9/11 - Airport Security, Hijackers and a few anomalies that still pose questions?

So we are to believe that 19 'hijackers' armed with 19 sets of 'utility knives' got them all past security, in their hand luggage with no questions asked?

Initially it was said they were 'box cutters' and later changed to 'utility knives' which meant that the airport was able to avoid liability. Apparently they were allowed to bring on utility knives, with a blade of up to 4 inches long onto a plane.

Does anyone else find it odd that airport security did not question the fact that 19 different people supposedly had 19 sets of blades that day, and none turned up at any crash sites?

Now we all know that plane cockpits are locked and not easy to break into, and the staff onboard the planes would have had security codes to alert the pilots if a hijack was taking place.

How is it feasible that all 4 cockpits were breached so easily?

If pilots were murdered there would be blood all over the controls, this would have made it very difficult to use the controls with blood everywhere, and they had a difficult enough task pulling off what they did with their very little experience as it was, again, does anyone else find this strange?

Why was there only airport security footage from one of the airports (Flight 77 - Dulles Airport )?

Why were 3 flights seen on radar after they supposedly crashed?

Why was flight 93 reported to have landed at Cleveland airport?




One more thing, slightly unrelated to 'hijackers' but does anyone know if there is any Naudet Brother's footage that exists prior to the first famous clip of them with firemen as the 1st plane hit?

Surely if they were making a documentary there would be some pre-footage, and they would not have just started filming in the moment before the 1st plane hit, that would just be too much of a coincidence imo.

reply to post by kidtwist


Each of your groundbreaking "questions" have been widely discussed in other threads. In my opinion, these are dead issues. Already debunked numerous times.

However there are some people still buying into them. May I suggest using the search feature of ATS?

Originally posted by BeliefInReality
reply to post by kidtwist

 

Each of your groundbreaking "questions" have been widely discussed in other threads. In my opinion, these are dead issues. Already debunked numerous times.

However there are some people still buying into them. May I suggest using the search feature of ATS?

There's nothing groundbreaking about 9/11 so no questions about it will ever be so.

I have searched for some things and haven't found them, and there is nothing wrong with bringing a few specific questions together in one thread. Some of these questions are most likely burried in old threads, and could also do with some fresh perspectives from new members, so I started a thread to get some fresh banter going.

If you have nothing to add then you are free to exclude yourself from commenting.

If you feel you can locate every single one of the questions posed then by all means link to them.

reply to post by kidtwist


I can't fathom this not being a concerted effort led by the nation of Saudi Arabia. Put it on a bastard son, why don't 'ya?

Vikings assembled themselves from many nation states too?

15 Saudis assembled to do harm, under the protection of US Gov.

handy facts

reply to post by kidtwist


You answered your own "question" about knives, back before September 2001.....yes, the rules allowed up to a 4-inch blade. And, a "boxcutter" IS also referred to as a "utility knife". There are some variations in design.....for instance, there are the smaller-sized boxcutters with snap-off blades.....easily sent through the X-Ray machines, and though to pose no harm....(folding pocket knives were allowed, too. In First Class, the cutlery often included a serrated-blade steak knife).

Other "cheap" boxcutter designs use a single-edged razor blade, that is inserted into the handle, and retracts. Then, the "utility knife", which is a more robust handle, and a trapezoid-shaped razor-edged blade, also retractable....the blade that fits this sort of knife is slightly longer than a single-edged blade....Here, I just measured the one in my own toolkit...the blade is 2 & 3/8 inches long. Just Internet search for photo examples.

How is it feasible that all 4 cockpits were breached so easily?

Because there was no concern, at the time, for a violent and brutal attack of that sort, and an intrusion. Historically, the patterns of previous hijackings didnot include such tactics. It was therefore easy for each crew to be taken by surprise.

If pilots were murdered there would be blood all over the controls....

Not if their throats were slit, as they sat in the seats.....cut an artery in the neck, the blood flows down, and a person is incapacitated very quickly.

.... this would have made it very difficult to use the controls with blood everywhere....

No, it would not....argument from ignorance.

..... and they had a difficult enough task pulling off what they did with their very little experience as it was....

They had enough experience.

Why was there only airport security footage from one of the airports (Flight 77 - Dulles Airport )?

Because, this is a false statement.

