It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


News crew at 93 crash site

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 06:17 PM
I live in North Idaho, and we get the Spokane TV feeds for the major networks, along with some cable channels. On 9-11, I watched an interview of some campers near the crash site. They made a point of the small military jet, right on the tail of Flight 93, just before it crashed. The heavy came accross their camp, low and slow, so the military jet was in real bad air, with no altitude to recover from a vortice, generated by the bigger airliner. I've never seen this clip again, since it was live about noonish, PDT. Have any of you seen this interview clip, from the local TV station? Thanx.

posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 07:26 PM
No, I have never even heard of it. But I would appreciate it very much if you would share anything you find out on this. If you want to u2u me some specifics on the TV channel info that aired this I will try to assist you in any way I can.

Thanks for sharing your recollection.

posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 01:46 AM
Unfortunately that looks to me like some of the stories such as the one where the news reporter said that he saw no windows on one of the planes that hit the WTC, just being aired once then being pulled off by the network.

IMO, there was something fishy going on there; did the people that were interviewed say much else about what they saw? it may well lead to some conclusions to what really happened.

posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 02:32 AM
The only thing I remember from the local news in Pittsburgh.. if you are referring to..

WPXI Channel 11
WTAE Channel 4
KDKA Channel 2

I was watching channel 11 at the time, they talked about the 911 call, the debris field being way to big, the coroner, and then just air shots of the crash scene.

I don't remember someone saying much about another airplane in the area. the ones that said there was they said it was another airliner.

I didn't hear anything about a military plane tho..

I hope this helps somewhat... This is all from memory.

posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 11:37 AM
Thank you for the imput. Here is my recollection of what was obviously a field tripping reporter with a cameraman.
1. You could see the funeral pyre of 93 off in the distance, so they were within 5 miles or so.
2. They, and I mean about six or seven, two were talking, and the rest nodded their heads in the affirmative, said exactly what I posted. Since they were camping, who knows where they were from.
2. Nobody mentioned gunfire, and nobody was waving expended shell casings around, but that military job has the answers.
3 At 400mph, the heavy, would have made the five miles, in slightly less than a minute, say 50seconds, so the little military jet was doing something electronic, to drive the big airliner down.
I was channel surfing, and didn't log each hit on the remote. Usually, you get it back ad nausium, anyways. But not this one. I do know that the Gov't spent zillions on "Look down, shoot down" technology, precisely to keep $50M interceptors, out of the bad air, and debris, of their victims.
The little bird was in a bad place, and it was there for a reason, and that reason, goes right to the heart of 9-11 conspiricies.
I don't know how the ATS ads, will take this, but here goes;
I am part of a loose knit community of world wide online dowsers. The Gov't hates us with a purple passion. Some time later, I posited three questions to a noted East Coast Dowser, at the end of a telephone session, about the above incident.
!st. Did the little airframe merely shadow 93, or did it bring it down?
Answer; It brought it down.
2nd Was the airframe manned or unmanned? (you can't see a cockpit, from the ground, looking straight up)
Answer; It was unmanned.
3rd Did the unmanned airframe, ditch over water,(Great Lakes), or did it come down over land?
Answer; It landed safely.

posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 12:22 PM
Sorry about this, I tried to reply to both posts, but got them crossed up.
This is probably more for the other gent. The TV crew splashed the call sign of a station with K, or K's in it. It was near Shanksville, so I'm guessing the KDKA station is the culprit. Why they scotched an interview with a half dozen eye witnesses of the final moments of 93, is beyond me. But please realize that not everyone in the U.S. saw all of the same TV feeds, that day.
All of the U.S. unmanned, or U.A.V development, is centered just over the border, at Wright Patterson Field, in Ohio. As for the no window blurb, I saw that too. Those TV feeds showed a Boeing Airframe that had been diverted off of the production line, and modified in the Phantom Works to sport, what would be called "bilge Keels' on a yacht, to carry some extra special avionics. It would have never passed the strict weight penalties for commercial traffic, but of course the Air Force doesn't care about fuel, since they don't show profit or loss, per passenger mile. A dummied up airliner, is the perfect cruise missile, albeit a bit rough on the hundred or so passengers and crew, so maybe you should be looking at "C" , both of the above, on the cruise missile, or airplane controversies.
These "Q" planes, would work really neat on a black, stormy night, but in bright sunlight, over NYC, and Washington, D.C., forget it.
My call is that the small unmanned airframe was loaded with Anthrax, and was going to circle D.C. about three times, after 93, took out the Capital building. That's seventy five years with no civillian seat of Gov't., folks. Now think just how important it was that the passengers of 93 torpedoed everything when they rushed the cockpit. Does it make their valor any less, if the boy in the bunker panicked, and brought down the heavy, remotely, before they regained control of the flight deck, and then screamed on their cell phones, that none of the controls were working??

new topics

top topics

log in