why did the wtc's collapse? conclusive proof

[russell jones]

and here you go russell

http://killtown.911review.org/flight77/debunking/popularmechanics.html

 

 

I hope you have something better than that, since that site uses no evidence or sources to back up its claims.

[bionic commando..]

http://www.consumptionjunction.com/content/detail.asp?ID=60816&type=1&page=1

:innocent: RIP-WTC......:innocent:

[bionic commando..]

I already posted this but hopefully every one got a chance to watch..

It's pretty long,but well worth it!!

[lord_casek]

The cellphone thing is really fishy but it is possible that the plane dropped altitude when the terrorists took over during the struggle. Plus, to hit a target on the ground they would have had to begin descent pretty early, like with the WTC. What's the altitude that calls were possible in 2001?

 

 

An experiment was conducted to see if cell phones can work in airplanes. The experiment found that the percent of success rate of contact was:

 

89% at 2,000 feet

44% at 4,000 feet

30% at 6,000 feet

9% at 8,000 feet

 

Flight 93 was flying at 35,000 feet.

 

 

russell: there's been alot of information i've posted. i would hope you've read through a good percentage of it.

[lord_casek]

September 13, 2001: Series of Unusual Circumstances Said to Make Hijacked Passenger Cell Phone Calls Possible

 

It is reported that the many phone calls made by passengers from the hijacked flights are normally technically impossible to make. A major cell phone carrier spokeswoman claims, “Those were a series of circumstances that made those calls go through, which would not be repeated under normal circumstances.” Supposedly, the calls worked because they were made when the planes were close to the ground and they were kept short. [Wired News, 9/13/2001] However, many of the cell phone calls were made from high cruising altitudes and lasted ten minutes or more. The New York Times later reports, “According to industry experts, it is possible to use cell phones with varying success during the ascent and descent of commercial airline flights, although the difficulty of maintaining a signal appears to increase as planes gain altitude. Some older phones, which have stronger transmitters and operate on analog networks, can be used at a maximum altitude of ten miles, while phones on newer digital systems can work at altitudes of five to six miles. A typical airline cruising altitude would be 35,000 feet, or about 6.6 miles.” [slate, 9/14/2001] A spokesperson for the AT&T phone company notes that cell phone networks are not designed for calls from high altitudes. She suggests that “it was almost a fluke that the calls reached their destinations.” [Wireless Review, 11/1/2001]

[russell jones]

An experiment was conducted to see if cell phones can work in airplanes. The experiment found that the percent of success rate of contact was:

 

89% at 2,000 feet

44% at 4,000 feet

30% at 6,000 feet

9% at 8,000 feet

 

Flight 93 was flying at 35,000 feet.

 

 

russell: there's been alot of information i've posted. i would hope you've read through a good percentage of it.

 

 

Do you have a source for this study?

 

There has been so much stuff posted that I can't really say that I've read most of it, I just don't have the time. I am skeptical about this theory because it requires hundreds of people to be involved, and that hurts its credibility. If it was something that could be pulled off and covered up by a group of 5 or 6 people, I could buy it.

 

I don't know if you mentioned this before, but who do the conspiracy theorists believe was responsible? I don't mean the vauge generalization of our government, but what individuals gave the orders, hatched the plan?

[HardyHarHar]

That's why I never check this thread (look I just contradicted myself). The movie Spare Change is pretty good, but if you look at the Wikipedia entry, there are a lot of alleged errors in the evidence.

[lord_casek]

Do you have a source for this study?

 

There has been so much stuff posted that I can't really say that I've read most of it, I just don't have the time. I am skeptical about this theory because it requires hundreds of people to be involved, and that hurts its credibility. If it was something that could be pulled off and covered up by a group of 5 or 6 people, I could buy it.

 

I don't know if you mentioned this before, but who do the conspiracy theorists believe was responsible? I don't mean the vauge generalization of our government, but what individuals gave the orders, hatched the plan?

 

 

the study was done by a professor of mathematics at the University of

Waterloo in Ontario. Prof. Dewdney is his name.

 

http://www.physics911.net/projectachilles.htm

 

your other question: a compartmentalized faction of the govt. probably hiring out private companies. i don't think it's all that hard to believe. that is pretty muc my belief, too.