Why were 3 flights seen on radar after they supposedly crashed?

This is also false.....these sorts of "claims" are unsubstantiated, but are made on various "9/11 conspiracy" websites, and in places like that they go unchallenged....so, the lies continue, and then others come along, and just believe them, without verifying the facts.

Why was flight 93 reported to have landed at Cleveland airport?

The confusion stemmed from an off-the-cuff remark by the Mayor of Cleveland.....he was incorrect in the turmoil of events, at that time.

Your little 15-second YouTube video is wrong....terribly wrong. The flight that was briefly mistaken (confused by the Mayor) as United 93 was actually Delta 1989.

Originally posted by PluPerfect
reply to post by kidtwist

 

You answered your own "question" about knives, back before September 2001.....yes, the rules allowed up to a 4-inch blade. And, a "boxcutter" IS also referred to as a "utility knife". There are some variations in design.....for instance, there are the smaller-sized boxcutters with snap-off blades.....easily sent through the X-Ray machines, and though to pose no harm....(folding pocket knives were allowed, too. In First Class, the cutlery often included a serrated-blade steak knife).

Other "cheap" boxcutter designs use a single-edged razor blade, that is inserted into the handle, and retracts. Then, the "utility knife", which is a more robust handle, and a trapezoid-shaped razor-edged blade, also retractable....the blade that fits this sort of knife is slightly longer than a single-edged blade....Here, I just measured the one in my own toolkit...the blade is 2 & 3/8 inches long. Just Internet search for photo examples.

I'm fully aware of what a utility knife is, I own one! And it's the airport security's job to notice anything strange, and these things would have shown up on body scanners, or x-ray scanners. To see a small group of people together, boarding the same flight, all with similar knives should have set alarm bells ringing.

As for serrated knives, they'd have to gain access to them, and in a struggle, one would be quite useless. If a large group of people thought their lives were in danger I'm sure they could have disarmed a small amount of people with relatively small knives.

How is it feasible that all 4 cockpits were breached so easily?

Because there was no concern, at the time, for a violent and brutal attack of that sort, and an intrusion. Historically, the patterns of previous hijackings didnot include such tactics. It was therefore easy for each crew to be taken by surprise.

There was a protocol in place on all planes, and breaching the pilots cabin would not have been an easy task, I've done some work inside planes before, and know what the set up is like. Hijackings had occured prior to 9/11, and hence why there was a protocol in place.

If a cockpit was breached no pilot would allow their plane to be hijacked without a serious struggle, unless the perps had a gun. They certainly would have attempted some hand to hand combat, and if they managed to kill both pilots, which I highly doubt, then blood on controls would have been a hazard.

Besides, some would have known that 'hijackings' were taking place and would have had foreknowledge to prevent it.

If pilots were murdered there would be blood all over the controls....

Not if their throats were slit, as they sat in the seats.....cut an artery in the neck, the blood flows down, and a person is incapacitated very quickly.

Those utility knives are designed for throat slitting, The blunt very easily and they would not have been able to creep up on both pilots in each cabin without being noticed. It would have been a tremendous struggle for them to pull it off, just would not happen.

.... this would have made it very difficult to use the controls with blood everywhere....

No, it would not....argument from ignorance.

Well you're entitled to your opinion, but I personally think it would have made it difficult to operate the controls with sticky blood over them.

..... and they had a difficult enough task pulling off what they did with their very little experience as it was....

They had enough experience.

Care to elaborate how these amateurs had enough experience? It has been proven in the past that were were not competent enough to fly the 'planes' in the manner they were, and saying they 'had enough experience' proves nothing.

Originally posted by kidtwist
There was a protocol in place on all planes, and breaching the pilots cabin would not have been an easy task, I've done some work inside planes before, and know what the set up is like. Hijackings had occured prior to 9/11, and hence why there was a protocol in place.

If a cockpit was breached no pilot would allow their plane to be hijacked without a serious struggle, unless the perps had a gun. They certainly would have attempted some hand to hand combat, and if they managed to kill both pilots, which I highly doubt, then blood on controls would have been a hazard.

Tell us kidtwist, what is the 'set up like' in a plane before 911? I very much doubt you actually know what you are talking about here at all, as the history of plane hijackings is easy to research.

