United 93

[TwelveMonkeys]

The passengers saved the day...everyone one of them a hero.

 

Also, Princess Di faked her own death. She is living and working as a farm hand in Texas.

 

God bless America.

[Elmyn Noos]

I can reslove this argument with some degree of certainty. I know the pilot of the US fighter aircraft that shot the passenger plane down.

 

Apparently, he had no idea terrorists were on board, and, in fact, wasn't actually aiming for the plane. He told me that he had his ipod plugged in and was listening at full volume to the soundtrack from Rocky IV, which, lets face it, makes you want to destroy something.The black box from his plane recorded events thus:

 

"it's the eye of the tiger, ner ner ner ner ne ner....rising up to the challenge of our do da. You're going down, no, no way Creeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed"*

 

*launches two air to air missiles lost in the grief of seeing Apollo fall in slow motion to the canvass at the hand of Ivan Mohammed** Drago

 

**probably.

[Captain]

Why would over-powering the hijackers make the plane plummetted to the ground?? It just makes no sense.

Oh, it makes sense alright. A cockpit is not the place to have a fight for your life.

 

In fact, this nutcase decided to attack the pilots of Kato Air's flight 605 between Narvik and Bodø (both in Norway) on September 29th 2004 and crash the plane.

Luckily, two passengers intervened and were able to win the struggle of death in the cockpit just in time for the pilots to rescue the plane from crashing.

 

This is what the cockpit looked like afterwards:

 

And the captain of the plane, after being discharged from the hospital the next day:

His co-pilot suffered more severe injuries and stayed in hospital longer, as did one of the two passengers involved in the fight. I saw an interview with the captain that day, and he was asked how much lower they could have been before crashing:

 

–Nothing. Absolutely nothing, I thought we would crash.

 

This is the axe that was used during the attack:

 

In short, it makes all the sense in the world for a plane to crash if there's a fight in the cockpit.

 

As for whether the plane was shot down or not, I don't think it was. It probably would have been had it gotten closer to the city. If I was CINC in such a situation, I would have authorized the Air Force to shoot it down as a last measure to prevent further loss of human life.

[Captain]

You can read the black box transcript yourself. It was a martydom mission and the passengers were ramming the door with the drinks tray (hence "Roll it" and not "Let's Roll" as is often portrayed. They were a minute away from storming the cockpit and possibly taking back control, meaning no martydom for our religious nutter friends. Hence, cut the engines, send the plane into a dive, send the passengers hurtling.

 

Black Box Transcript

That's my take on it as well.

 

Imho there is a lesson to be learned from this. In the early days of airplane hi-jackings, the passengers usually got out of it alive if they just sat tight and did as they were told. That probably isn't the case anymore. Also, if you're going to put up a fight and put your life on the line, it's probably wise to do so before the hi-jacker(s) is/are physically in control of the plane, i.e. are in charge of the cockpit.

[TwelveMonkeys]

I have another lesson...stop people getting on planes with axes. If this proves too difficult, train all pilots in the art of killing cunts that attack them on a plane. I think Ninja type skills would suit best.

 

I believe you should be given further options on the plane. All this shouldn't be left to chance. People should be made to decide their approach when they purchase a ticket...

 

 

- Emergency exit seat?

- Meal?

- Business or Economy?

- Fight for your life or sit tight?

 

That way the fighters can sit in the aisle seats and not have to worry about pushing past a screaming taker before taking out the muslim reaching for his phone while he makes his way for a piss.

 

In addition, all axe wielding physco's should be made to sit at the back allowing the pilot every opportunity to take him out with a throwing star before he even gets to the door.

[Captain]

I'd take fight for your life and no meal, in case I have to throw up!

[Guest TK-421]

This sit tight policy applies to all situations in life and in death no wonder it's popular.

[Strontium]

I believe you should be given further options on the plane. All this shouldn't be left to chance. People should be made to decide their approach when they purchase a ticket...

 

- Emergency exit seat?

- Meal?

- Business or Economy?

- Fight for your life or sit tight?

