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.


Cleveland Smoking Gun Proves “Arab Hijacker” Calls From United Airlines Flight 93 Were Faked

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 11:58 AM
reply to post by weedwhacker

excellent video. thank for posting. here is a direct link to the video.

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 12:10 PM
Yes I agree, great video.

I like the comments

imprint does not fit a boeing in a 40° angle....

faked crash site we got presented here.

They also said that the hijackers passports were found at the base of the twin towers "proving" that they were in the planes...then they find most of them alive and well living in Saudi Arabia....(There is no "real" answer when it comes to this crap)
saintmirrenmalky (1 week ago) Show Hide +8 Marked as spam Reply Ok guys I am not trying to to be controversial here, and certainly not trying to disrespect those who died on 9/11, but if the plane didn't crash in PA (and from that video it sure looks it didn't) then where? As I understand it, real people died as a result of United 93 so what happened to them? Like I say I'm not trying to be disrespectful, i'm just wondering.

janeleone (1 week ago) Show Hide +3 Marked as spam Reply Watch the rest of it, it landed. Who they claimed died, we don't know. There are a lot of mysteries behind this. Remember the flight lists were never consistent. For all we know they could have completely made up the "victims" with agent's names or whatever..or perhaps put them on the other planes...who knows. What we know for sure is that they are lying. the story doesn't add up. They control the information and had their story prepared well in advance.

redprojet (1 week ago) Show Hide +1 Marked as spam Reply That is true. Where are the missing passengers? Some witnesses claimed to have seen flight 93 land in Cleveland at about 11:30 am on sept. 11. Flights 93 and 175 were still valid after 9/11. While flights 11 and 77 were destroyed.
AnahiCharles (1 week ago) Show Hide +1 Marked as spam Reply excellent video 5 stars

AlexJonesWarrior (1 week ago) Show Hide +3 Marked as spam Reply this is the best 93 vid i have seen
dj5665 (1 week ago) Show Hide +25 Marked as spam Reply THIS MAKES ME SIIIICCCKKKK!!!! 911 was a totall set up, and im stoaked youtube put this on the top page!!! WAKE UP AMERICA!!!! WERE RUNNING OUT OF TIME!

Meze1231 (2 weeks ago) Show Hide +10 Marked as spam Reply Good vid! I'm still appalled that so many people don't see the obvious lies & manipulations orchestrated by their government, right in front of their eyes... but then again, I can understand that not everyone is fit to handle the truth.

'The truth will set you free, but only if you can handle it. Can you?" ... CAN YOU HANDLE THE TRUTH?'

4AntiWar (2 weeks ago) Show Hide +10 Marked as spam Reply Wreckage remains disappearing; muslims turning up saying they weren't hijackers; Pakistan interview with Bin Laden saying he swore on the Koran that he didn't do 9/11; phony Bin Laden video's suddenly appearing before Bush election; proven propaganda by American Government (WMD, Private Lynch etc).

Why would anybody have problems believing the official story!!
6thCreated (2 weeks ago) Show Hide +6 Marked as spam Reply what about OPERATION NORTHWOODS? that # says the US gov would blow up a civilian plane. a drone plane none the less. and that was like 30 years ago. i think that is the biggest smoking gun. building 7 is good to though.

The strongest parts of any passenger jet are the engines and landing gear. Where are they?

erryjam22 (1 month ago) Show Hide +4 Marked as spam Reply I thought the fuel for these planes were stored in the wings? why is there no smoke in the phony wing indention's.

fixanator (1 month ago) Show Hide +20 Marked as spam Reply The impact hole was covered with undisturbed dry grass blades. The hole was dug months beforehand. I have the pic to prove it. I guess jet fuel does not burn grass, but takes down steel structures? And what DNA? They just happened to have ALL the DNA of passengers on hand? No way. Why would they need dna if there is a passenger list?

You got some real convincing evidence here. There should have been some wreckage left. Planes dont hit the ground so hard that they disintergrate into atoms.

jerryjam22 (1 month ago) Show Hide +8 Marked as spam Reply What else do we need folks?

