain that the co-pilot he spoke with was not Mr. Homer.

www.911myths.com...

The FBI report ends here and leaves the reader to itself with the question: who was the "male" in the co-pilot's seat, if not Leroy Homer? Jason Dahl, the pilot? Given Mazza's report, this only "regular" explanation seems to be highly unlikely. After seeing the memorial, Mazza obviously took the initiative to contact the FBI. Had he identified Dahl - whose picture he certainly saw, too - as the "male", he would not have felt compelled to call the FBI.

When interviewing Mazza, the FBI surely asked him about this possibility and probably showed ihm photos of Dahl again. In any case, the absence of Dahl in the report makes clear that he was not the "male" either. And Dahl was 43, not really a young man like the "male" as described by Mazza.

Jere Longman ("Among the heroes") describes meticulously the United Airlines routine pre-flight procedures. Before the passengers board a plane, it has to be checked, of course. Basically the captain looks after the cockpit instruments along a pre-flight checklist while the first officer checks the plane outside (tires etc.). The fact that Mazza met neither Dahl nor Homer is even more disturbing than the presence of the "male".

This looks like another case of plane duplication. It is already known that according to United Airlines ACARS messages, Flight 93 took off at 8:28, other than the official take-off time 8:42. We have to accustom ourselves to two different "Flight 93" taking off from Newark Airport.


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

And we haven't even discussed the 2 separate boardings of Flight 93. Why did they board two groups of people, one at the terminal and one on the tarmac?


Cheers-
Phil

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
I have properly classified the people on Flight 93 as still missing. We can neither confirm or deny their deaths.

Answer to # of passengers and crew: 37 passengers, 7 crew members.

Phil, thanks for all the information. I cut down your response in order to stay focused.

Why were there so few passengers on a cross-country 757 that could hold over 200 passengers? The airline would most assuredly make no money on that trip.

Flight 93 vanished into a "soft earthen pit" in a Pennsylvania field

However...

When two other planes struck the steel structure in NYC they were consumed almost completely by the purported fire created by the jet fuel (even though most of it burned up on the outside of the towers) and yet, those two aircraft still left debris strewn all around.

But...

Flight 93 hit some soft dirt and vanished.

ATTACK ON A FEDERAL FACILITY RESULTING IN DEATH

That line per the FBI as well as my own personal expertise as a retired federal law enforcement officer is that the statement from the UBL wanted flyer relates directly to the American Embassy attack in Africa and does NOT have anything to do with the events on September 11, 2001. As there are no current indictments against him for that as there is no proof that he was involved.

Originally posted by mikelee

ATTACK ON A FEDERAL FACILITY RESULTING IN DEATH

That line per the FBI as well as my own personal expertise as a retired federal law enforcement officer is that the statement from the UBL wanted flyer relates directly to the American Embassy attack in Africa and does NOT have anything to do with the events on September 11, 2001. As there are no current indictments against him for that as there is no proof that he was involved.

What we really need is an independent translation of all released Osama Bin Laden footage to determine its legitimacy. Does he ever specifically say, "9/11", or, "World Trade Center"?

[edit on 8-4-2010 by kiwasabi]

Originally posted by kiwasabi

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
I have properly classified the people on Flight 93 as still missing. We can neither confirm or deny their deaths.

Answer to # of passengers and crew: 37 passengers, 7 crew members.

Phil, thanks for all the information. I cut down your response in order to stay focused.

Why were there so few passengers on a cross-country 757 that could hold over 200 passengers? The airline would most assuredly make no money on that trip.

Part of the reason is because the 4 planes needed only to carry the amount of people who were chosen to "disappear" and carried no real passengers. Only carefully prepared aliases.

Another reason no doubt, is that each of the flights was going to be "doubled up" before reaching their destination of Cleveland Airport.

For example, Flight 93 was boarded twice; Once at the airport terminal and again on the airport tarmac. This 2nd group of people boarding 93 on the tarmac are no doubt the passenger group from Dulles Flight 77. (Remember, Flight 77 didn't ever takeoff on 911 according the Bureau of Traffic Statistics. - BTS )

Does this help?

Cheers-
Phil

reply to post by Phil Jayhan

(Remember, Flight 77 didn't ever takeoff on 911 according the Bureau of Traffic Statistics. - BTS )

I believe I've already addressed this misunderstanding.

Did you notice that, according to BTS, American Airlines 11 also "didn't ever takeoff"?

To be clear, it is simply a case of HOW two different airlines chose to have the records shown, in the BTS data.

BOTH American flights don't show the ACARS data in BTS...

Yet, BOTH United flights do.

Two different companies, to different results, and not surprising at all. For people who have worked in the business, anyway.

I am afraid that there is much too much "guesswork", combined with a hint of innuendo, along with a certain lack of more thorough investigating, in order to learn how things actually work (or don't work) in real life airline operations.

A place to start would be to ask, over at American Airlines --- or specifically, their subsidiary Sabre, which is the compnay that provides their computer support, for reservations, crew scheduling, flight operations, etc.

