Family Members of Flight 93 Victims on Larry King Live - Open Thread

Larry King comes on in about 10 minutes, feel free to post any comments on what is said during the interview.

THIS IS FUCKING

THIS IS FUCKING PROPAGANDA...

Off..

Off..

Couldn't watch it.

Couldn't watch it.

WTF Why would the TV movie

WTF Why would the TV movie version have the caller using a cell phone and why did the "real life" mother clarify that it was the airphone?

Syria Switched To The

Syria Switched To The Euro

Ruh Roh Rorge...

ha. my family made me turn

ha. my family made me turn it off because I was arguing with the TV -
GRRR - in one breath they showed a clip from the idiot93 where 5 passengers were standing in the aisle as calm as day, and in the next breath mr. familymember said that eyewitnesses said the plane was rocking it's wings violently due to turbulence - OFF.

the entire show was nothing

the entire show was nothing but clips from the recent flight 93 movie that has been re-running ad-nauseam on A&E.. did they talk at all about the end of the movie where the agents on the crash scene joke about how the plane dissapeared?

This is obviously an effort

This is obviously an effort to counteract some of the ongoing effects of having unbiased information regarding the government's ridiculous 9/11 conspiracy theory discussed on the internet. People are coming to conclusions, and asking questions the producers of this film, and the gatekeepers at CNN would rather not see addressed.

in the movie he goes

in the movie he goes "Mother, it's Mark Bingham".

Who says that to their mom?

What's worse is, that's actually what he said in real life, allegedly.

Seems strange.

The blonde woman quoted her

The blonde woman quoted her daughter as saying, "I'm being hijacked and I'm not going to be coming home."

I find this a strange thing to say. She didn't say she was going to die, she said she wasn't coming home. This seems more like something you would say if you were going to disappear forever, maybe with a new identity and 3 million dollars. Somebody needs to do some serious research on these passengers and their families.

Chander I agree about the

Chander I agree about the research. May I suggest that you pick a plane and get to work. We are the "somebody" that must get this work done.

dz They talked about the plane flying so fast that it was absorbed into the earth. They did not clarify whether it was into the actual core of the earth or just under the crust.

Did anyone else think the callers to King were faked/scripted from talking points all to sell the official story. Or more aptly to undermine the real story that has been making it's way into society. They touched on so many of them but without ever actually mentioning the true question. By this i mean for example King said "she called from her cell phone" the mother said no she called from the seat back phone.
There was one of the guests he appears to actually be an agent.... "How is the war on terror." asked a caller. MrAgent: Well GWB is doing a great job he said we would go after the terrorists and that is what he did. Such a load of crap.

dz, would you care to

dz, would you care to elaborate on 'the agents on the crash scene joke about how the plane dissapeared'. I'm interested in this aspect.

Although I accept that an explosion occurred in mid air (probably from a missile) I have always found criticisms of the main impact site a bit unsatisfactory. Military and other pilots have made in clear that high impact crashes do reult in a 'shredding' effect with only small pieces of the plane body left. Also the depth of the crater would imply a powerful impact.

So my reading of it has been that it was shot down, pure and simple.

Am I missing something here about the impact site that the agents on the scene noticed?

damien wrote... "So my

damien wrote...

"So my reading of it has been that it was shot down, pure and simple."

How do you possibly draw the conclusion that because it hit the earth at high velocity that it must have met it was shot down?

I find it interesting that everyone here is upset but haven't provided any information to contradict what was presented.

S. King, There is plenty out

S. King,

There is plenty out there on the web covering why some 9/11 skeptics think Flight 93 was shot down, do some searches and I'm sure you will come across a few examples. A quick example is the widespread debris field.