Angienic05 (1 month ago) Show Hide +7 Marked as spam Reply It blows my mind that people still refuse to accept the fact that 9/11 was indeed a inside job even after all of these years and after al of the evidence that has surfaced since the attacks.

streetviper08 (1 month ago) Show Hide +4 Marked as spam Reply man I am so confused now. I do not know what to trust from the government anymore

punkermetalhead7772 (1 month ago) Show Hide +2 Marked as spam Reply great vid its hilarious how they expect us to believe that the jet fuel vaporized all the bodies, luggage, and plane, but left the black box perfectly intact. if you look at the first news heading he showed in the vid it says "Black box found in penn. crash site".
such bull#

I got 2000+ comments that all agree. Then we got 2 ro 3 here at ats that can understand the information.

So as you can see.... everyone you really researched flight 93 and has an i.q over 79 will learn that Flight 93 never crashed in Shanksville on 911.

The video you provided only focuses on the shoot down theory which no one was on board with anyways. The conspiracy was started by Rumsfeld and the nurtured by Letsroll911 and the loose change gang. Government propaganda and disinformation.

Thank you gentlemen.

[edit on 3-7-2008 by IvanZana]

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 01:08 PM
reply to post by dgtempe

Before Berkshire Hathaway (Bushie Warren Buffett) bought it in 1998, Netjets was named Executive Jet (coded EJA) On 9/11 Buffett was hosting a golf tourney in Omaha. Guess where GWB went that afternoon. Yup, Omaha

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 01:09 PM
oh dear look out,t here is comments on youtube that agree with these crack pot "it was an inside job theories

lemme try doing what they do and see if it helps


did that change anything guys?

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 01:38 PM
reply to post by ThroatYogurt

There are still some that are "on the fence", or "newbies." These folks should be shown both sides of the table here.

Aren't you concerned that if these individuals get all of the evidence available, that you will notice the other side of the fence that you are on filling up...?

I honestly believe that anyone who actually looks at the information available, and uses even basic reasoning skills, will never buy the official report...You should not either. I believe you to be intelligent, just a bit mis-lead...

Flame on...

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 02:00 PM
reply to post by esdad71

There has never, ever been a solid piece of evidence that supports explosives at the WTC or missles at the Pentagon.

There is plenty of video evidence contrary to what you state here...but PHYSICAL evidence...No. You are correct. I do find it quite convenient that all of the debris from WTC 1, 2, and 7 were loaded up, and sent overseas. I know that if I didn't was any proof of involvement, I would take the evidence and put it completely out of reach.

I understand that where it was moved(the debris that is), it is still under armed security supervision...So the lack of PHYSICAL proof is by design, not lack of proof being there...

Flame on...

:after Edit:
Oh yeah...Dig the Kitty

[edit on 3-7-2008 by daddymax]

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 02:43 PM
of course they identified all the bodies at the shanksville site but of course that coroner was in on it too. God there sure is a lot of people involved in the conspiracy. Although those scars that were there before the crash and that the plane crashes into there seems a little fishy. Can anyone explaine how those plane crashed directly into a scar that has already been there. Regardless there is still way too much debris and human remains found there to say something did not crash there. And the people involved in a conspiracy of this magnitude alone makes a consiracy highly unlikely. The only possible thing I would say would be that some people in the government knew an attack was immenent and kept it secret. I really do not believe Bush knew about it, however maybe the people who knew about knew what his reaction would be if it happened.

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 02:47 PM
First off I have a question? Does hearing or reading things in regards to 9/11 choke anyone up. I as a grown man still get tears in my eyes when I think about how these people suffered before dieing! Now back on topic, I can not say I agree with this about how the these were not the highjackers. However I have questions that I dont think will ever be answered. 1 Why is any of the evidence kept top secret. 2 Why did these buildings fall the way they did. 3 Why did building five fall 4 Why was the video's from a near by store taken and not shown pertaining to the pentagon. And so on. Then you have the papers that were released last year showing our own government had suggested that some of the same thing be done by our government in the sixties to make us think that cuba had attacked us so they could bomb them and have the whole country behind them. Now this is just toooo strange. My personal beleaf is they might have known and took no action, then they could do what they wanted. Guess what! It worked. Did it not say in press a short time back that over a hundred people knew they were going to do something soon, if they knew this what else did they know? Oh one more question why did the so called peoples mayor get rid of the buiding (evidence) so fast. Oh hay he's not any mayor I want.

