Flight 93: shot down over Pennsylvania?

Official Story Limited Hang Out Best Evidence Disinformation
the "heroes" took down the plane no limited hang outs

Flight 93 was probably shot down.

The best collection of information documenting this is the website www.flight93crash.com - it has not been updated in years, but it saved a number of early news articles and eyewitness accounts.

There are several different theories why it was shot down.

Journalist Wayne Madsen claims that NSA officers were barred from listening to intercepts of Air Force fighter planes at the moment of shootdown:
"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." - Wayne Madsen

The American Free Press, a publication run by a white supremacist organization, floated the claim in September 2004 that the crash of Flight 93 did not happen. There are also claims from people pushing other "no planes" hoaxes that Flight 93 really landed in Cleveland.

This hoax is echoed in the film Loose Change Second Edition Curiously, the first edition of this film suggested that Flight 93 was really shot down.

The hoax site physics911 claims that the passengers didn't really make phone calls to their loved ones because cell phones are not reliable on planes (although the air phones on the planes definitely do work). These hoaxes imply that the victims' voices were simulated by military psychological warfare teams - a great way to alienate the victims' families and ensure that they will not form alliances with the skeptics investigating complicity evidence.


Flight 93
crashed in
10:06 am

cloud from the crash of Flight 93

The official story of Flight 93 is that the heroic passengers brought down the plane to spare the country the tragedy of a fourth attack, a tremendous sacrifice to save others. However, while it seems true that the passengers were revolting against their hijackers, the evidence shows that Flight 93 was actually shot down. Debris from the plane was spread out over 8 miles, which suggests major trauma to the plane while it was still in the air. Some media coverage of this crash in the first couple days strongly suggested a shoot-down, most of this is archived at the website www.flight93crash.com

It is probable that most citizens, regardless of their political philosophies, would have been able to accept the sad necessity to shoot down the fourth plane to avert a worse tragedy -- if the pilots were dead and the passengers doomed, the shoot down could have been easily justified to a traumatized nation. While it is easy to suggest that the "heroes of 9/11" story was a much happier message to tell the public, there are deeper reasons to cover up the shoot down.

The most critical issue that would be raised by admitting to the shoot down is why Flight 77 was not intercepted. Even if one believes the official story that 9/11 was a complete surprise, the fact is at 9:03 am, when the South Tower was hit, no one in the air defense system could have had any ambiguity about what was going on. Flight 77 was over the Ohio / West Virginia border at this point and was making a 180 degree turn to fly back toward the National Capitol, which would have caused the air defenses to "scramble" to intercept. There is no excuse for the fact that supersonic jet interceptors were not "scrambled" to investigate what this plane was doing, and defend the Capitol from attack. If necessary, most of the area that Flight 77 crossed between 9:03 and 9:38 (when it hit the Pentagon) was very rural and forested, and a shoot down would have posed minimal risk for "collateral damage" on the ground.

There are several theories on why Flight 93 was shot down. Which of these theories, or combinations, are true would require a full scale investigation, including access to the black boxes, radar tapes, classified communications, satellite imagery and electronic interceptions, and other evidence that is unlikely to ever be made public.

  1. the military took that long to get their fighter planes ready, and Flight 93 was the first plane they were able to stop. This theory does not adequately explain why the military was not able to prevent Flight 77 from hitting the Pentagon, since 77 was at the Ohio / West Virginia border at 9:03 am, when the second tower was hit (and the entire air defense system knew that an attack was underway).
  2. the passengers were about to regain control of the plane, and one passenger was a pilot who might have been able to safely land the plane, something the official conspirators could not allow, since this would have resulted in live hijackers who would have been interrogated. This theory suggests that the shootdown was the 9/11 equivalent of Jack Ruby's shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald, covering up evidence that the conspirators could not allow to be cross-examined.
  3. the story of the heroic passengers was always an intentional part of the psychological manipulation of the 9/11 plot. Once the Pentagon had been hit, there was no need for Flight 93, since the goals of the attack had already been met. The "let's roll" story was a "Wag the Dog" propaganda that was a part of the overall psychological operation (psyop).
  4. The hijackers were planning to go to Three Mile Island (this has been floated in a few places, although without actual evidence), which would have been an unmanageable disaster much worse than 9/11.
  5. Flight 93 was late taking off, and missed the window of opportunity to reach Washington before the air defense system was mobilized. After the Pentagon was hit about 9:38 am, the military defense of the national capital area went into full force. It is theoretically possible that the original 9/11 plan was to have all four (or more?) planes hit their targets nearly simultaneously, but the delays (especially Flight 93) made it impossible to allow the last plane to reach DC, and therefore it had to be shot down, since the longer the lack of response of the Air Force, the more suspicious the event would become.

