What Happened on the
Planes on September 11, 2001? The 9/11 Commission “Script” Was Fabricated
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, November 08, 2015
Global Research Archives 10 August 2004
What Happened on the Planes on September 11, 2001? The
9/11 Commission “Script” Was Fabricated
Global Research, November 08, 2015
The following article published more than eleven years
ago, in August 2004 refutes the 9/11 Commission script as to what actually
happened on the planes.
Much of this detailed information was based on alleged
cell phone conversations between passengers and family members. Yet the
technology to use a cell phone on a plane above 8500 feet did not exist in
September 2001.
A revised version of the article
was subsequently published in my book entitled America’s “War on Terrorism”, Montreal 2005, which can be ordered directly from Global
Research
More Holes in the Official Story: The 9/11 Cell Phone
Calls
by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, August 10, 2004
“We Have Some Planes”
The 9/11 Commission’s Report provides an almost visual description of the
Arab hijackers. It depicts in minute detail events occurring inside the cabin
of the four hijacked planes.
In the absence of surviving passengers, this
“corroborating evidence”, was based on passengers’ cell and air phone
conversations with their loved ones. According to the Report, the cockpit voice recorder
(CVR) was only recovered in the case of one of the flights (UAL 93).
Focusing on the personal drama of the passengers, the
Commission has built much of its narrative around the phone
conversations. The Arabs are portrayed with their knives and box cutters,
scheming in the name of Allah, to bring down the planes and turn them “into
large guided missiles” (Report, Chapter 1, http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf ).
The Technology of Wireless Transmission
The Report conveys the impression that cell phone
ground-to-air communication from high altitude was of reasonably good quality,
and that there was no
major impediment or obstruction in wireless transmission.
Some of the conversations were with onboard air
phones, which contrary to the cell phones provide for good quality
transmission. The report does not draw a clear demarcation between the two
types of calls.
More significantly, what this carefully
drafted script fails to mention is that, given the prevailing technology in
September 2001, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, to place a
wireless cell call from an aircraft traveling at high speed above 8000 feet:
“Wireless communications networks weren’t designed for
ground-to-air communication. Cellular experts privately admit that they’re
surprised the calls were able to be placed from the hijacked planes, and that
they lasted as long as they did. They speculate that the only reason that the
calls went through in the first place is that the aircraft were flying so close
to the ground
Expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry
casts serious doubt on “the findings” of the 9/11 Commission. According to
Alexa Graf, a spokesman of AT&T, commenting in the immediate wake of the
9/11 attacks:
“it was almost a fluke that the [9/11] calls reached
their destinations… From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and
most callers will experience drops. Although calls are not
reliable, callers can pick up and hold calls for a little while below a
certain altitude”
New Wireless Technology
While serious doubts regarding the cell calls were
expressed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, a new landmark in the wireless
telecom industry has further contributed to upsetting the Commission’s
credibility. Within days of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report in
July, American Airlines and Qualcomm, proudly announced the
development of a new wireless technology –which will at some future
date allow airline passengers using their cell phones to contact family
and friends from a commercial aircraft (no doubt at a special rate aerial
roaming charge)
“Travelers could be talking on their personal
cellphones as early as 2006. Earlier this month [July 2004], American Airlines
conducted a trial run on a modified aircraft that permitted cell phone calls.”
(WP, July 27, 2004)
Aviation Week (07/20/04)
described this new technology in an authoritative report published in July
2004:
“Qualcomm and American Airlines are exploring [July
2004] ways for passengers to use commercial cell phones inflight for
air-to-ground communication. In a recent 2-hr. proof-of-concept flight,
representatives from government and the media used commercial Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) third-generation cell phones to place and
receive calls and text messages from friends on the ground.
For the test flight from Dallas-Fort Worth, the
aircraft was equipped with an antenna in the front and rear of the cabin to
transmit cell phone calls to a small in-cabin CDMA cellular base station. This
“pico cell” transmitted cell phone calls from the aircraft via a Globalstar
satellite to the worldwide terrestrial phone network”
Needless to say, neither the service, nor the “third
generation” hardware, nor the “Picco cell” CDMA base station inside the cabin (which so to speak
mimics a cell phone communication tower inside the plane) were available on the
morning of September 11, 2001.