I like it. That's a Jam sketch right there.

[Paul]

Anyone else seen this yet?

[bri]

no and haven't read the whole thread but planes travel at around 300 mph so if they were in 10 mile of the white house then it'd only take 2 mins to reach. thats when they say it was a close miss and then say the distance was a 1000m as it'll only take seconds for it to collide.

[Nunavut Patrick]

That's my take on it as well.

 

Imho there is a lesson to be learned from this. In the early days of airplane hi-jackings, the passengers usually got out of it alive if they just sat tight and did as they were told. That probably isn't the case anymore. Also, if you're going to put up a fight and put your life on the line, it's probably wise to do so before the hi-jacker(s) is/are physically in control of the plane, i.e. are in charge of the cockpit.

 

Why did this fellow axe attack a Norwegian domestic flight?

 

Lapland Liberation Army?

 

Upset at high beer prices?

 

Disgruntled stalker of Gro Haarlem?

 

Did he live N of 66?

[mister_lizard]

On the somewhat forgotten-about topic of the film, I saw it at FACT on Saturday and have to say it was one of the most powerful experiences I've had at a cinema in a long, long time. I went with two friends and when we left at the end we couldn't actually talk to one another for a few minutes. A combination of horrific subject matter and consummate film-making - I know the verite style won't be to everyone's taste but I thought it was the perfect way to deal with this.

 

As for the conspiracies, can I just chuck another one in? There is a body of thought that suggests that the plane was crashed by the hijackers, but that rumours of it being shot down are themselves the product of the neo-con conspiracy behind 9/11. The idea is that the websites suggesting the plane was blown out of the sky by air force fighters were deliberately set up by the conspirators to hide the real truth behind 9/11 - that there were no fighters scrambled until it was far too late in order to allow the attacks to succeed. So conspiracy theorists who think they're onto something by suggesting the plane was shot down are actually falling for deliberate misinformation, a policy called "poisoning the well", I believe. This all plugs back into the much bigger theory that the American military knew about 9/11 in advance but allowed it to happen to create a "Pearl Harbour" for the 21st century, a neo-con conspiracy to accept the sacrifice of a few thousand American lives in exchange for long-term geo-political influence in oil-rich areas of the mid-east (or is that the new series of 24? ;) )

Oh, and the latest conspiracy theory I've seen on the web is that there is photographic proof that the second plane into the twin towers fired a missile into the building just before impact - not sure of the exact web address but it's either 'letsroll911' or 'inplanesight' - google either of these and you'll find some heavy-duty conspiracy thinking. O_o

[mister_lizard]

Just had a quick check, and here are the links, if anyone's interested:

 

http://www.letsroll911.org/

 

this is the site that claims the second plane fired a missile which can be seen on video footage.

 

http://www.policestate21.com/get_your_copy_of_911_ips.htm

 

"In plane sight" is actually a video put together by a conspiracy theorist claiming that the whole thing was a set up, and he can prove it. You can get stuff like this on ebay for about tree-fiddy.

 

And check this one out: http://www.gallerize.com/Gallerize.News.htm

Apparently no planes flew into the Twin Towers - what you thought you saw were holograms wrapped around cruise missiles. Goodness gracious me.

 

 

:ermm:

[Stu Monty]

Just had a quick check, and here are the links, if anyone's interested:

 

http://www.letsroll911.org/

 

this is the site that claims the second plane fired a missile which can be seen on video footage.

 

http://www.policestate21.com/get_your_copy_of_911_ips.htm

 

"In plane sight" is actually a video put together by a conspiracy theorist claiming that the whole thing was a set up, and he can prove it. You can get stuff like this on ebay for about tree-fiddy.

 

And check this one out: http://www.gallerize.com/Gallerize.News.htm

Apparently no planes flew into the Twin Towers - what you thought you saw were holograms wrapped around cruise missiles. Goodness gracious me.

 

 

:ermm:

 

 

Goddam Loch Ness Monster!!

 

I believe that either are plausable but would need to know more about probable radii of crash wreckage before I accepted bits could be found that many miles away.