 

as for leaders in the "grande scheme"? i would think it's as high as cheney, rumsfeld, wolfowitz, and various other high ranking old-timers in washington. as low as blackwater and several other privately owned companies. i could go further, but i fucking blew out a vessel in my eye late last night. it's killing me.

[lord_casek]

That's why I never check this thread (look I just contradicted myself). The movie Spare Change is pretty good, but if you look at the Wikipedia entry, there are a lot of alleged errors in the evidence.

 

dylan, jason, and the other guy are making a 3rd loose change to correct said errors in the script and footage. from what i've heard, expect big things from it. they aren't just some dumb college kids.

[Larry Pubes]

ugh...another loose change? maaaann..

will dylan and jason leave their intense bias, fluffy personal observations/speculations, and embarrassingly weak leaps of logic on the cutting room floor?!?!

[lord_casek]

who knows?

[fermentor666]

i could go further, but i fucking blew out a vessel in my eye late last night. it's killing me.

 

 

 

Looking too hard at that mysterious shape in the fuselage?

[Larry Pubes]

The New York Times later reports, “According to industry experts...phones on newer digital systems can work at altitudes of five to six miles. A typical airline cruising altitude would be 35,000 feet, or about 6.6 miles.” [slate, 9/14/2001]

 

so is the reader supposed to assume that 'newer digital systems' is a reference to current tech that was not commercially available in 2001? otherwise i see a pretty unconvincing snippet of info.

anyhow, according to this...

 

[wikipedia]At 9:24 a.m. Flight 93 received from flight dispatch the warning "Beware any cockpit intrusion—two a/c [aircraft] hit World Trade Center". At 9:26 a.m. the pilot asked for confirmation of the message. That was the last time flight dispatch heard from Flight 93. Two minutes later, the hijackers took over the plane.

At about 9:28 a.m., after both towers of the World Trade Center had already been hit, flight controllers in Cleveland overheard some commotion, and possibly screaming, from Flight 93's cockpit. Forty seconds later, more screams were heard. During this time the aircraft dropped 700 feet (200 m). The flight controllers tried to contact the pilot and received no reply. At 9:32 a man with an Arabic accent, probably Ziad Jarrah, transmitted to flight control the following: "Ladies and gentlemen, here [is] the captain, please sit down, keep remaining sitting. We have a bomb on board. So sit." (It is likely that Jarrah was attempting to broadcast this over the plane's intercom, but did not understand that the message was transmitted to flight control instead.) The flight then reversed direction and began flying eastward at a low altitude. At 9:39 air traffic controllers overheard Jarrah saying, "Uh, this is the captain. Would like you all to remain seated. There is a bomb on board, and [we] are going back to the airport, and to have our demands [unintelligible]. Please remain quiet." There were no further transmissions.[/wikipedia]

 

..the flight was not flying at maximum altitudes, or at the very least was lowering rapidly within a short period of time(9, 10, 11 minutes). when were calls being made? closer to 9:30 or closer to 9:40-5ish? unless the govt created the calls with that new voice synthesis application i don't really understand how the calls were not made.

[lord_casek]

see if you can find the exact time when the famous "let's roll " call was made.

 

fermentor: no, i have no idea what i did to it.

[lord_casek]

almost forgot: "newer technology" may refer to GSM.

 

after further reading, perhaps not.

[Obvious]

from the Loose Change producer Korey Rowe:

 

In response to some of these Korey Rowe, the producer of the "Second Edition", claimed in an interview, “We know there are errors in the documentary, and we’ve actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves.”

[lord_casek]

from the Loose Change producer Korey Rowe:

 

In response to some of these Korey Rowe, the producer of the "Second Edition", claimed in an interview, “We know there are errors in the documentary, and we’ve actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves.”

 

doing the research is nothing to be ashamed of.

[Obvious]

doing the research is nothing to be ashamed of.

 

Loose Change putting out false information on is.

 

if Loose Change has been exposed for mistating incidents and giving false information, it's not far-fetched to think all that other conspiracy bullshit they spew is wrong.