How can you say that no pilot would allow their plane to be hijacked, when this is exactly what has happened innumerable times before 911. All it takes is a weapon and a claim of a bomb and pilots would of course hand over the controls. Your naked assertions don't change anything about the reality of that day, and they don't become truth just because you state them.

reply to post by PluPerfect

Why was there only airport security footage from one of the airports (Flight 77 - Dulles Airport )?

Because, this is a false statement.

Why is this a false statement? You need to provide a reason as to why you think that! There are no other airport footage as far as I am aware, a bit like the pentagon footage, a bit thin on the ground! Please do post the other 3 sets of airport security footage to back up your claim.

Why were 3 flights seen on radar after they supposedly crashed?

This is also false.....these sorts of "claims" are unsubstantiated, but are made on various "9/11 conspiracy" websites, and in places like that they go unchallenged....so, the lies continue, and then others come along, and just believe them, without verifying the facts.

So again, in your opinion you think this is false, I take it you have not heard all the military/Air Traffic control audio recordings from that day, and they clearly state that 3 of the planes re-appeared on radar after they were supposed to have crashed. If you can post ATC audio that says otherwise please feel free to do so.

you seem to be making sweeping statements with zero evidence to back up your opinions, so to give you opinions more credibility, it would be useful for you to attempt to give more information and post any evidence where relevant, because you seem to be showing none, and you need to do so to be taken seriously.

Why was flight 93 reported to have landed at Cleveland airport?

The confusion stemmed from an off-the-cuff remark by the Mayor of Cleveland.....he was incorrect in the turmoil of events, at that time.

He was quite clear, I don't think people make mistakes like that, seems like there were a lot of 'mistakes' and retractions that day.

Your little 15-second YouTube video is wrong....terribly wrong. The flight that was briefly mistaken (confused by the Mayor) as United 93 was actually Delta 1989.

I knew you'd refute this as well, looks like we have another forum member who denies everything but produces nothing to refute real evidence! The mayor was correct, and the ATC (Air Traffic Control) were correct, how could they both be wrong about something that important?


Do you have anything to say about the Naudet Brothers video 'PluPerfect'?! You seem to have ignored that bit, maybe that is a tricky subject and you did not want to elaborate! Where is the Naudet pre 1st plane crash footage, and I don't just mean the bit where we see them doing their inspection in the street before they look up, I mean even before that, surely they were rolling the film before that moment?!

reply to post by kidtwist


You say you've "done some work" on airplanes? In what capacity?

I ask because, you see, I am a retired pilot. I think my experience level plays a part in how much I understand airline operations, and the arrangements and layouts of the airplanes, both in the cabin and on the Flight Deck (or cockpit).

And it's the airport security's job to notice anything strange, and these things would have shown up on body scanners, or x-ray scanners.

There were no body scanners in 2001!

And, as already pointed out, small-bladed knives were perfectly acceptable, under the rules in existence then.

To see a small group of people together, boarding the same flight, all with similar knives should have set alarm bells ringing.

You think that all from each group, per airplane, were stupid enough to go through security all together?!?

You don't think that maybe they were smart enough to go through different lines, at different times?

And, by the way.....on each airplane, only two would each need a knife.....two pilots, two knives, two criminals that do the job of storming in, during a moment of opportunity.

As for serrated knives, they'd have to gain access to them, and in a struggle, one would be quite useless.

On each flight two hijackers were in First Class.

If a large group of people thought their lives were in danger I'm sure they could have disarmed a small amount of people with relatively small knives.

Oh, I see .... you seem to have the mistaken belief that the passengers would have "risen up", Bruce Willis-style, and been "heroes".....that only happened on United 93, and only because it was delayed on the ground in Newark, and thus the news of the other three could reach the passengers, and they learned that theirs was not a "normal" hijacking.

You mentioned the hijacking "protocol".....keep that in mind. Oh, and it was known within the industry as the "Common Strategy" in dealing with hijacking situations. Refresher courses were mandatory once per year, for all crewmembers and others involved in Flight Operations.

The "Common Strategy" never involved a scenario where the first clue of a hijacking in progress was a vicious attack on the pilots......after a sudden breach of the cockpit. The consensus of the "typical" hijacking scenario was NOT to presume it would be a suicide mission....in fact, one part of the Strategy was to play on the hijackers' fears of dying, in order to give them the impression that getting safely on the ground was priority one....because then, the situation could be better managed by law enforcement authorities.