I wouldn't expect every comment posted here to be backed up by references for everything said.. but im sure some out there will help you out if you are honestly wondering about their opinion.

ha. the official story sez

ha. the official story sez that the front 1/3 of 93 shredded into little pieces and the remaining 2/3 buried itself into the ground because the ground was so soft - reason #1054

damien, the depth of the

damien, the depth of the crater?

please...I've dug bigger holes than that all by myself with a shovel - see the link above for two photos of the mighty 93 crater

S. King... reasons to think

S. King... reasons to think Flight 93 was shot down...

"the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania."
-Donald Rumsfeld

Flight 93 apparently starts to break up before it crashes, because debris is found very far away from the crash site. [Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01] The plane is generally obliterated upon landing, except for one half-ton piece of engine found some distance away. Some reports indicate that the engine piece was found over a mile away. [Independent, 8/13/02] The FBI reportedly acknowledges that this piece was found “a considerable distance” from the crash site. [Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01] Later, the FBI will cordon off a three-mile wide area around the crash, as well as another area six to eight miles from the initial crash site. [CNN, 9/13/01] One story calls what happened to this engine “intriguing, because the heat-seeking, air-to-air Sidewinder missiles aboard an F-16 would likely target one of the Boeing 757's two large engines.” [Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01] Smaller debris fields are also found two, three, and eight miles away from the main crash site. [Independent, 8/13/02; Mirror, 9/13/02] Eight miles away, local media quote residents speaking of a second plane in the area and burning debris falling from the sky. [Reuters, 9/13/01 (C)] Residents outside Shanksville reported “discovering clothing, books, papers, and what appeared to be human remains. Some residents said they collected bags-full of items to be turned over to investigators. Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly six miles from the immediate crash scene. Workers at Indian Lake Marina said that they saw a cloud of confetti-like debris descend on the lake and nearby farms minutes after hearing the explosion...” [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/13/01] Moments after the crash, Carol Delasko initially thinks someone had blown up a boat on Indian Lake: “It just looked like confetti raining down all over the air above the lake.” [Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 9/14/01] Investigators say that far-off wreckage “probably was spread by the cloud created when the plane crashed and dispersed by a ten mph southeasterly wind.” [Delaware News Journal, 9/16/01] However, much of the wreckage is found sooner than that wind could have carried it, and not always southeast.

For example, George W. Bush spoke of the heroic actions of the passengers and crew aboard United Flight 93 over rural Pennsylvania on the morning of 9-11. However, NSA personnel on duty at the NSOC that morning have a very different perspective. Before Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania, NSA operations personnel clearly heard on the intercom system monitoring military and civilian communications that the "fighters are engaged" with the doomed United aircraft. NSOC personnel were then quickly dismissed from the tactical area of the NSOC where the intercom system was located leaving only a few senior personnel in place. NSA personnel are well aware that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld did not "misspeak" when, addressing U.S. troops in Baghdad during Christmas last year, said, "the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania." They believe the White House concocted the "passengers-bring-down-plane" story for propaganda value.

The whole 93 let's roll,

The whole 93 let's roll, crash site, & debris are not believable.

But certainly don't dismiss those ridiculously-worded phone conversations (see above)--Yes, who the hell calls his mother and greets her with his full name, e.g., "Hi mom, this is Richard Williams." This is so phony and stilted! It is not credible.

And why is everyone calling their moms, other relatives, phone operators, reservation desks, etc. No one calls, or even gets patched into, or forwarded onto the FBI, FAA, Air Force? Or even dials 911? (Of course, such calls to real authorities would have been harder to fake, and would have been fully recorded, and could have backfired!)

here's some more stuff

here's some more stuff about, and photos of flight 93's amazing crater

dz wrote... "There is plenty

dz wrote...

"There is plenty out there on the web covering why some 9/11 skeptics think Flight 93 was shot down."

I've read them all long ago.

"I wouldn't expect every comment posted here to be backed up by references for everything said.. but im sure some out there will help you out if you are honestly wondering about their opinion."

Neither would I. The point, however, is that opinions are of little value but facts and evidence are.

I'll respect dz's request

I'll respect dz's request and not debate here.

Here's some help on Flight 93:

http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93.html

S. King... They don't

S. King... They don't mention any of the tidbits I mentioned above. They are very selective in their analysis which, to me, is no different than the Popular Mechanics piece, or any other "9/11 debunking" story.

Ugg. I am sorry I looked at

Ugg. I am sorry I looked at that site. Their counter arguments split hairs rather than answer the tough questions. For example, about the molten metal found in the ground after the towers collapsed, their counter argument is to clarify what it means to be "molten", but they never take on the big issue of what burned for so long or what source of energy could have created that effect.

