A bible of the debunkers

[Raphael Weber]

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page1


Often quoted as a sort of bible by many whe it comes to discussing the crash site of UA 93 I decided to have a closer look to its content:

In their „Evidence Summary: 10 Points“ we find two points that I’d like to have a closer look at.

„3) The cockpit voice recorder recorded the hijackers' attack and apparent murder of the pilots and a flight attendant.“

Comment: This is clearly wrong. The CVR only contains the last 30 minutes before the crash. The hijacker are supposed to have overtaken the cockpit clearly before. Moreover the transcript doesn’t show the moment the hijacker overtook the cockpit.

„Air traffic controllers heard a radio transmission by a man with an Arabic accent, warning of a bomb on board. Passengers reported that one of the hijackers had what appeared to be a bomb strapped to him.“

Comment: A misrepresentation.
This is omitting the callers as Burnett who states that he doubts they do have a bomb:

« What is the probability of their having a bomb on board? I don't think they have one. I think they're just telling us that for crowd control. »
Bingham says that they say they have a bomb. Implying that he can’t see it.
As Burnett and Bingham are known to have talked to other passengers we can conlude that it is certainly possible that the witnesses who talk of seeing the bomb are right but it far from being certain as presented by this page.

„4) After learning about the other attacks, passengers and cabin crew attempted to retake the cockpit but were apparently unable to gain entry. The sound of their attempts was recorded on the CVR. The CVR also recorded the hijackers' decision to end the flight, followed by repeated shouts of "Allahu Akbar!" ("God is greatest.") until the plane crashed. Families of victims heard the CVR recording.“

Comment: This omits the fact that the family members heard an end that differs from the transcript of the CVR.

7) Hundreds of first responders (mostly volunteer firefighters) and crime scene investigators were quickly on the scene. They saw human remains, aircraft wreckage, personal effects, jet fuel, etc.

Comment: Again this is a mispresentation.
On this page
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page1
they show their proofs.
But there are two reasons why this pages is evidently not striving for objectivity. There is not a single witness quoted who contradicts the above mentioned claim (though there are many). And it is striking that they don’t have a single witness who appeared in the media right in the days after 911. As with all witnesses the timespan between the witnessed event and the witness statement is important. So why do they only rely on witnesses that gave their statements months later?


But let’s have a look step by step:

Humain remains:

They quote five witnesses who talk of having seen small signs of human remains or even body part.

But if this page really wants to objective then why doesn’t it quote the coroner? The person whose profession it is to look for human remains?

“Immediately after the crash, the seeming absence of human remains led the mind of coroner Wally Miller to a surreal fantasy: that Flight 93 had somehow stopped in mid-flight and discharged all of its passengers before crashing. "There was just nothing visible," he says. "It was the strangest feeling." It would be nearly an hour before Miller came upon his first trace of a body part.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8¬Found=true

And:

"This is the most eerie thing," he says. "I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop."
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/specialreports/oneyearlater/s_90823.html

Or this witness:

“Peterson said he saw no bodies at the scene, but saw no signs of life, either.”
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/News/957434/index.html

Aircraft wreckage:
Again they present five witnesses for this claim.
But for example their witness Mike Suba who says: "We made our way to a small pond. That's where I observed the largest piece of wreckage that I saw, a portion of the landing gear and fuselage. One of the tires was still intact with the bracket, and probably about three to five windows of the fuselage were actually in one piece lying there.“
As this was exactly the biggest part of the plane to have been found in the whole recovery and it was only reported on September 20 we can doubt that he witnessed it on September 11.

But anyway.
Again it is striking that all witnesses are omitted that say something different e.g.:

Barron

"It didn't look like a plane crash because there was nothing that looked like a plane …. Just like a big pile of charcoal,” Barron
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912somerscenenat4p3.asp

John Walsh:

John Walsh: "When I got there, the plane was obliterated. You couldn't see the cockpit or the wings or nothing."
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912somerscenenat4p3.asp

Lee Purbaugh:

“There was nothing there. Everything was shredded.”
(Among the Heroes, 299)

Nick Tweardy :

“You couldn’t see nothing,” said Nick Tweardy, 20, of Stonycreek Township. “We couldn’t tell what we were looking at. There’s just a huge crater in the woods.”
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_12940.html

Nina Lensbouer:

"But I got there and there was nothing, nothing there but charcoal. Instantly, it was charcoal."
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912somerscenenat4p3.asp

And the coroner described what he saw:

“He was stunned at how small the smoking crater looked, he says, ‘like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it.’”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8¬Found=true

This creates a very different picture. Certainly not the same as presented by the webpage that I discuss.


Jet fuel:
Here they present three witnesses. (Though to be fair there are many more whom they don’t site). But they ignore a crucial question surrounding the jet fuel:
Why did an examination of the soil and groundwater around the crash site find no evidence of contamination by jet fuel?
DEP Secretary David E. Hess suggested a possible explanation for this absence of jet fuel, which was that "most of the hazardous fluids were consumed by the crash's fire."
http://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2009/03/why-was-there-no-jet-fuel-at-flight-93.html

But then why didn’t the first responders not witness raging fires? And how come that paper and the red bandana survive intact?


Conclusion:
To be fair this page is certainly valuable cause it shows many important witnesses and evidence. Yet, as I’ve tried to show the reality is certainly much less black and white and the page is extremely subjective to put it mildy. To discuss the presence of human remains and to omit all witnesses who state the contrary is one thing but even to omit the statement of the coroner?
Therefore even if the page is useful it certainly must be taken with a grain of salt and with the knowledge that there are many other witnesses who one needs to add to come as close as possible of the reality of the crash site on 911.

[SDuderstadt]

1. Poor Raphael...

I guess he was just too high-strung.