The 911 Commission points to the clarity and detail of
these telephone conversations.
In substance, the Aviation Week report
creates yet another embarrassing hitch in the official story.
The untimely July American Airlines / Qualcomm
announcement acted as a cold shower. Barely acknowledged in press reports, it
confirmed that the Bush administration had embroidered the cell phone narrative
(similar to what they did with WMDs) and that the 9/11 Commission’s account was
either flawed or grossly exaggerated.
Altitude and Cellphone Transmission
According to industry experts, the crucial link in
wireless cell phone transmission from an aircraft is altitude. Beyond a
certain altitude which is usually reached within a few minutes after takeoff,
cell phone calls are no longer possible.
In other words, given the wireless technology
available on September 11 2001, these cell calls could not have been placed
from high altitude.
The only way passengers could have got through to
family and friends using their cell phones, is if the planes were flying below
8000 feet. Yet even at low altitude, below 8000 feet, cell phone
communication is of poor quality.
The crucial question: at what altitude were the planes
traveling, when the calls were placed?
While the information provided by the Commission is
scanty, the Report’s timeline does not suggest that the planes were
consistently traveling at low altitude. In fact the Report confirms that a fair
number of the cell phone calls were placed while the plane was traveling at
altitudes above 8000 feet, which is considered as the cutoff altitude for cell
phone transmission.
Let us review the timeline of these calls in relation
to the information provided by the Report on flight paths and altitude.
United Airlines Flight 175
United Airlines Flight 175 departed for Los Angeles at
8:00:
”It pushed back from its gate at 7:58 and
departed Logan Airport at 8:14.”
The Report confirms that by 8:33, “it had reached
its assigned cruising altitude of 31,000 feet.” According to the
Report, it maintained this cruising altitude until 8.51, when it “deviated
from its assigned altitude”:
“The first operational evidence that something was
abnormal on United 175 came at 8:47, when the aircraft changed beacon codes
twice within a minute. At 8:51, the flight deviated from its assigned altitude,
and a minute later New York air traffic controllers began repeatedly and
unsuccessfully trying to contact it.”
And one minute later at 8.52, Lee Hanson receives a
call from his son Peter.
[Flight UAL 175] ”At 8:52, in Easton,
Connecticut, a man named Lee Hanson received a phone call from his son Peter, a
passenger on United 175. His son told him: “I think they’ve taken over the
cockpit—An attendant has been stabbed— and someone else up front may have been
killed. The plane is making strange moves. Call United Airlines—Tell them it’s
Flight 175, Boston to LA.
Press reports confirm that Peter Hanson was using his
cell (i.e it was not an air phone). Unless the plane had suddenly nose-dived, the
plane was still at high altitude at 8.52. (Moreover, Hanson’s call could
have been initiated at least a minute prior to his father Lee Hanson picking up
the phone.)
Another call was received at 8.52 (one minute after it
deviated from its assigned altitude of 31,000 feet). The Report does not
say whether this is an air phone or a cell phone call:
Also at 8:52, a male flight attendant called a United
office in San Francisco, reaching Marc Policastro. The flight attendant
reported that the flight had been hijacked, both pilots had been killed, a
flight attendant had been stabbed, and the hijackers were probably flying the
plane. The call lasted about two minutes, after which Policastro and a
colleague tried unsuccessfully to contact the flight.
It is not clear whether this was a call to
Policastro’s cell phone or to the UAL switchboard.
At 8:58, UAL 175 “took a heading toward New York
City.”:
“At 8:59, Flight 175 passenger Brian David Sweeney
tried to call his wife, Julie. He left a message on their home answering
machine that the plane had been hijacked. He then called his mother, Louise
Sweeney, told her the flight had been hijacked, and added that the passengers
were thinking about storming the cockpit to take control of the plane away from
the hijackers.
