Sunday, April 16, 2006

The Truth about Flight 93

As we know of the 9/11 attacks, there were 4 civil flights that were seized by terrorists, all of which ended up in crashes. Two aeroplanes were flown into the Twin Towers while one into a section of the Pentagon, but the last, United Airlines Flight 93, crashed way before it reached its alleged target, either the Capitol building or White House.

I had followed the whole affair right from the second crash at the Tower, after I chanced upon a CNN broadcast while surfing the channels. I saw that crash and the subsequent collapse of the Towers in real time (technically a micro-second later as the transmission travelled at the speed of light to my location.). I saw worse than that, as unfortunate victims hurled themselves off buildings. It was a terrible sight that I hope never to witness again.

I followed media chatter on the other two crashes, including the one at Pentagon as they unfolded. Over the next few days I was glued to the TV [CNN, BBC, ABC, NBC, etc] for almost 24 hours each day, as I so happened to be on leave.

I have read books about aircrashes, and the sort of footprints that different crashes would tell us, which bring us to Flight 93. I know, just as many in the USA also know, that flight did not crash in the manner that the US government has been promoting.

I cannot understand why the American authorities have recently been allowed to indulge in what I perceive as unnecessary stressful traumas for the victims’ families, by releasing tape recordings of the last agonising cries of dying victims. Perhaps they wanted the horrors to be relived to lend weight to the prosecutors case for the execution of Moussaoui, the only person convicted in the US for the 9/11 attacks - though I have a wild theory that he might not be executed, but then that's another story and a fairly wild one at that.

Anyway, a member of the independent commission that investigated the attacks said: "There is absolutely no doubt that through their heroic actions still more carnage and catastrophe was prevented." What the commission claimed was that the passengers of Flight 93 stopped an attack aimed at either the Capitol building or White House.

This line of conclusion had been part of the purpose for what I feel as an unnecessary release of traumatic recordings, traumatic for the families of victims. Obviously the authorities had wanted to tell the American public that the victims of Flight 93 were heroic in fighting the hijackers until they forced the crash, saving people at the intended target. Mind you, much of the tape has been reported by the media as unintelligible with loud static and inaudible voices.

But what has been revealing has been the authorities conceding that it couldn’t ascertained whether the passengers entered the cockpit, though concluding they were certain about the passengers forcing the hijackers to crash the aircraft into a Pennsylvania field.

How?

This is an example of wishful thinking rather than objective assessment, which wasn't challenged by the general public because it represented the optimum picture of heroic Americans saving other Americans.

If the authorities couldn't be certain about the passengers gaining entry into the cockpit where a couple of the terrorists were flying that ill-fated aeroplane, then how could they claimed they have been certain that the passengers had charged into the cockpit to force the plane to crash, or more plausibly, to try to wrestle control away from the terrorists, even though I wonder which of the passengers was able to fly such a complex hugh aeroplane, had they succeeded. But the plausible version would be an inconvenient one, lacking the much needed 'spirit of the Alamo' to console the victims' families.

I recall what I saw on TV and what those media commentators announced when Flight 93 crashed. I remember vividly that there was a trail of aircraft debris for several kilometres (in miles for Americans) behind the spot where the airline aeroplane crashed. There were chunks of panels, an engine, etc along the last part of the aeroplane path before it hit the ground.

That’s right, parts of the aeroplane were breaking up in flight (or torn/sheared off) before it eventually crashed kilometres away. Ask ourselves what could have caused these. It is also significant that the aeroplane flight data recorder, known commonly as the ‘black box’, was never released. The data would tell a lot more than the released recordings, which haven’t revealed much anyway, other than the authorities adding conjecture that the passenger bravely brought about the crash. We also know that the authorities could easily tamper with tape recordings.

Whether the passengers tried to counter-attack the terrorists would be a moot point, because the trail of debris has been conclusive that the aeroplane was shot down by a USAF fighter plane. The US government obviously don’t want to or can’t tell that to families of the victims. It would be more consoling to emphasize on or create the struggle in the aeroplane cabin, portraying their loved ones as heroes.

The Bush Administration is a known pathological liar but in this case, I think most people including KTemoc would be prepared to support its compassionate fabrication to the families.

1 comment:

  1. That some Flight 93 passengers "fought like warrior poets" is encouraging for our future. For surely “we the people” are able (but are we willing?) to storm the bridge of the ship of state, and seize the helm from postmodernist hijackers. See www.tell-usa.org/flight93

    ReplyDelete