Flight 93 hoaxes

The first hoax about Flight 93 was that the phone calls from the passengers to their relatives were faked. These calls told the passengers about the WTC crashes, who then decided to attack the hijackers. Ignoring the reality that modern planes have "air phones" that explicitly are designed to work on planes, the evidence for "no cell phone calls are possible" is ambiguous at best. The website physics911 seems to be the source for these claims, which were concocted by a Canadian physicist who staged an experiment to replicate cell-phone reception in a small plane flying in Canada. A real experiment to prove the calls could not have been made would have needed to replicate the locations and altitudes in the United States (since cell phone reception is completely dependent on location). Physics911 also pushes the no plane hit Pentagon hoax and has promoted the "pod."

While it is true that fake audio and video can be created with sophisticated software systems, this is probably the meme most calculated to alienate "9/11 researchers" from the family members. It is unlikely that a spouse would not know they were having a phone conversation with their partner, and the extra complication to the operation makes this theory one of the least credible. There is enough provable evidence of official complicity without claiming that 9/11 family members really didn't talk with their loved ones on the phone - at least for those sincerely interested in the truth.

Physics911 also promoted a science fiction story claiming that the passengers from all four planes were all brought to a single site (a secret military base) and then all relocated to a single plane, which was then crashed to dispose of the evidence. This fantasy has zero evidence for it. It would have massively complicated the operation for no benefit. It is likely that the only "plane swap" that happened was tampering with the navigation system to ensure the "success" of the attacks, not any substitution of one plane for another.

In September 2004, the American Free Press newspaper published an article implying that there wasn't a plane crash in Pennsylvania (even though a lot of people saw and heard it happen). This publication is part of an ultra right wing media group that also publishes the "Barnes Review," a Holocaust Denial publication that has praised Hitler. AFP / Barnes, by their own admission, works closely with KKK leader David Duke. Perhaps their motto should be "No Planes on 9/11 and No Gas Chambers in the Holocaust." The AFP acronym is also used by Agence-France Press, one of the world's leading media organizations, which could cause confusion and undeserved legitimacy for the American Free Press, which promotes (and creates) hoaxes that misdirect serious investigation into 9/11 complicity.

There is also a hoax that Flight 93 landed in Cleveland during the attacks, a variation on the plane substitution claims.

United Airlines Flight 93: shot down?

... all indications point to the inescapable conclusion that the plane was shot down with an air-to-air missile fired from a fighter interceptor.
To be sure, this unpleasant fact alone does not disqualify the entire official story. Indeed, it could be claimed that the fact that a justified shootdown did occur weakens the case for an air defense stand down, that is, the failure of the air defenses seems less unlikely in light of UA93. On the other hand, monumental incompetence on the part of all those responsible for defending the skies is a requirement for the official story. In any case, general suspicion about the events of September 11 has advanced to such a degree that admitting that a major facet of the prevailing storyline is incorrect probably is not an option for the alleged perpetrators inside the Federal Government.
First, as usual, it is necessary to dispel disinformation: a very persistent, illogical and incorrect claim states that UA93 landed in Cleveland, Ohio. This was initially based on a single erroneous wire report that confused flights 93 and 1989 (which was indeed forced to land in Cleveland because of a report of a bomb on board). The report was retracted just minutes after it was issued, but remained, erroneously, on the website of a local paper. The local reporter's, instead of the wire service's, name was attached to the story - a third error.
(The most insanely improbable version of this theory holds that the flight was made to land just so that the Government could unload the passangers, kill them in a NASA research center, and then dispose of the plane. Or return it to use. Well, either that, or the plane was loaded with the passangers of all the other flights in order to dispose of them in a single blow. Just how preposterously complicated can a plan get?)

Download, print and spread 9/11 truth to moviegoers at the latest cover-up film
"United 93"!

1. 6-Panel pdf 'Flight 93' Flyer from 911Research
Folding flyer that highlights some of the omissions and contradictions in the official story of the crash of Flight 93. An HTML version of the flyer has hyperlinks to all the supporting references. Suitable for printing on both sides of an 8-1/2 X 11 sheet. Color or b/w. http://911research.wtc7.net/materials/flight93/index.html

2. 1-Page 'Flight 93' Fact Sheet from Digital Style Designs
Single page high resolution pdf with the clear and simple facts for a quick education on the street in b/w.

Federal Register: June 16, 2006
National Park Service
Draft General Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement,
Flight 93 National Memorial, Pennsylvania