 

Interesting counter-conspiracy there about the lack of scrambled planes too.

[Roast Beef]

Why would you shoot a missle into a tower only to fly the same plane into the tower seconds later?

 

Further to that, IF the plane was a hijacked passenger plane, where the fuck did they get a missile from?

 

IF the plane was not a hijacked passenger plane, what happened to all the passengers who were supposedly on board that flight?

[Stu Monty]

Why would you shoot a missle into a tower only to fly the same plane into the tower seconds later?

 

Further to that, IF the plane was a hijacked passenger plane, where the fuck did they get a missile from?

 

IF the plane was not a hijacked passenger plane, what happened to all the passengers who were supposedly on board that flight?

 

 

Don't think it's been thought through properly has it.

[Paul Don]

If you've got an hour and a half to kill it's worth watching this video on Google.

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&q=9%2F11+conspiracy

 

Goes over familiar ground but still pretty decent.

[mister_lizard]

Why would you shoot a missle into a tower only to fly the same plane into the tower seconds later?

 

Further to that, IF the plane was a hijacked passenger plane, where the fuck did they get a missile from?

 

IF the plane was not a hijacked passenger plane, what happened to all the passengers who were supposedly on board that flight?

 

According to the letsroll911 site, it wasn't a passenger plane - one of the things they bang on about is that you can't see any windows on the plane, and therefore it was a customised military airliner. The missile was to ensure the collapse of the tower. As for the passengers - well, this is where the extreme conspiracy theorists lose it completely: there are suggestions that many of the passengers simply didn't exist - their records were invented by the government, some of the grieving relatives on tv were actors. I've even read allegations that tribute sites and bursaries set up to honour some of the individual dead are funded by big businesses with links to neo-cons in the White House - ie, they're fake too. I don't think anyone's suggested yet that the passengers were kidnapped and murdered by the government, but it's probably out there somewhere.

 

Conspiracy theories are the new religion - they allow you to impose order on chaos, it's just that the order is now malevolent rather than benign.

 

Incidentally, I read a poll recently that stated more than 50% of New Yorkers now believe their government was either complicit in 9/11 or deliberately allowed it to happen. I guess not all of them are nutters - some people reckon the extreme conspiracies are deliberately seeded by the government to discredit the more difficult questions a lot of people have about the whole thing ("poisoning the well" again). The truth is out there.....spooky music.....woooohhh..........

[Captain]

Why did this fellow axe attack a Norwegian domestic flight?

 

Lapland Liberation Army?

 

Upset at high beer prices?

 

Disgruntled stalker of Gro Haarlem?

 

Did he live N of 66?

He had a liver problem. It makes some very aggressive.

[Paul]

On the somewhat forgotten-about topic of the film, I saw it at FACT on Saturday and have to say it was one of the most powerful experiences I've had at a cinema in a long, long time. I went with two friends and when we left at the end we couldn't actually talk to one another for a few minutes. A combination of horrific subject matter and consummate film-making - I know the verite style won't be to everyone's taste but I thought it was the perfect way to deal with this.

 

As for the conspiracies, can I just chuck another one in? There is a body of thought that suggests that the plane was crashed by the hijackers, but that rumours of it being shot down are themselves the product of the neo-con conspiracy behind 9/11. The idea is that the websites suggesting the plane was blown out of the sky by air force fighters were deliberately set up by the conspirators to hide the real truth behind 9/11 - that there were no fighters scrambled until it was far too late in order to allow the attacks to succeed. So conspiracy theorists who think they're onto something by suggesting the plane was shot down are actually falling for deliberate misinformation, a policy called "poisoning the well", I believe. This all plugs back into the much bigger theory that the American military knew about 9/11 in advance but allowed it to happen to create a "Pearl Harbour" for the 21st century, a neo-con conspiracy to accept the sacrifice of a few thousand American lives in exchange for long-term geo-political influence in oil-rich areas of the mid-east (or is that the new series of 24? ;) )

Oh, and the latest conspiracy theory I've seen on the web is that there is photographic proof that the second plane into the twin towers fired a missile into the building just before impact - not sure of the exact web address but it's either 'letsroll911' or 'inplanesight' - google either of these and you'll find some heavy-duty conspiracy thinking. O_o

Woo - me too! The 8.45 showing.