At 9:00, Lee Hanson received a second call
from his son Peter:
It’s getting bad, Dad—A stewardess was stabbed—They
seem to have knives and Mace—They said they have a bomb—It’s getting very bad
on the plane—Passengers are throwing up and getting sick—The plane is making
jerky movements—I don’t think the pilot is flying the plane—I think we are
going down—I think they intend to go to Chicago or someplace and fly into a
building—Don’t worry, Dad— If it happens, it’ll be very fast—My God, my God.
The call ended abruptly. Lee Hanson had heard a woman
scream just before it cut off. He turned on a television, and in her home so
did Louise Sweeney. Both then saw the second aircraft hit the World Trade
Center.50 At 9:03:11, United Airlines Flight 175 struck the South Tower of the
World Trade Center. All on board, along with an unknown number of people in the
tower, were killed instantly.”
American Airlines Flight 77
American Airlines Flight 77 was scheduled to depart
from Washington Dulles for Los Angeles at 8:10… ”At 8:46, the flight
reached its assigned cruising altitude of 35,000 feet.”
At 8:51, American 77 transmitted its last routine
radio communication. The hijacking began between 8:51 and 8:54. As on American
11 and United 175, the hijackers used knives (reported by one passenger) and
moved all the passengers (and possibly crew) to the rear of the aircraft
(reported by one flight attendant and one passenger). Unlike the earlier
flights, the Flight 77 hijackers were reported by a passenger to have box
cutters. Finally, a passenger reported that an announcement had been made by
the “pilot” that the plane had been hijacked….
On flight AA 77, which allegedly crashed into the
Pentagon, the transponder was turned off at 8:56am; the recorded altitude at
the time the transponder was turned off is not mentioned. According to the
Commission’s Report, cell calls started 16 minutes later, at 9:12am, twenty minutes
before it (allegedly) crashed into the Pentagon at 9.32am:
” [at 9.12] Renee May called her mother, Nancy May, in
Las Vegas. She said her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had
moved them to the rear of the plane.”
According to the Report, when the autopilot was
disengaged at 9:29am, the aircraft was at 7,000 feet and some 38
miles west of the Pentagon. This happened two minutes before the crash.
Most of the calls on Flight 77 were placed between
9.12am and 9.26am, prior to the disengagement of automatic piloting at
9.29am. The plane could indeed have been traveling at either a
higher or a lower altitude to that reached at 9.29. Yet, at the same time there
is no indication in the Report that the plane had been traveling below the 7000
feet level, which it reached at 9.29am.
At some point between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson
called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States.
[using an airphone]
(Report p 7, see http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf )
United Airlines Flight 93
UAL flight 93 was the only one of the four planes
that, according to the official story, did not crash into a building. Flight 93
passengers, apparently:”alerted through phone calls, attempted to subdue the
hijackers. and the hijackers crashed the plane [in Pennsylvania] to prevent the
passengers gaining control.” ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_flight_93 ). Another version of events, was that UAL
93 was shot down.
According to the Commission’s account:
“the first 46 minutes of Flight 93’s cross-country
trip proceeded routinely. Radio communications from the plane were normal. Heading,
speed, and altitude ran according to plan. At 9:24, Ballinger’s warning to
United 93 was received in the cockpit. Within two minutes, at 9:26, the pilot,
Jason Dahl, responded with a note of puzzlement: “Ed, confirm latest mssg
plz—Jason.”70 The hijackers attacked at 9:28. While traveling 35,000 feet
above eastern Ohio, United 93 suddenly dropped 700 feet. Eleven seconds into
the descent, the FAA’s air traffic control center in Cleveland received the
first of two radio transmissions from the aircraft….”
At least ten cell calls are reported to have taken
place on flight 93.
The Report confirms that passengers started
placing calls with cell and air phones shortly after 9.32am, four
minutes after the Report’s confirmation of the plane’s attitude of 35,000 feet.
