Real History, Shanksville, and the World Trade Center

AR-Online Posted Friday, October 26, 2001

Another forum on UA 93

David Irving writes:

A READER has called our attention to another, Canadian-based, Web discussion on the real story behind the crash of United Flight 93 on September 11, 2001 [link ] The initial page by Ken Peerless is reproduced below. Some of the following discussion [not reproduced below] appears to wander off track. We do not necessarily endorse any of the views expressed.

The Fourth Plane

October 20, 2001:

Has the international media agreed to ignore the anomalies regarding the fourth aircraft that terminated lethally in Pennsylvania? It seems certain to me that this plane was shot down given the following evidence. . .

A woman talking to her husband on the plane via cell phone said that he told her that he and some of the other passengers were going to try and retake the airplane. He let the phone dangle with the connection unbroken . . . an explosion is heard and then silence.
When we see the shot of the "crash" site on CNN there is nothing but a hole in the ground, a little smoke here and there and some folks wandering around in white protective suits. This is like no wreck site anyone has ever seen. No wreckage. No bodies. Not much of a hole.
The police officer securing the scene says that the wreckage is spread over nine miles. When asked he suggests that "maybe the wind blew it." The trees in the background show no wind movement. Not a leaf stirs, He says that "there is no piece bigger then a cigarette package."
A witness says that there was a small plane following the jetliner.
Either the black box isn't recovered or its contents are being kept secret, although the boxes from the WTC survived the 600 mph crash, a 1000 degree centigrade fireball and the subsequent collapse of the buildings on them . . . and are still readable.
[Vice President Dick] Cheney announces that [President George W] Bush ordered any planes remaining in the air to be shot down after the two impacts the WTC. Later, after being informed of the attempt of the passengers to retake the plane, he says that they didn't have to do it . . . that it crashed as a result of the struggle.
[Secretary of Defense Donald] Rumsfeld quotes [Winston] Churchill. . . "Truth is so precious that it must be accompanied by a bodyguard of lies."
The Governor of Pennsylvania [Tom Ridge], the state where the plane terminated and a man not known for his expertise on terrorism, nor anything much else, is appointed 'terrorism czar' for the whole of the US. The Governor of Pennsylvania? Gimme a break.
After initial reports from two vague witnesses . . . silence. We don't hear anything more of this aircraft. No more witnesses are questioned and we see no more shots of the crash site.

SUMMARY The hole in the ground could be a hole in the ground anywhere. Actually, the TV footage looks like an out-take from a cheap science fiction movie shot in a landfill. We never see any bodies. Much larger pieces of wreckage are recovered from the WTC site, along with parts of tied up stewardesses and the black boxes. Neither I, nor anybody I've queried, have ever seen an aircraft crash site where there was no wreckage. No seats. No luggage. No pieces of wing or fuselage. "No piece bigger than a cigarette package." And spread over nine miles.

CONCLUSION It would seem that this plane was taken out by a hell of a missile. Perhaps one designed to destroy a nuclear armed bomber and cook the payload. This was the last plane to go down and was a long way from its assumed target, so the US military had plenty of time to scramble a fighter and blow it out of the sky. Initial reports put a fighter on the scene. Further . . . Cheney announced that the President ordered it shot down . . . but then the PR disaster reared its ugly head.

The Passengers were trying to retake the aircraft and given a few more minutes might have succeeded. They decide to circle the wagons and lie but the Governor of Pennsylvania has either been informed or has found out on his own so they appoint him to the position of 'Terrorist Czar" and sign him to the "Official Secrets Act." He is effectively silenced. The Administration quickly praises the brave passengers and claims that the struggle caused the plane to crash.

The question that bothers me is . . . Why haven't the international media been all over this?

I can understand the major media in the US dummying up on orders from the US Administration (I wonder if this wasn't what Bob Woodward was alluding to when he admitted on TV to quashing a story a couple of weeks ago "for the good of the country") but why are the international media keeping mum? It seems obvious that the US Administration has lied but nobody jumps on it. Why? There's something very wrong here.

Source: The New York Times