United 93...Not for Liberals

There seems to be some confusion as to what did/didn't happen in this real life tragedy. So here's what IS known.

The black box made it clear that the passengers did not breach the cock pit, they never made it in. However, the pressure they put on the hijackers did more or less force the hijackers to crash the plane early.

In short, while the passengers didn't physically crash the plane, they are the reason it did crash. This is supported by statements from the US Government, people who spoke to the passengers on the phone while they were on the flight, and people doing flight control on the ground, and as I said, the Black Box. Like it or not, for those who are skeptical, this IS evidence, and this scenario has more backing than any of the other scenarios that have been suggested, which have nothing to back them up other than strange and questionable reasoning.

Originally posted by BackFire
There seems to be some confusion as to what did/didn't happen in this real life tragedy. So here's what IS known.

The black box made it clear that the passengers did not breach the cock pit, they never made it in. However, the pressure they put on the hijackers did more or less force the hijackers to crash the plane early.

In short, while the passengers didn't physically crash the plane, they are the reason it did crash. This is supported by statements from the US Government, people who spoke to the passengers on the phone while they were on the flight, and people doing flight control on the ground, and as I said, the Black Box. Like it or not, for those who are skeptical, this IS evidence, and this scenario has more backing than any of the other scenarios that have been suggested, which have nothing to back them up other than strange and questionable reasoning.

How does banging on a secured cockpit pressure the Terrorists to crash the Plane? Not at all? Yeah, that's what I thought.

Just because they didn't get in doesn't mean they wouldn't have eventually. Hence why they crashed the plane.

Originally posted by BackFire
Just because they didn't get in doesn't mean they wouldn't have eventually. Hence why they crashed the plane.

Makes not much sense. If you are ging to die anyways, why would you crash it somewhere where nobody is?

Because they were pressed for time.

Again, the black box supports that that the hijackers were being pressured by the uprising from the passengers and were forced to crash the plane prematurely before they broke through the cockpit.

It makes perfect sense if you're reasonable. They didn't breach the cockpit, that doesn't mean that they weren't very close to breaching the cockpit.

Originally posted by BackFire
Because they were pressed for time.

Again, the black box supports that that the hijackers were being pressured by the uprising from the passengers and were forced to crash the plane prematurely before they broke through the cockpit.

It makes perfect sense if you're reasonable. They didn't breach the cockpit, that doesn't mean that they weren't very close to breaching the cockpit.

But what if they had breached it? If you are a suicide bomber, why would you abort your mission? You have nothing to lose. It makes no sense.

You keep saying it makes no sense...it does, and I've been explaining why for the past few posts.

What do you mean "what if they had breached it?" They didn't, this is a pointless question.

They have a lot to lose. These men wanted to die, they wanted to suicide and control their own deaths. Had they been overwhelmed they'd no longer be in control. For all they knew one of the passengers may have known how to land a plane, in which case they'd be absolutely screwed, they wouldn't have killed themselves, or the passengers, they would be put in prison, which isn't what they wanted. They wanted to die. I've also heard that the black box supports that one of the pilots was actually left alive, in which case it makes even more sense.

Originally posted by BackFire
You keep saying it makes no sense...it does, and I've been explaining why for the past few posts.

What do you mean "what if they had breached it?" They didn't, this is a pointless question.

They have a lot to lose. These men wanted to die, they wanted to suicide and control their own deaths. Had they been overwhelmed they'd no longer be in control. For all they knew one of the passengers may have known how to land a plane, in which case they'd be absolutely screwed, they wouldn't have killed themselves, or the passengers, they would be put in prison, which isn't what they wanted. They wanted to die. I've also heard that the black box supports that one of the pilots was actually left alive, in which case it makes even more sense.

No, those people wanted to die as suicide bombers. Not as people who wanted crashed a plane into a field. I am not saying that it didn't happen that way, just that it was very stupid of the Terrorists if it did. Also, what exactly is the Black Box showing?

The black box records sounds, specifically, it recorded the sounds of the hijackers while they were in the cockpit. The recordings on the black box support that the hijackers were pressured into crashing the plane early because of the uprising of the passengers.

Yes, they wanted to die as suicide bombers and kill people many many people. They however realized that this had become an impossibility, and were forced to crash the plane into the field to ensure their deaths and the deaths of the passengers. Which was all they could hope for at that time.

Originally posted by BackFire
The black box records sounds, specifically, it recorded the sounds of the hijackers while they were in the cockpit. The recordings on the black box support that the hijackers were pressured into crashing the plane early because of the uprising of the passengers.

Yes, they wanted to die as suicide bombers and kill people many many people. They however realized that this had become an impossibility, and were forced to crash the plane into the field to ensure their deaths and the deaths of the passengers. Which was all they could hope for at that time.

But how does it support that?

What the hijackers say before they crash the plane is supposed to support that they had to bring the plane down because of the passengers.

Of course, I don't have specifics, they haven't released the black box to the public, but according to the US government it does support it.

Originally posted by BackFire
What the hijackers say before they crash the plane is supposed to support that they had to bring the plane down because of the passengers.

Of course, I don't have specifics, they haven't released the black box to the public, but according to the US government it does support it.

Okay, the US government. I trust the US Government there....really...

They said "Let's roll!"

Originally posted by Janus Marius

Yes, go Dubya...

Originally posted by DiamondBullets
Silence hippie! 😠

GO DUBYA!!!

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I guess they just gonna consider United 93 the Brokeback Mountain for Republicans...

"Yowza yowza yowza"

Originally posted by BackFire
There seems to be some confusion as to what did/didn't happen in this real life tragedy. So here's what IS known.