Their approach is to attack the hypothesizes rather than try to answer the outstanding questions. Proving a given theory wrong does mean the offical theory is correct.

S. King... are you the admin

S. King...

are you the admin of 911myths.com or in some way associated with him?

Could you please tell him that this "myth" here

http://www.911myths.com/html/93_landed_in_cleveland.html

is no myth - it's a mystery.

In fact it's the CLEVELAND AIRPORT MYSTERY and more and more acknowleged by 9/11 researchers as an important breakthru, pointing to switched planes on 9/11:

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=323

Do you know the article?

No? Then take a look at it and give your "myth" page an update. All your questions are answered here.

Yes? Hmm...then why are you asking questions which are already answered without linking to the article?

Woody Box

S. King... I'm looking on

S. King... I'm looking on www.911myths.com for mention of the fact that Philip Zelikow, someone with SEVERE conflicts of interest, was actually in charge of the entire 9/11 Commission's investigation, and I can't find anything. Any help would be appreciated.

opinions are of little

opinions are of little value but facts and evidence are

that was regarding flight93.

but really, the FACT is that if you look at photos of the crater where 93 was said to have crashed, there is NO EVIDENCE that it has done so. - isn't the official line on 93 that the front 1/3 of it shredded into countless pieces and the remaining 2/3 buried itself into the ground? since there is no evidence of that, then either the remaining 2/3 of 93 whipped out a shovel and covered itself up after making such a pathetic crater, or the official story of 93's impact is a LIE.

S. King... I'm looking on

S. King... I'm looking on www.911myths.com for any mention of the fact that the Secret Service didn't do their jobs on 9/11 by pulling Bush out of the classroom, and I can't find anything. Any help would be appreciated.

S. King... I'm looking on

S. King... I'm looking on www.911myths.com for any mention of the fact that the U.S. Government has refused to cooperate in trials having to do with people allegedly involved in the 9/11 attacks, and I can't find anything. Any help would be appreciated.

S. King... I'm looking on

S. King... I'm looking on www.911myths.com for any mention of David Schiffer, and I can't find any. Any help would be appreciated.

Sorry... David Schippers...

Sorry... David Schippers...

So much info for S.King to

So much info for S.King to pick through, and unfortunately very telling photographs, and not enough time to debunk it all. LOL.

S. King... I'm looking for

S. King... I'm looking for mention of Sibel Edmonds on www.911myths.com, and I can't find anything... any help would be appreciated.

S. King... I'm looking for

S. King... I'm looking for mention of how it took 411 days for the creation of the commission after months of fighting with the families to have it created, and I'm not finding anything. Any help would be appreciated.

I'm done wasting my time

I'm done wasting my time with www.911myths.com

S. King, I'm looking for

S. King, I'm looking for some debuking of William Rodriguez. Can't seem to find any on 911myths but, I'm sure you can refute his testimony some how.

Respectfully

And if you want to talk

And if you want to talk about demolitions... S. King... I'm not finding how www.911myths.com explains how MSNBC made a conscious effort to discredit Professor Jones not 3 days after KUTV gave him a fair shot on local television. ANY help would be appreciated.

The Professional... are you

The Professional... are you JH?

Hmm. Read this speech by

Hmm.

Read this speech by Nafeez Ahmed;
http://www.gnn.tv/B12624

Then read this page at 911myths.com;
http://www.911myths.com/html/hijackers.html

I can't seem to reconcile the two.

And I know that Ahmed is a serious researcher.

Hmm.

Sorry, guys, dz asked me not

Sorry, guys, dz asked me not to use the comments section to carry on a debate.

Apparently, you think the fact that I pointed out one site, www.911myths.com, on information about flight 93 for you to read and educate yourselves about alternate explanations, means that the site is there to answer ALL of your questions.

At least my reading of Jon Gold's growing impatience suggests that.

Of course, I don't need to tell you that none of the 9/11 conspiracy sites contains all the information either. And, boy, do they lack the science they all claim to have, particularly Prof. Jones and his so-called "scholars!"

And I have yet to see this site link to any site that counters the "offical 9/11 conspiracists' story", or papers like Dr. Greening's, whose links I have provided elsewhere here, that raise strong and serious doubts about 9/11 conspiracists' claims.