In other words, the calls started some 9 minutes before the
Cleveland Center lost UAL 93’s transponder signal (9.41) and approximately 30
minutes before the crash in Pennsylvania (10.03)
“At 9:41, Cleveland Center lost United 93’s
transponder signal. The controller located it on primary radar, matched its
position with visual sightings from other aircraft, and tracked the flight as
it turned east, then south.164 “
This suggests that the altitude was known to air
traffic control up until the time when the transponder signal was lost by the
Cleveland Center. (Radar and visual sightings provided information on its
flight path from 9.41 to 10.03.)
Moreover, there was no indication from the Report that
the aircraft had swooped down to a lower level of altitude, apart from the 700
feet drop recorded at 9.28. from a cruising altitude of 35,000 feet:
“At 9:32, a hijacker, probably Jarrah, made or attempted
to make the following announcement to the passengers of Flight 93:“Ladies and
Gentlemen: Here the captain, please sit down keep remaining sitting.
We have a bomb on board. So, sit.” The flight data
recorder (also recovered) indicates that Jarrah then instructed the plane’s
autopilot to turn the aircraft around and head east. The cockpit voice recorder
data indicate that a woman, most likely a flight attendant, was being held
captive in the cockpit. She struggled with one of the hijackers who killed or otherwise
silenced her.
Shortly thereafter, the passengers and flight crew
began a series of calls from GTE airphones and cellular phones. These
calls between family, friends, and colleagues took place until the end of the
flight and provided those on the ground with firsthand accounts. They
enabled the passengers to gain critical information, including the news that
two aircraft had slammed into the World Trade Center.77…At least two callers
from the flight reported that the hijackers knew that passengers were making
calls but did not seem to care.
The hijackers were wearing red bandanas, and they
forced the passengers to the back of the aircraft.80 Callers reported that a
passenger had been stabbed and that two people were lying on the floor of the
cabin, injured or dead—possibly the captain and first officer. One caller
reported that a flight attendant had been killed.81 One of the callers from
United 93 also reported that he thought the hijackers might possess a gun. But
none of the other callers reported the presence of a firearm. One recipient of
a call from the aircraft recounted specifically asking her caller whether the
hijackers had guns.
The passenger replied that he did not see one. No
evidence of firearms or of their identifiable remains was found at the
aircraft’s crash site, and the cockpit voice recorder gives no indication of a
gun being fired or mentioned at any time.
We believe that if the hijackers had possessed a gun,
they would have used it in the flight’s last minutes as the passengers fought
back.82 Passengers on three flights reported the hijackers’ claim of having a
bomb. The FBI told us they found no trace of explosives at the crash sites. One
of the passengers who mentioned a bomb expressed his belief that it was not
real. Lacking any evidence that the hijackers attempted to smuggle such illegal
items past the security screening checkpoints, we believe the bombs were probably
fake. During at least five of the passengers’ phone calls, information was
shared about the attacks that had occurred earlier that morning at the World
Trade Center. Five calls described the intent of passengers and surviving crew
members to revolt against the hijackers. According to one call, they voted on
whether to rush the terrorists in an attempt to retake the plane. They decided,
and acted. At 9:57, the passenger assault began. Several passengers had
terminated phone calls with loved ones in order to join the revolt. One of the
callers ended her message as follows:
“Everyone’s running up to first class. I’ve got to go.
Bye.” The cockpit voice recorder captured the sounds of the passenger assault
muffled by the intervening cockpit door. Some family members who listened to
the recording report that they can hear the voice of a loved one among the din.
We cannot identify whose voices can be heard. But the
assault was sustained. In response, Jarrah immediately began to roll the
airplane to the left and right, attempting to knock the passengers off balance.
At 9:58:57, Jarrah told another hijacker in the cockpit to block the door.
Jarrah continued to roll the airplane sharply left and right, but the assault
continued. At 9:59, Jarrah changed tactics and pitched the nose of the airplane
up and down to disrupt the assault. The recorder captured the sounds of loud
thumps, crashes, shouts, and breaking glasses and plates.