Compare to the United Airlines in-house system, and you will see different modes of operations, in the specifics of data storage and dissemination.

SO....scratching the srface, then drawing a 'conclusion' is not going to be based on ALL the facts, in many cases.

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan

Originally posted by kiwasabi

Originally posted by Phil Jayhan
I have properly classified the people on Flight 93 as still missing. We can neither confirm or deny their deaths.

Answer to # of passengers and crew: 37 passengers, 7 crew members.

Phil, thanks for all the information. I cut down your response in order to stay focused.

Why were there so few passengers on a cross-country 757 that could hold over 200 passengers? The airline would most assuredly make no money on that trip.

Part of the reason is because the 4 planes needed only to carry the amount of people who were chosen to "disappear" and carried no real passengers. Only carefully prepared aliases.

Another reason no doubt, is that each of the flights was going to be "doubled up" before reaching their destination of Cleveland Airport.

For example, Flight 93 was boarded twice; Once at the airport terminal and again on the airport tarmac. This 2nd group of people boarding 93 on the tarmac are no doubt the passenger group from Dulles Flight 77. (Remember, Flight 77 didn't ever takeoff on 911 according the Bureau of Traffic Statistics. - BTS )

Does this help?

Cheers-
Phil

Did no passengers end up dying then? And what about a pilot?

reply to post by Phil Jayhan


Thanks for the link regarding the fueler, at Newark Airport, who serviced United 93 on September 11, 2001.

I recall I had heard of that tale, before. Again, it drops lots of innuendo, and considering the source (which I believe to be slightly biased in favor of "conspiracy") I think it fails to answer some specific questions.

If I had the opportunity ot interview Mr. Mazza, I'd ask him what TIME it was, when he delivered the fuel slip.

(I wish to also note, "Phil Jayhan", that in your initial statement regarding this incident, you said that the fuel slip was "signed for", and that is what piqued my interest, so I asked about it. Now, of course, the story is more in line with reality --- the "flight crew copy" -- of the three-to-four-page carbonless form -- fuel slip is taken to the cockpit, or delivered to some other Airline representative, depending on circumstances. So, no one was required, nor did they, "sign for it".)

Back to Mr. Mazza --- the time of his encounter with the stranger on the Flight Deck would be an important factoid in this. In those days, before security has become so tight, that could simply have been another United employee, perhaps a pilot who was either new to the Company, or was gong to be transitioning to the equipment type (the B-757) who was taking the opportunity to sit and become familiar with the cockpit. Many of us do that, prior to starting the actual training.

Mr. Mazza said he was young, and dress business attire? Sounds like a fairly junior pilot, about to non-rev somewhere. Another possibilty is, he was a maintenace technician, perhaps in Avionics. Many of them are dressed in what you'd call "business casual"...it's a plum job, in the maintenace department, because it's relatively "cleaner" in nature....


SO...my point is, we need more information and details, before we just draw some "conspiracy" conclusion here.

IF Mr. Mazza was there BEFORE the two pilots arrived (which is highly possible, for a First-Flight-of-the-Day like that, then it's not surprising he didn't actually meet the two pilots. I know this frompersonal experience, many many times, the airplane was fueled an hour or two before we shoed up, and fuel slip was on the Captain's control wheel clipboard. VERY common.....

I hope this additional information is useful.

reply to post by kiwasabi


As an investigator with very limited resources, no help and no budget, I can only go so far with any evidence or proofs I find. I believe all the passengers ended up in Cleveland. Of this I am fairly certain.

A lot of the passengers were part of the criminal plot of 9/11 and were never passengers in the sense we have come to think. There is a more thorough explanation of what happened to the passengers here. Some passengers apparently had died before 911 and were included in the lists. I can only believe they were friends of the network.

Still others purchased tickets as part of a "new identity" program, more than likely being sold for some very hefty cash sums. I have counted 1 billionaire and around 30 millionaires on the 4 flights, and think there is still another 30 to be sifted out. But I think it is safe to assume there was at least 40-45 millionaires on these 4 flights alone.

This is why there were so many celebrities on those flights, and also why even more celebrities supposedly "missed flight 93." Seth Macfarlane, maker of family guy and "Marky Mark" Wahlburg allegedly missed their flight on 93. And oddly enough, there seems to be a concentration of wealth on flight 93 which is even more than the other 3 flights, which might indicate that people paid more to be on that flight, because they would ride into the sunset as "heros."

While unconventional to many in 9/11, I go where the evidence leads me. And all the evidence suggests there was a massive new identity program being sold to people whereby they could get onto airplane, leave their old identity behind and start anew doing what they couldn't previously achieve or do in their old lives. And leave as heros. This would be one definition of a "carefully prepared alias."


Cheers-
Phil







[edit on 8-4-2010 by Phil Jayhan]

reply to post by Phil Jayhan


So Phil, empty planes hit mostly empty buildings? It does make sense due to the fact that they were obviously trying to minimize casualties (most obvious case is with the Pentagon hit).