So, what do you all intend to learn in the end? The truth?

Or just what you want to believe?

So far, the evidence you've presented is that you're doing a far better job at the latter than the former.

And, Jon, if you wonder about Prof. Jones being discredited, just ask him to refute these papers and see what answer you get:

http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf

http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf

http://www.911myths.com/Energy_Transfer_Addendum.pdf

http://www.911myths.com/NISTREPORT.pdf

Share his answer with everyone here.

Cheers.

Yours is the same message

Yours is the same message over and over "I will not accept what you say because I believe in the 9/11myths website". And maybe there are some details or problems with some minor issues. After all no one has all the answers. But there are still overwhelmingly large problems with 9/11 itself that no matter how hard you try to counter them. The bottom line is, you must decide for yourself whether or not you're happy with every single detail of the official story.

Jon, I'm not JH. S. King can

Jon, I'm not JH.

S. King can do nothing but, copy and paste.

911MYTHS IS A JOKE.

The overall aim is to avoid

The overall aim is to avoid discussing links in the chain of evidence which cannot be broken by truth, but at all times, to use clever deceptions or lies to make the links seem weaker than they are, or better still, cause any who are considering the chain to be distracted in any number of ways, including the method of questioning the credentials of the presenter.

The 9/11 truth skeptics

The 9/11 truth skeptics ALWAYS focus in on the pentagon or building debate...and NEVER acknowlege the mountain of foreknowlege evidence. Why is that ya wonder? They never talk about the Cheney standown orders, war games, Able Danger, etc.

It is *slightly* posisble WTC1 and 2 fell from the plane,s but that seizing financial oppurtunity, Silverstein "pulled" WTC7 in the fog of war. Heck maybe there was explosive vans in the WTC1/2 sublevels who knows.

Also, any updates on Ahmed the money man of 9/11 bein gbuddy buddy with DC th emorning of 9/11?

they lack the science they

they lack the science they all claim to have, particularly Prof. Jones and his so-called "scholars"

prof. Jones points out the fact that molten metal was still red hot in the basements of the WTC a long time after 911. he further points out that the energy required to make that metal molten in the first place is a lot more than could be generated by the gravity driven pancake theory. he claims that controlled explosives are one way to generate the heat required, and states that any other theories need to take into account the existence of said molten metal. so far none have.
he didn't even NEED to bust out any scientific equations to make his report, and his scientific know-how should not be referred to as "so-called". he is an esteemed professor of physics and is well respected in his field. in my opinion Prof. Jones' Report has put a serious thorn into the side of the pancake theory.

S.King is 322.

S.King is 322.

"So far, the evidence you've

"So far, the evidence you've presented is that you're doing a far better job at the latter than the former."

Please name for me one thing I've pointed out that's not true.

"Somebody needs to do some

"Somebody needs to do some serious research on these passengers and their families."

I agree.

But respect (for grief) is a powerful gatekeeper of sorts. For example, who among us is a big enough cad to get in the faces of family members of 9/11 victims and demand to see the bills for phone calls made from an airplane on 9/11?
_______________________________________

Dan wrote... "Yours is the

Dan wrote...

"Yours is the same message over and over "I will not accept what you say because I believe in the 9/11myths website."

Hardly. I am presenting alternate explanations that most here have stated they are reluctant to consider. Some with hostility.

At least try to be accurate in your representations, Dan.

no,i agree with Dan, you are

no,i agree with Dan, you are a 911myths.com groupie.find a new website buddy, it aint working.

"911blogger.com does not

"911blogger.com does not seek to push any specific 'theories' about 9/11, but rather seeks to cover 9/11 related 'alternative' news."

Are you afraid of alternative news, Chris?

s. king is welcome to stay

s. king is welcome to stay here as long as he follows the rules, just like everyone else.

and i did find the article on the bin laden fake tape to be worth my looking at.

as long as he doesnt bash the opinions of others who might disagree then descenting opinions are more than welcome.

Are you afraid of

Are you afraid of alternative news, Chris?
S. King | 02.16.06 - 7:18 am | #
nope, but i think you are. is there anything your government does that you dont blindly believe?