At 10:00:03, Jarrah stabilized the airplane. Five
seconds later, Jarrah asked, “Is that it? Shall we finish it off?” A hijacker
responded, “No. Not yet. When they all come, we finish it off.” The sounds of
fighting continued outside the cockpit. Again, Jarrah pitched the nose of the
aircraft up and down.At 10:00:26, a passenger in the background said, “In the
cockpit. If we don’t we’ll die!” Sixteen seconds later, a passenger yelled,“Roll it!” Jarrah
stopped the violent maneuvers at about 10:01:00 and said, “Allah is the greatest! Allah is the greatest!” He then asked another hijacker in the cockpit,“ Is
that it? I mean, shall we put it down?” to which the other replied, “Yes, put
it in it, and pull it down.” The passengers continued their assault and at
10:02:23, a hijacker said, “Pull it down! Pull it down!” The hijackers remained
at the controls but must have judged that the passengers were only seconds from
overcoming them. The airplane headed down; the control wheel was turned hard to
the right.
The airplane rolled onto its back, and one of the
hijackers began shouting “Allah is the greatest. Allah is the greatest. ”With
the sounds of the passenger counterattack continuing, the aircraft plowed into
an empty field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 580 miles per hour, about 20
minutes’ flying time from Washington D.C. Jarrah’s objective was to crash his
airliner into symbols of the American Republic, the Capitol or the White House.
He was defeated by the alerted, unarmed passengers of United”
The Mysterious Call of Edward Felt from UAL 93
Earlier coverage of the fate of UAL 93 was based in
part on a reported cell call from a passenger named Edward Felt, who managed to
reach an emergency official in Pennsylvania. How he got the emergency
supervisor’s number and managed to reach him remains unclear.
The call was apparently received at 9.58 am, eight
minutes before the reported time of the crash at 10.06 am in Pennsylvania:
“Local emergency officials said they received
a cell phone call at 9.58 am from a man who said he was a passenger
aboard the flight. The man said he had locked himself in the bathroom and told
emergency dispatchers that the plane had been hijacked. “We are being hijacked!
We are being hijacked!” he was quoted as saying. A California man identified as
Tom Burnett reportedly called his wife and told her that somebody on the plane had
been stabbed. “We’re all going to die, but three of us are going to do
something,” he told her. “I love you honey.”
The alleged call by Edward Felt from the toilet of the
aircraft of UAL 93 was answered by Glenn Cramer, the emergency supervisor in
Pennsylvania who took the call.
It is worth noting that Glenn Cramer was subsequently
gagged by the FBI.” (See Robert Wallace`s incisive analysis published in Sept
2002 by the Daily Mirror, (http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/WAL403A.html ).
Ironically, this high profile cell call by Ed Felt,
which would have provided crucial evidence to the 9/11 Commission was, for some
reason, not mentioned in the Report.
American Airlines Flight 11
Flight 11 took off at 7:59. Just before 8:14.
The Report outlines an airphone conversation of flight attendant Betty Ong and
much of the narrative hinges upon this airphone conversation
There are no clear-cut reports on the use of cell
phones on Flight AA11. According to the Report, American 11 crashed into
the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 8.46.
Concluding Remarks
A large part of the description, regarding the 19
hijackers relies on cell phone conversations with family and friends.
While a few of these calls (placed at low altitude)
could have got through, the wireless technology was not available. On this
issue, expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry is unequivocal.
In other words, at least part of the Commission’s script
in Chapter 1 on the cell phone conversations, is fabricated.
According to the American Airline / Qualcomm [2004]
announcement, the technology for cell phone transmission at high altitude will
only be available aboard commercial aircraft in 2006. This is an inescapable
fact.
In the eyes of public opinion, the cell phone
conversations on the Arab hijackers is needed to sustain the illusion that
America is under attack.
The “war on terrorism” underlying the National
Security doctrine relies on real time “evidence” concerning the Arab hijackers.
The latter personify, so to speak, this illusive “outside enemy” (Al Qaeda),
which is threatening the homeland.
Embodied into the Commission’s “script” of 911, the
narrative of what happened on the plane with the Arab hijackers is therefore
crucial. It is an integral part of the Administration’s disinformation and
propaganda program. It
constitutes a justification for the anti-terror legislation under the Patriot
acts and the waging of America’s pre-emptive wars against Afghanistan and Iraq.