[mister_lizard]

Woo - me too! The 8.45 showing.

 

Now that is spooky - that's the screening I went to. I won't ask whereabouts you were sitting cos that would sound a little bit weird!

[BatChainPuller]

Why would you shoot a missle into a tower only to fly the same plane into the tower seconds later?

 

Further to that, IF the plane was a hijacked passenger plane, where the fuck did they get a missile from?

 

IF the plane was not a hijacked passenger plane, what happened to all the passengers who were supposedly on board that flight?

 

Made from bottles of duty free, plastic cutlery, and toenail clippers. Very simple to do, lots of plans on the internet - basic special forces training.

[Chris]

Went to see this tonight. An extremely intense and uncomfortable movie, which showcases the panic, confusion, general lack of communication and contingency for what happened on September 11th, pretty well.

 

But I really don't see the point of it being made. Making it a Michael Bay special was inappropriate and would be utterly inconsiderate just five years after such a tragedy. Pearl Harbour may have sucked (and I miss youuuu), but at least they waited 60-years to turn it into a Hollywood cash cow.

 

They didn't take the classic emotive action movie route with Flight 93. The other way would have been to produce something thought provoking, debate inspiring, and perhaps something which challenges the commonly held views propagated by the Government. But it's too soon to do that too. People want to believe that those brave US citizens fought to overcome those terrorists. The pain is too close, to think otherwise.

 

What we're left with, is something which documents the version of events as history is currently recording them, showcasing the suffering of these brave heroic Americans in quite a mild, but horrendously discomforting manner, while cleaning up at the box office and upsetting nobody.

 

Wait a generation and make this film mean something.

[Hoddy]

Went to see this tonight. An extremely intense and uncomfortable movie, which showcases the panic, confusion, general lack of communication and contingency for what happened on September 11th, pretty well.

 

But I really don't see the point of it being made. Making it a Michael Bay special was inappropriate and would be utterly inconsiderate just five years after such a tragedy. Pearl Harbour may have sucked (and I miss youuuu), but at least they waited 60-years to turn it into a Hollywood cash cow.

 

They didn't take the classic emotive action movie route with Flight 93. The other way would have been to produce something thought provoking, debate inspiring, and perhaps something which challenges the commonly held views propagated by the Government. But it's too soon to do that too. People want to believe that those brave US citizens fought to overcome those terrorists. The pain is too close, to think otherwise.

 

What we're left with, is something which documents the version of events as history is currently recording them, showcasing the suffering of these brave heroic Americans in quite a mild, but horrendously discomforting manner, while cleaning up at the box office and upsetting nobody.

 

Wait a generation and make this film mean something.

 

I saw it on Saturday. Thought it was absolutely harrowing. I want to say it was 'awesome', but how can you describe that as 'awesome'? I go for a really well-made, well-handled account of what could have been nationalistic guff (as it was made by a Brit, this may have been more difficult).

 

As for why was it made? Well I guess it's a case of showing the true fear, blindness and human reactions of what these – mostly ordinary –*people were feeling. I enjoyed the fact that it wasn't full of macho, Hollywood mechanism bullshit, but instead was full of real people acting like real people do. The passengers didn't attack these men with their bare fists and brawn, they went with weapons, they went with whatever they could get their hands on, they went primeval, animalistic. I'm one of the most placid, pacifistic people I know (even if I wasn't, I wouldn't argue about it), but I said to my girlfriend that I hoped to God they killed that guy with the bomb. It's what I would have done. At least what I hope I would do.

[Captain]

Saw United 93 tonight. I'm exhausted. Very good film, although the handheld camera stuff was a bit tiring in the end. But it brings that extra bit of realism to it as well.

 

Too bad the passengers and crew didn't make it.