There was a protocol in place on all planes, and breaching the pilots cabin would not have been an easy task, I've done some work inside planes before, and know what the set up is like.

Why would it "not have been an easy task" to storm into the cockpit? Don't you recall flying back before 9/11? It was quite typical for the door to be left open, as the Flight Attendants brought food or beverages up to the pilots. I had personally witnessed this occurring countless times.....even saw it happen post 9/11, on an airline in Europe! I was appalled at the lackadaisical disregard.

And, I don't know what you mean about the "set up"....if you mean the "floor plan" of the cockpit? There is plenty of room on a Boeing 757 and 767 for two people to stand directly behind the seated pilots...pilots who by the way have seatbelts on, and are constrained in their movements because of seat position.

From entry at the door, to grabbing a guy's head and slashing throat? About one second.

If a cockpit was breached no pilot would allow their plane to be hijacked without a serious struggle, unless the perps had a gun.

See above.

One second to react. When you're essentially immobile, and attacked from behind.

They certainly would have attempted some hand to hand combat, and if they managed to kill both pilots, which I highly doubt, then blood on controls would have been a hazard.

See above.

And, no, "blood on the controls" is not a "hazard".....

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by kidtwist
There was a protocol in place on all planes, and breaching the pilots cabin would not have been an easy task, I've done some work inside planes before, and know what the set up is like. Hijackings had occured prior to 9/11, and hence why there was a protocol in place.

If a cockpit was breached no pilot would allow their plane to be hijacked without a serious struggle, unless the perps had a gun. They certainly would have attempted some hand to hand combat, and if they managed to kill both pilots, which I highly doubt, then blood on controls would have been a hazard.

Tell us kidtwist, what is the 'set up like' in a plane before 911? I very much doubt you actually know what you are talking about here at all, as the history of plane hijackings is easy to research.

How can you say that no pilot would allow their plane to be hijacked, when this is exactly what has happened innumerable times before 911. All it takes is a weapon and a claim of a bomb and pilots would of course hand over the controls. Your naked assertions don't change anything about the reality of that day, and they don't become truth just because you state them.

No pilot would allow his plane to be hijacked if they were just brandishing pen knives! I'm not talking about guns or bombs here and neither is the OS.

reply to post by kidtwist


Every post you make, you just reinforce the fact that you really don't know what you are talking about. Prior to 9/11, airline protocols called on flight crews to cooperate with hijackers, in the hopes of getting the plane onto a runway somewhere, where crashing was no longer a likely outcome. Your idea that a flight crew engage in hand to hand combat in the cockpit, prior to 9/11, is stupid.

Originally posted by PluPerfect
reply to post by kidtwist

 

You say you've "done some work" on airplanes? In what capacity?

I ask because, you see, I am a retired pilot. I think my experience level plays a part in how much I understand airline operations, and the arrangements and layouts of the airplanes, both in the cabin and on the Flight Deck (or cockpit).

Oh, that old story eh, retired pilot! Don't talk crap, I can tell from your responses you have zero experience with planes!

And it's the airport security's job to notice anything strange, and these things would have shown up on body scanners, or x-ray scanners.

There were no body scanners in 2001!


I meant metal detecting scanners, and x-ray was available for bags.. Here' you can see 'them' having their bodies scanned with metal detectors...

And, as already pointed out, small-bladed knives were perfectly acceptable, under the rules in existence then.
You think that all from each group, per airplane, were stupid enough to go through security all together?!?

You don't think that maybe they were smart enough to go through different lines, at different times?

And, by the way.....on each airplane, only two would each need a knife.....two pilots, two knives, two criminals that do the job of storming in, during a moment of opportunity.

You obviously know very little about 9/11 and are just guessing your opinions.. See video above to see 'them' being checked together, can't say for the other 3 videos because I'm still waiting for your magical evidence of the other 3 sets of hijacker security videos.

No, 2 small blades are not enough to overpower all staff, all passengers and 2 pilots! It's just not believable.

As for serrated knives, they'd have to gain access to them, and in a struggle, one would be quite useless.

On each flight two hijackers were in First Class.

First class or not, serrated knives are not great weapons! A fork would be more effective!