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 03:09 PM
Debunkers are failing once again. They can no longer fool,derail and mislead you good readers out there looking forr the truth.
They are up against the walls and they already urinated themselves.
I have no pity.

It must be sad to know that everything you have done was for nothing eh boone, weedwaker?

All the evidence that was collected by expert researchers and investigators and not to mention the actual people that were involved in the clean up, all agree that Flight 93 did not crash in Shanksville on 911.

Forget all the 911 conspiracies. This one is a slam dunk.

[edit on 3-7-2008 by IvanZana]

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 03:14 PM
reply to post by IvanZana

Of course there are an awful lot of witnesses that actually saw the plane crash. Were these people in on it too. Oh yeah, that crater that was there before the plane crashed isnt the same crater where the plane crashed. It actually cashed right next to the trees. That crater is way back from the trees. look at your video. See how close those wing marks are to those trees. They are actually touching part of the road. Now look at the picture here of the geological survey if you compare that scar to the size of the house you would see that those are two total different locations. you could fit about six of those houses in that scar. The plane scar is much smaller and much closer to those trees. The geological scar is about 200 yards or further from those trees. SO what do you think now? Do you still claim them one in the same?

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 03:23 PM
reply to post by IvanZana

Come on Ivan, still waiting for your response about the scar. You claimed it was there before, which there was one close to the site, however the plane crashed some 200 feet from it. So that video you posted is complete BS.

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 03:37 PM
You know what.

I dont know if 9/11 was an 'inside job' but to say that the plane didnt crash is just absurd.

My preacher, 76 years old, lost one of his friends in that crash.

Jane Folger

He rarely mentions her anymore - but if you ask his wife, she'll tell you.

So i guess the government just blew her brains out to cover up the crash?

This isnt 'proof' of anything, and certainly gives no credit to a 9/11 cover up conspiracy.

Anyone who knew anyone on that plane will certainly tell you

It crashed.

Or does this conspiracy offer an explanation for the missing people that i may have missed?

[edit on 7/3/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 03:41 PM
reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

I am agreeing that it crashed. Ivan said that the mark was there before the plane crashed. Saying with out that mark there is just a hole in the ground like a bomb hit there. However I have proved that the mining scar is hundred of yards away from the actual crash site. I also posted a link with eye witnesses that saw the plane crash. The plane crashed, was not shot down, and left an imprint of a plane where it crashed. Those are facts.

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 03:47 PM

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
reply to post by tide88

You know what.
This isnt 'proof' of anything, and certainly gives no credit to a 9/11 cover up conspiracy.

This thread is not about if it crashed or not but centers around the calls from Cleveland Center and the alleged accidental dispatch stating bombs on board from the alleged flight 93 and the alleged terrorists.

I have a question.

Flight 1989 also dispatched warnings to cleveland that they had a bomb on board and was returning to the nearest airport, at the same time flight 93's terrorist hit the wrong button and dispatched " This is the captain speaking, we have a bomb on board, please remain seated"

Well here is a clipping from one of the passengers of Flight 1989. I must add that this is the flight that some people reported as being flight 93 landing in cleveland shortly after the alleged crash of Flight 93.

[My spouse] and I and six other fellow [...] employees were on the 8 am flight from Boston to Los Angeles on Tuesday, but we were on the Delta flight [1989], the one out of three 8am flights departing Logan that did not get hijacked. Instead, we were forced to make an emergency landing in Cleveland because there were reports that a bomb or hijacking was taking place on our plane. The pilot had radioed that there was suspicious activity in the cabin since one of the passengers was speaking urgently on his cellphone and ignored repeated flight attendant requests to stop using his cell phone while in flight. Also, there was an irregularity in the passenger manifest because there were two people [with the same middle eastern name] who were listed but only one aboard. Please read that whole link. Amazing.

How do we know that that the 'bomb' call that the officials state came from flight 93 wasnt an overlap of the bomb call of Flight 1989?

Isnt it odd and a little too coincidental? Middle easter men? Same names? Acting funny? but thats another thread.

[edit on 3-7-2008 by IvanZana]

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 03:51 PM
reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

I suppose then you can prove it was not shot down? Or is the OS beyond proof since loved ones were lost?