[lord_casek]

The Blair Witch Project also looked real to people who were in on the documentary preceding it. It totally worked. The first time you watch it, it grabs you. But Loose Change isn�t meant to be fictional. It�s a watchable film, but what do you expect people to do with it?

What I encourage people to do is go out and research it themselves. We don�t ever come out and say that everything we say is 100 per cent. We know there are errors in the documentary, and we�ve actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves�the B52 [remarked to have flown into the Empire State Building], the use of Wikipedia, things like that. We left them in there so people will want to discredit us and go out and research the events yourself and come up with your own conclusions. That�s our whole goal, to make Americans think. To wake up from the 16 amps of your television to watch something and get a passion in something again. And that�s what America has always been about. From the Vietnam protests�it�s always been about a passion. And now we�re trying to build that passion in people, to wake up, to stop watching television, to stop reading the crappy newspapers, and go online and find those de-classified documents, go find the scientists that aren�t young filmmakers, but the ones after Steven E. Jones at BYU, who has steel from the World Trade Center and has conducted tests on the steel and it�s come to the point, over and over again, that what they [the 9-11 Commission] say can�t be true. That it had to be brought down by controlled demolition. Our whole goal is to wake Americans up to do something about it.

[Obvious]

you said yourself that you don't believe a missle hit the pentagon. which is Loose Change's chief claim. or do you think Loose Change "purposely" (snicker) gave false information about a missle hitting the Pentagon? it's funny how Loose Change made several blunders, and then when called out for it gave the "oh we meant to do that" cheap response. i have never heard of a documentary that wants you to take them seriously and has several inaccuracies in their reporting.

[Larry Pubes]

so it happened around 9:30, but i still can't find anything that gives me a timeline AND a corresponding altitude. however, it seems the action was happenening at roughly 30, 000 ft.

also, 23 of the calls were made by airphone. how many calls were made apart from this that were cell phone calls?

more to the point casek, if the calls from cell phones were not technologically feasible in september 2001, how would you explain the cell calls then?

[russell jones]

the study was done by a professor of mathematics at the University of

Waterloo in Ontario. Prof. Dewdney is his name.

 

http://www.physics911.net/projectachilles.htm

 

your other question: a compartmentalized faction of the govt. probably hiring out private companies. i don't think it's all that hard to believe. that is pretty muc my belief, too.

 

as for leaders in the "grande scheme"? i would think it's as high as cheney, rumsfeld, wolfowitz, and various other high ranking old-timers in washington. as low as blackwater and several other privately owned companies. i could go further, but i fucking blew out a vessel in my eye late last night. it's killing me.

 

 

I'm no scientist, but I know that I can't use my cell for easily near my computer when the fan comes on. It creates some sort of interference. Dewdney was using a prop plane, which I wouldn't doubt could cause some interference. Either way, it's not directly comparable, since he was using a prop and not a jet.

[russell jones]

from the Loose Change producer Korey Rowe:

 

In response to some of these Korey Rowe, the producer of the "Second Edition", claimed in an interview, “We know there are errors in the documentary, and we’ve actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves.”

 

I've heard more intelligent excuses from the Bush adminstration...

[lord_casek]

theo: no, i don't think it was a missile. why do i have to agree with everything on loose change again? what do i think it was? a plane. maybe not a 757. but a plane. maybe it was a 757. i don't know. but i highly doubt it was a missile. i kind of lean towards global hawk, but it's disputable. it's the govt's own honeypot. hard to argue. they won't release anything with frames of an acutal plane hitting the pentagon, so it's really up in the air.

 

 

larry pubes: how would i explain cell calls from a plane? i explained this once already. they were faked. there's technology (and it was introduced pre-9/11) that can mimic voices with only a small snippet of the 'victims' voice. where did you get your facts about the 23 calls made by air phone?

 

 

russell: no, a prop plane goes to 30k feet, too. besides, it's public information that cell phones do not work at anywhere near that altitude. even Iron_Lungs mentioned that he works for an airline. has his phone on in the air, it never works.