Originally posted by kidtwist
Oh, that old story eh, retired pilot! Don't talk crap, I can tell from your responses you have zero experience with planes!

How old are you? You post a bunch of falsehoods with no factual backing, you are told they are definitely wrong and asked intelligent questions, and you respond with attacks and insults. If you're an adult you have a lot to learn about conversing with people.

No, 2 small blades are not enough to overpower all staff, all passengers and 2 pilots! It's just not believable.
...
First class or not, serrated knives are not great weapons! A fork would be more effective!

You heard it here first folks, forks are better than knives. Nobody would use a knife as a weapon when they could use a fork, and kidtwist is definitely not just nay-saying everything he hears because he has no intelligent comeback or knowledge of history or the subject under discussion.

The fact that you didn't even know about the common strategy and the nature of flights pre 911 shows that you are just talking with no knowledge, and relying on attacking your opponent to assert your authority. In reality, hijackings were a common occurrence until fairly close to 911, and the reason was not to kill hundreds of people but to achieve political goals. They're even referred to as goal-oriented hijackers these days.

reply to post by PluPerfect

Oh, I see .... you seem to have the mistaken belief that the passengers would have "risen up", Bruce Willis-style, and been "heroes".....that only happened on United 93, and only because it was delayed on the ground in Newark, and thus the news of the other three could reach the passengers, and they learned that theirs was not a "normal" hijacking.

You mentioned the hijacking "protocol".....keep that in mind. Oh, and it was known within the industry as the "Common Strategy" in dealing with hijacking situations. Refresher courses were mandatory once per year, for all crewmembers and others involved in Flight Operations.

The "Common Strategy" never involved a scenario where the first clue of a hijacking in progress was a vicious attack on the pilots......after a sudden breach of the cockpit. The consensus of the "typical" hijacking scenario was NOT to presume it would be a suicide mission....in fact, one part of the Strategy was to play on the hijackers' fears of dying, in order to give them the impression that getting safely on the ground was priority one....because then, the situation could be better managed by law enforcement authorities.

Ok, you opinion is your opinion, you're entitled to that. There was enough of time gap between the first 'hijacking' to warn the other planes, so not buying that rubbish.

Yes, people will defend their lives if nthey are in danger, and regardless of what their objective was, they would not have been able to achieve what they did with a couple of pen knives, so the rest of your ideas do not matter.

Why would it "not have been an easy task" to storm into the cockpit? Don't you recall flying back before 9/11? It was quite typical for the door to be left open, as the Flight Attendants brought food or beverages up to the pilots. I had personally witnessed this occurring countless times.....even saw it happen post 9/11, on an airline in Europe! I was appalled at the lackadaisical disregard.

And, I don't know what you mean about the "set up"....if you mean the "floor plan" of the cockpit? There is plenty of room on a Boeing 757 and 767 for two people to stand directly behind the seated pilots...pilots who by the way have seatbelts on, and are constrained in their movements because of seat position.

From entry at the door, to grabbing a guy's head and slashing throat? About one second.

Yes, I used to fly to different locations around the world with my job, up to 3 times a week pre-9/11, so I know from countless flights what happens onboard a plane, and not once have ever seen a cockpit door left open! Yes, staff go in and out at times, but they have a system in place so the pilot knows who is coming through the door. Air Stewards do not carry cabin keys on them! Again, your opinion is well off the mark!

Just because people use different termology doesn't change the facts. You say color I say colour!

A pen knife might take one injure one person temporarily, but what about the co-pilot?!

As for seat belts, once in the air only one pilot has to wear a seat belt, so much for being a retired pilot! Surprising how many people say that on this forum, but they all make slip ups to expose they are not pilots, just as you have, but then I never believed you were!

If a cockpit was breached no pilot would allow their plane to be hijacked without a serious struggle, unless the perps had a gun.

See above.

One second to react. When you're essentially immobile, and attacked from behind.

More than one second to react because staff would have warned them, and if they managed to get past staff somehow then the co-pilot could have blocked the 'hijckers'. So no, it would not be as easy as you seem to think. C'mon, you said you were a 'retired pilot' you can do better than that!

They certainly would have attempted some hand to hand combat, and if they managed to kill both pilots, which I highly doubt, then blood on controls would have been a hazard.

See above.

And, no, "blood on the controls" is not a "hazard".....