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 03:56 PM

Originally posted by IvanZana
reply to post by tide88

This thread is not about if it crashed or not but centers around the calls from Cleveland Center and the alleged accidental dispatch stating bombs on board from the alleged flight 93 and the alleged terrorists.

Oh - i apologize then. I was nto attempting to derail. But when i watched the video you posted about the 'smoking gun' showing satellite photographs, i had to respond.

I know one thing, for sure. Flight 93 crashed. Real people died for real.

The rest, i have no idea.
I could see WHY someone would want to commit a 9/11

Afterall, to someone who doesnt find life valuable - whats 2000 or so corpses, when compared to billions....trillions...invested in war.

then again

i also see the other side of that - why wouldnt someone want to attack America? I mean...honestly - they are out there, and they want to do it, so why isnt it possible that they did?

Im open for debate, open for argument, and open to be swayed.

But flight 93 crashed

I've said my part

[edit on 7/3/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 03:56 PM
This part of flight 1989 is interesting and could be applied to all the calls that originated from the planes.

After our emergency landing, our plane was directed to go to an isolated area of the airport, and we waited for over two hours in quarantine before FBI agents and bomb sniffing dogs came out to the plane. Just after we landed, the pilot gave us permission to make one very brief telephone call before we were banned from any further telephone use. The sixty or so passengers were thus able to gather some alarming details of the unbelievable fates of the other two LA-bound planes and the collapse of the World Trade Center towers, the suicide bombing of the Pentagon as well as reports of other plane crashes in PA and LA (LA proved unfounded) before we were cut off from any further communication. Unfortunately, all this information only added to the alarm and confusion we felt as we waited for over two hours far away from the gates of the airport.

The mp3 provided on the 1st page of this thread does sound a little odd. The oddest part is how the Exec flight was tailing flight 93, lost him in a corner, then decribes, very calmy without emotion that "yup a see a little smoke puff cloud, just appears to be a puff of dark smoke".

Now does that sound like a fellow pilot witnessing a comercial heavy going do infront of him.

[edit on 3-7-2008 by IvanZana]

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 05:12 PM
reply to post by IvanZana

You posted that video which more than half of it uses the scar mark as proof no plane crashed there. You also bring up this same video in another post on this site mentioning the scar. What did I prove. I proved that the scar isnt even close to the site where the plane crashed, although the video you posts claims the scar is the exact spot. I also lgave a link where dozens of shanksville residents witnessed the plane crashing, not being shot down. Now your are saying how do I know that the transmission came from that plane and was not an overlap from an incident that happened 11 years before. That is complete speculation, there is no proof what so ever that the transmission didnt come from flight 93. You proof is because of the quaility of transmission that the call has to be a fake. A pilot posted above that perhaps he was hitting the proper button on the plane to transmit. You start your thread, which is a copy and paste from another website, with "Though this discontinuous pre-edited tape from AirDisaster. com cannot be verified as genuine, there is a high probability the audible segments which remain probably are." It says in the opening paragraph that they cannot be verified. He is the transcipt played to hundred of people and families of the victims Of course you are going to come back and say it was fake or doctored. Just like the pieces of planes at the WTC, Pentagon, and shanksville were planted there. Here is the whole tape you can listen to the whole tape. Sound pretty clear. Not as clear as the first transmission but clear nonetheless. WHo knows what was going on it in cockpit or who was transmitting. THe highjackers see completely out of breath which would make sense with the rushing of the cockpit. I dont see how your post is proof of anything. If anything, if you listen to that tape it proves it was highjacked. Then you are saying people that don't believe your side with the proof that you gave
have to have an iq of 70. Well if someone was to believe thats the SMOKING GUN that proves calls from flight 93 were fake they would have to have serious mental issues, maybe even have an iq of 70.

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 05:18 PM

Originally posted by want2believe
First off I have a question? Does hearing or reading things in regards to 9/11 choke anyone up. I as a grown man still get tears in my eyes when I think about how these people suffered before dieing!

Not at all. In the years since 9/11 countless innocent foreigners have been killed and maimed resulstant directly from U.S. foreign policy stemming from the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. For millions of people in the Middle East the suffering starting at 9/11 has not stopped and will not for the forseeable future.

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 05:25 PM
i expected to see proof that the transcripts and audio recordings of flight 93 were fake, per the title of this thread. as usual, i went through the whole thread and found nothing of the sort.

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in