Note: Emphasis added in bold font.
Michel Chossudovsky’s book can be order directly from Global Research. Click image to order
ANNEX
The 9/11 Report’s Footnotes on the Cell Phone
Conversations
emphasis added
70. On FDR, see NTSB report,“Specialist’s Factual
Report of Investigation—Digital Flight Data Recorder” for United Airlines
Flight 93, Feb. 15, 2002; on CVR, see FBI report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec.
4, 2003; Commission review of Aircraft Communication and Reporting System
(ACARS) messages sent to and from Flight 93 (which indicate time of message
transmission and receipt); see UAL record, Ed Ballinger ACARS log, Sept. 11,
2001. At 9:22, after learning of the events at the World Trade Center, Melody Homer,
the wife of co-pilot Leroy Homer, had an ACARS message sent to her husband in
the cockpit asking if he was okay. See UAL record,ACARS message, Sept. 11,
2001.
71. On FDR, see NTSB report,“Specialist’s Factual
Report of Investigation—Digital Flight Data Recorder” for United Airlines
Flight 93, Feb. 15, 2002; on CVR, see FBI report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec.
4, 2003; FAA report,“Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events: September 11, 2001,”
Sept. 17, 2001; NTSB report, Air Traffic Control Recording—United Airlines
Flight 93, Dec. 21, 2001.
72.The 37 passengers represented a load factor of
20.33 percent of the plane’s seating capacity of 182, considerably below the
52.09 percent for Flight 93 on Tuesdays in the three-month period prior to
September 11 (June 11–September 4, 2001). See UAL report, Flight 93 EWR-SFO
load factors, undated. Five passengers holding reservations for Flight 93 did
not show for the flight.All five were interviewed and cleared by the FBI. FBI
report,“Flight #93 ‘No Show’ Passengers from 9/11/01,” Sept. 18, 2001.
73. INS record,Withdrawal of Application for Admission
for Mohamed al Kahtani,Aug. 4, 2001.
74. See FAA regulations,Admission to flight deck, 14
C.F.R. § 121.547 (2001);UAL records, copies of boarding passes for United 93,
Sept. 11,2001.One passenger reported that ten first-class passengers were
aboard the flight. If that number is accurate, it would include the four
hijackers. FBI report of investigation, interview of Lisa Jefferson, Sept. 11,
2001;UAL record, Flight 93 passenger manifest, Sept. 11, 2001.All but one of
the six passengers seated in the first-class cabin communicated with the ground
during the flight, and none mentioned anyone from their cabin having gone into
the cockpit before the hijacking.Moreover, it is unlikely that the highly
regarded and experienced pilot and co-pilot of Flight 93 would have allowed an
observer into the cockpit before or after takeoff who had not obtained the
proper permission. See UAL records, personnel files of Flight 93 pilots. For
jumpseat information, see UAL record,Weight and Balance Information for Flight
93 and Flight 175, Sept. 11, 2001;AAL records, Dispatch Environmental
Control/Weekly Flight Summary for Flight 11 and Flight 77, Sept. 11, 2001.
75. Like Atta on Flight 11, Jarrah apparently did not
know how to operate the communication radios; thus his attempts to communicate
with the passengers were broadcast on the ATC channel. See FBI report,“CVR from
UA Flight #93,” Dec. 4, 2003.Also, by 9:32 FAA notified United’s headquarters
that the flight was not responding to radio calls.According to United, the
flight’s nonresponse and its turn to the east led the airline to believe by
9:36 that the plane was hijacked. See Rich Miles interview (Nov. 21, 2003); UAL
report, “United dispatch SMFDO activities—terrorist crisis,” Sept. 11, 2001.
76. In accordance with FAA regulations, United 93’s
cockpit voice recorder recorded the last 31 minutes of sounds from the cockpit
via microphones in the pilots’ headsets, as well as in the overhead panel of
the flight deck. This is the only recorder from the four hijacked airplanes to
survive the impact and ensuing fire.The CVRs and FDRs from American 11 and
United 175 were not found,and the CVR from American Flight 77 was badly burned
and not recoverable. See FBI report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,”Dec. 4, 2003; see
also FAA regulations, 14 C.F.R. §§ 25.1457, 91.609, 91.1045, 121.359; Flight 93
CVR data. A transcript of the CVR recording was prepared by the NTSB and the
FBI.