Again, you have no clue what you are on about, if there was blood everywhere it would have been a major hazard having it all over the controls.

ONE AGAIN YOU IGNORED THE NAUDET BROTHERS QUESTION, BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT IS A SENSITIVE SUBJECT AND ARE DELIBERATELY IGNORING IT.

THIRD TIME, WHERE IS THE PRE-1ST PLANE IMPACT FOOTAGE FROM THE NAUDET BROTHERS, THEY MUST HAVE BEEN FILMING A WHILE BEFORE IF IT IS A LEGITIMATE VIDEO!

Originally posted by kidtwist
ONE AGAIN YOU IGNORED THE NAUDET BROTHERS QUESTION, BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT IS A SENSITIVE SUBJECT AND ARE DELIBERATELY IGNORING IT.

THIRD TIME, WHERE IS THE PRE-1ST PLANE IMPACT FOOTAGE FROM THE NAUDET BROTHERS, THEY MUST HAVE BEEN FILMING A WHILE BEFORE IF IT IS A LEGITIMATE VIDEO!

I already answered this for you in another thread. You seem to miss a lot of replies, why is that?

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by kidtwist

 

Every post you make, you just reinforce the fact that you really don't know what you are talking about. Prior to 9/11, airline protocols called on flight crews to cooperate with hijackers, in the hopes of getting the plane onto a runway somewhere, where crashing was no longer a likely outcome. Your idea that a flight crew engage in hand to hand combat in the cockpit, prior to 9/11, is stupid.

Every time I write something 'vipertech0596' you come along and troll it, and never ever offer one piece of accurate, or useful information.

You are a gatekeeper, it is your job to behave like a troll, I bet you're proud to be a professional troll! Something to tell the grandchildren!

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by kidtwist
ONE AGAIN YOU IGNORED THE NAUDET BROTHERS QUESTION, BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT IS A SENSITIVE SUBJECT AND ARE DELIBERATELY IGNORING IT.

THIRD TIME, WHERE IS THE PRE-1ST PLANE IMPACT FOOTAGE FROM THE NAUDET BROTHERS, THEY MUST HAVE BEEN FILMING A WHILE BEFORE IF IT IS A LEGITIMATE VIDEO!

I already answered this for you in another thread. You seem to miss a lot of replies, why is that?

I was not directing it at you, you seem to be responding to a lot of comments I direct at other people thinking they are for you, rmember the apology you gave me for doing that, seems you forget which account you are logged into!

Please do link to your reply, I cannot track every comment in every thread. Just remember to log out of your troll account before responding next time!

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by kidtwist
Oh, that old story eh, retired pilot! Don't talk crap, I can tell from your responses you have zero experience with planes!

How old are you? You post a bunch of falsehoods with no factual backing, you are told they are definitely wrong and asked intelligent questions, and you respond with attacks and insults. If you're an adult you have a lot to learn about conversing with people.

No, 2 small blades are not enough to overpower all staff, all passengers and 2 pilots! It's just not believable.
...
First class or not, serrated knives are not great weapons! A fork would be more effective!

You heard it here first folks, forks are better than knives. Nobody would use a knife as a weapon when they could use a fork, and kidtwist is definitely not just nay-saying everything he hears because he has no intelligent comeback or knowledge of history or the subject under discussion.

The fact that you didn't even know about the common strategy and the nature of flights pre 911 shows that you are just talking with no knowledge, and relying on attacking your opponent to assert your authority. In reality, hijackings were a common occurrence until fairly close to 911, and the reason was not to kill hundreds of people but to achieve political goals. They're even referred to as goal-oriented hijackers these days.

What has my age got to do with anything?! That old 'how old are you' trick eh, trying to belittle me!

Your desperate attempt to troll from different accounts has been exposed. You've been caught out many times now, so I'll just ignore you comments and trolling from now on!

reply to post by kidtwist


You are being foolish.
If you put a blade to the neck of a stewardess they would have handed over the controls back then.
The ideals back then were to protect every life. Where as now days passengers are likely to say 'if you kill her we'll kill you'.

You didn't need to overpower each passenger.

Even today you could hijack a metro bus with a utility knife.

Wait, was there any footage of the passengers boarding the planes? Were families shown these videos? It would be the last image of their loved ones before they perished. How do we find this out?