The black box made it clear that the passengers did not breach the cock pit, they never made it in. However, the pressure they put on the hijackers did more or less force the hijackers to crash the plane early.

In short, while the passengers didn't physically crash the plane, they are the reason it did crash. This is supported by statements from the US Government, people who spoke to the passengers on the phone while they were on the flight, and people doing flight control on the ground, and as I said, the Black Box. Like it or not, for those who are skeptical, this IS evidence, and this scenario has more backing than any of the other scenarios that have been suggested, which have nothing to back them up other than strange and questionable reasoning.

Backfire, don't you think that if the terrorists intentionally crashed the plane that they (as terrorists) would have chosen a target instead of an open field? I understand that what you are saying is a possibility, but it is also speculation not fact. I would think that if they were going to intentionally crash the plane, why would they not take something out with it, that was the plan.

Also, I believe that eyewitness reports mention that the plane was upside down before impact, why (if this is true) would the terrorists intentionally invert the plane before impact?

Finally, looking at every crash previous to flight 93, why did all those planes leave post crash debris of considerable size such as entire tail sections, nose sections or body sections of the plane whereas flight 93 seems to have left nothing on the ground larger than a 3x3 section.

It seems very odd, and irresponsible, to have so little information regarding a national tragedy (odd also due the numerous conflicting eyewitness reports) and make a movie based on such information and speculation.

I'm sure if they were able to choose a better target, they would have. The fact that the plane crashed in an open field merely suggests that they didn't have time to go and look for a better target, and that they were greatly pressed for time, which again, is supposedly supported by what was recorded on the black box.

I've not heard of those eyewitness accounts. Assuming it's true, it could just mean they completely lost control of the plane in their panic and haste to crash it before the cockpit was breached, keep in mind these guys supposedly weren't the best pilots around. Also keep in mind, eyewitness reports should always be met with skepticism, the power of suggestion is great with people and you can't always trust what people think they've seen.

I don't think it's at all irresponsible to make such a film just because some people are skeptical to what happened. The information is there, it's supported by everyone who was involved in the event that day, including the flight controlers on the ground and the families of the victims who recieved the phone calls. It's also supported by the black box and the government. They have all the information that will ever be available, really, and that information is grounds for a great story about the immense courage and bravery that normal people can achieve even under the most terrible and dire of situations.

I must agree with Karmadog here. We know far too little of the actual events to know what really happened. Making a movie based on scarce information is a bad idea.

Not the entire recording from 93’s black box has been released.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_93#Passenger_and_crew_phone_calls

I’m not saying that the passengers did not act. But what was different from this hi-jacking as opposed to the other three? It seems many more phone-calls were made from Flight 93 than there were from the other three planes (which has been used to “establish” what happened)? Why was that?

Flight 93 was delayed more than 45 minutes, so I can imagine the hi-jackers were a little on the edge, but still...

backfire, the only problem i have with the "pressured terrorists" idea is that...well...those cockpits are constructed for the sole purpose of that very situation, accept with the terrorists on the other side of the door. but of coarse, they may have paniced and/or not known of this feature, and that the passengers had absolutely no chance of breaking through the door.

i agree that anything is possible, but feel you go to far when you say that the idea that the plane was shot down is based on " strange and questionable reasoning" when even the vice president stated that he regretted not being able to have the planes (wtc) shot down to save many more lives at the wtc.

the fact is that whether or not the terrorists knew of the impenatratble cockpit door, its certain that our commanders in chief knew. so how is it so outlandish to think that they would order the plane shot down before the inevitable happened, AND the deaths of everyone in the white house/capitol building/wherever to top that?

anyway, let me point out again that i dont disbelieve the official story...i just have my doubts.

Omega - It's not a bad idea though, because it's grounds for a great story, and in turn a great film. Which is what this movie is supposed to be.

Whether or not the events are factual shouldn't make a difference when looking at a film, it should be the quality of the movie that is important.

And like it or not, again, the scenario presented in the film is the one that has by far the most back up and evidence supporting it. It may not be entirely factual, but if it's a great story and a respecful movie (which again, it is from what I've heard) than that shouldn't make a difference.

This was the last flight to be in the air that day, the passengers, through phone calls, learned that there was a massive terrorist attack involving planes going on. They knew that they were not hostages and that they would not be released, they knew that if they didn't do anything they would die, which is what caused the uprising. People in the other planes were blind to the grand scheme of the attack, the people in this plane were not, that is the difference.

Originally posted by BackFire
It's not a bad idea though, because it's grounds for a great story, and in turn a great film. Which is what this movie is supposed to be.

Whether or not the events are factual shouldn't make a difference when looking at a film, it should be the quality of the movie that is important.

And like it or not, again, the scenario presented in the film is the one that has by far the most back up and evidence supporting it. It may not be entirely factual, but if it's a great story and a respecful movie (which again, it is from what I've heard) than that shouldn't make a difference.

This was the last flight to be in the air that day, the passengers, through phone calls, learned that there was a massive terrorist attack involving planes going on. They knew that they were not hostages and that they would not be released, they knew that if they didn't do anything they would die, which is what caused the uprising. People in the other planes were blind to the grand scheme of the attack, the people in this plane were not, that is the difference.

its certain that the passengers did take a stand. common sense dictates that. if either of us were in that situation and knew we would die anyway, im sure we would do the same. so im happy with the making of the film (as it seems it will be, hopefully sans republican bullshit)

a thought/fact to ponder: there will never again be a hijacked plane with hostages.
think about that.