But what about Fiduciary, who lost 76 employees in the World Trade Center. The CEO was at Warren Buffett's charity event at the Omaha, Nebraska Air Force Base, when 9/11 took place. This was the same base Bush was at later in the day. So obviously Fiduciary's CEO knew about 9/11...so she let 76 people die? Or was she just invited to the charity event to save her (without giving specifics), but they left her employees to rot?

My point is, it does seem that they let SOME people die; it only makes sense that they'd take out some enemies while they're at it.

reply to post by kiwasabi


I agree completely with you. Remember who had control of the WTC for years before 9/11. The New York Port Authority. They could control what was rented, to whom, etc..

There is no doubt that many of those who perished at the World Trade Center were actually chosen to die beforehand. One such example might be a black op which had come to an end, and possibly people needed to be forever silenced for what they took part in.

I do not buy into the notion for a second that hardly anyone died on 9/11 and will only go as far as prudence and common sense allow; Those who hold the idea that no planes hit the towers will also tell you nobody died at the WTC, it was all staged and fake. This is so unreasonable, it makes me wonder what their real motives and purpose is. As a group these people seem to find a good idea and take it so far beyond reason as to ruin the original premise or evidence, making it a laughingstock. I have heard them say not a single police officer or fireman died that day. And then go so far as to call every single one of them traitors. I honestly doubt that their motives are noble.

As a group these people do not bring any harm to 9/11, because most peoples intelligence is far beyond the level of ignorance needed to buy such malarkey. They only bring harm to their own selves,. And their own characters and reputations.

Having said that, I do believe the casualties on 9/11 to be greatly exaggerated. But it would take me a few million dollars and at least a dozen investigators working full time to even make a preliminary report on the numbers of people truly killed vs the inflated numbers.

Remember, it takes only a single person to inflate and exaggerate the numbers on 911. If we find even a single person who didn't die or we have a good premise to believe they didn't, then one can assume there will be many more. Here is a story of one passenger, from Flight 11, John J Wenckus, who appears to still be alive, under another identity.

Here is a second passenger I have no doubt didn't die on 9/11. Barbara Olson. Her marriage to Ted Olson, endures even a fiery death into the Pentagon. Talk about true love!!

Hope that helps--


Cheers-
phil

reply to post by Phil Jayhan


Now, i'd like to focus on this bit...is it from "911myths"? The link went to what looked like an FOIA from the FBI, or something...

It is already known that according to United Airlines ACARS messages, Flight 93 took off at 8:28, other than the official take-off time 8:42.

Here is a transcript I found, shows the Newark Local (Tower) issuing take off clearance at time 1241:49. (That is 0841:49 EDT)

www.gwu.edu...

BTS show the actual ACARS reported 'OUT' time of 1201 (0801). For the ACARS to report "OUT", ACARS must, of course, first be 'initialized' (preflight SOP). The, when all doors are closed, and all door lights extinguished, when the parking Brake is released, the ACARS notes that time, from its internal clock (which is receiving constant updates via VHF communication, on transceiver number 3, usually).

I did not find BTS ACARS 'OFF' time, but the ATC transcript should be sufficient to nail the time, yes?

To compare, on that morning, I used BTS to "snap-shot" what Continental flights were encountering, in terms of taxi delays, after push-back, prior to take off:

www.bts.gov...

(I chose Continental because it IS a hub, and they have several flights that departed around the same time, or before, as United 93).

"Average Taxi-Out" time = 34.43 minutes. That's an average, for CAL only. Average for "ALL" flights, 31.26 minutes.

Of course, that is only reflecting FIVE departing flights, since the attacks on the WTC had begun at 0846 EDT.

I looked at United 93 on the 10th, September:

Average Taxi-Out Time (minutes) -- 24.00

Average Scheduled Departure to Take-off (minutes) -- 21.00

www.bts.gov...

I cut out all the extra data, just to show that UAL scheduled for at least 21 minutes, in their planning, for flight 93 KEWR-KSFO. ALL airlines do this, based on best-guess estimates, and historical data, using various times of day.


Then, I looked at some specific OTHER flights (Continental Airlines) that morning, just to compare, and get an idea of how things were going at KEWR.

CAL 211, destination KIAH. ETD (gate push-back): 0800. Taxi time: :50

CAL 428, to KDEN. ETD: 0810. Taxi time: :52

CAL 132, to KOAK. ETD: 0815. Taxi time: :52


Based on this preliminary research, it is not unreasonable that United 93 encountered an unusuallylong taxi time, after push-back, that morning.

ANY event, as asserted, of a 'secondary' boarding AFTER gate departure is rather dubious, in my mind. It would involve co-ordination with Newark Ground Control (or the appropriate Ramp Control, depending. I am quite familiar with the layout at Newark, and the terminal that United operated(s) from).

Also, a set of mobile AirStairs wouldhave to be utilized, for any such endeavor. It is NOT something done spur-of-the-moment.

I hope this information from an experienced airline professional's perspective helps to add to the discussion.