77. All calls placed on airphones were from the rear
of the aircraft. There was one airphone installed in each row of seats on both
sides of the aisle.The airphone system was capable of transmitting only eight
calls at any one time. See FBI report of investigation, airphone records for
flights UAL 93 and UAL 175 on Sept. 11, 2001, Sept. 18, 2001.
78.FAA audio file, Cleveland Center, position Lorain
Radar; Flight 93 CVR data; FBI report, “CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec. 4, 2003.
79. FBI reports of investigation, interviews of
recipients of calls from Todd Beamer, Sept. 11, 2001, through June 11, 2002;
FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Sandy
Bradshaw, Sept. 11, 2001, through Oct. 4, 2001.Text messages warning the
cockpit of Flight 93 were sent to the aircraft by Ed Ballinger at 9:24. See UAL
record, Ed Ballinger’s ACARS log, Sept. 11, 2001.
80.We have relied mainly on the record of FBI
interviews with the people who received calls. The FBI interviews were
conducted while memories were still fresh and were less likely to have been
affected by reading the accounts of others or hearing stories in the media. In
some cases we have conducted our own interviews to supplement or verify the
record. See FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls
from Todd Beamer, Mark Bingham,Sandy Bradshaw,Marion Britton,Thomas Burnett,
Joseph DeLuca,Edward Felt, Jeremy Glick,Lauren
Grandcolas, Linda Gronlund, CeeCee Lyles, Honor Wainio.
Grandcolas, Linda Gronlund, CeeCee Lyles, Honor Wainio.
81. FBI reports of investigation, interviews of
recipients of calls from Thomas Burnett, Sept. 11, 2001; FBI reports of
investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Marion Britton, Sept. 14,
2001, through Nov. 8, 2001; Lisa Jefferson interview (May 11, 2004); FBI report
of investigation, interview of Lisa Jefferson, Sept. 11, 2001; Richard Belme
interview (Nov. 21, 2003).
82. See Jere Longman, Among the Heroes—United Flight
93 and the Passengers and Crew Who Fought Back (Harper-Collins, 2002), p. 107;
Deena Burnett interview (Apr. 26, 2004); FBI reports of investigation,
interviews of recipients of calls from Jeremy Glick, Sept. 11, 2001, through
Sept. 12, 2001; Lyzbeth Glick interview (Apr. 22, 2004). Experts told us that a
gunshot would definitely be audible on the CVR. The FBI found no evidence of a
firearm at the crash site of Flight 93. See FBI response to Commission briefing
request no. 6, undated (topic 11).The FBI collected 14 knives or portions of
knives at the Flight 93 crash site. FBI report, “Knives Found at the UA Flight
93 Crash Site,” undated.
83. FBI response to Commission briefing request no. 6,
undated (topic 11); FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of
calls from Jeremy Glick, Sept. 11, 2001, through Sept. 12, 2001.
84. See FBI reports of investigation, interviews of
recipients of calls from United 93.
85. FBI reports of investigation, interviews of
recipients of calls from United 93. For quote, see FBI report of investigation,
interview of Philip Bradshaw, Sept. 11, 2001; Philip Bradshaw interview (June
15, 2004); Flight 93 FDR and CVR data.At 9:55:11 Jarrah dialed in the VHF
Omni-directional Range (VOR) frequency for the VOR navigational aid at
Washington Reagan National Airport, further indicating that the attack was
planned for the nation’s capital.
The original source of this article is Global Research Archives
Copyright © Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research Archives, 2015
/https://www.niagarafallsreview.ca/content/dam/thestar/news/canada/2021/09/25/huawei-executive-meng-wanzhou-receives-warm-welcome-upon-return-to-china/_1_meng_wanzhou_2.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.