[Larry Pubes]

you think the calls were faked?

so the other airphone calls were faked too, or they were real and only the cell calls were faked?

so i guess the NSA wiretapped people who were on board weeks in advance, then wrote the script and used voice synthesis software to recreate a drama. wowzers.

the 23 calls made by airphone was plucked from an observer article:

 

Those on board, destined for destruction, relayed their final words of love and farewells over digital airwaves - and thereby into indelible technological posterity. The phone calls began, 23 from airphones, others by mobile, with passengers passing their cell phones to strangers. Through these calls those aboard UA93 learnt what was happening to America that morning.

[lord_casek]

yes, i think the (cell phone) calls were faked. the airphone calls are the only calls possible from 35,000 feet.

most likely faked, too.

 

it wouldn't take weeks to grab a sample large enough to make a voiceprint. only a few sentences or less. a script could've had an outline, and otherwise been impromtu.

 

 

also: if you listen to the most famous calls from flight 93, they don't sound very dramatic at all.

[russell jones]

yes, i think the (cell phone) calls were faked. the airphone calls are the only calls possible from 35,000 feet.

most likely faked, too.

 

it wouldn't take weeks to grab a sample large enough to make a voiceprint. only a few sentences or less. a script could've had an outline, and otherwise been impromtu.

 

 

also: if you listen to the most famous calls from flight 93, they don't sound very dramatic at all.

 

What about the people they called??????? They're in on the conspiracy too???

[lord_casek]

What about the people they called??????? They're in on the conspiracy too???

 

no. absolutely not. how would i have implied that? did i? if so, i apologize.

[lord_casek]

"Earlier reports have said that a previously unidentified passenger, Edward Felt of Matawan, N.J., said in a 911 call from a restroom that he saw a puff of smoke and heard an explosion, leading some to cite this as evidence that the plane was shot down by the military to prevent it from crashing into sensitive targets. But the 911 dispatcher, John Shaw, and others who have heard the tape, including Mr. Felt's wife, Sandra Felt, say he made no mention of smoke or an explosion when he said, 'We're going down.'"

(New York Times, 3/27/02)

 

 

 

Passengers who are known to have made phone calls:

Todd Beamer: airphone, begin: 9:45, length: approx.: 13 minutes

 

Mark Bingham: airphone, begin: 9:42, 9:44 or 9:45, length: 3 minutes, got disconnected

Comment: Not only do all accounts stress the fact that Bingham used an airphone he even said this explicitly during his call. But what is strange is that the Commission points out: “All calls placed on airphones were from the rear of the aircraft.” (CR, 456, Foot.: 77)

But Bingham was claimed to have been in first class. Moreover the identification of Mark Rothenberg as the dead passengers is based on the assumption that no passenger from first class was herded into the rear of the plane. Moreover Bingham was Burnett’s neighbour and Burnett explicitly tells his wife that he is passing information to his neighbour. So all in all we have a clear contradiction here. Either Bingham is lying in his phone call or all other mentioned details are wrong. We will assume for this analysis that Bingham used indeed an airphone.

 

Sandra Bradshaw: unclear. While she was calling she was boiling water at the same time. This occupation and the fact that her colleague CeeCee Lyles used a cell phone indicates to me that a cell phone is more likely to have been used. Though this is not clear we don’t count this.

 

Marion Britton: extremely likely cell phone. Moreover according to CeeCee Lyles she was sitting in first calls. Therefore basing on the statement of the Commission we take it that she used indeed a cell phone. Beginning: “After 9:30”, 9:41. Length: Approx.: 4 minutes (my estimation based on the content of the call). Call got disconnected.

 

Tom Burnett: Cell phone. (For his first two calls we have the word of Deena Burnett (who saw Burnett’s ID on the phone’s display), for his third the note of Jere Longman. Moreover we can base this conclusion on the statement of the Commission as Burnett was sitting in first class and that nowhere it was challenged that Burnett used a cell phone). Call 1: Beginning: 9:27, Length: 30’. (my estimation based on the transcript) He hangs up. Call 2: Beginning: 9:31, Length: 1’ 30’’ (my estimation based on the transcript). He hangs up. Call 3: Beginning: 9:45, Length: 1’ 30’’ (my estimation based on the transcript). He hangs up. Call 4: Beginning: 9:54, Length: 1’ 30’’ (my estimation based on the transcripts). He hangs up.

 

Joe DeLuca: unclear. He did several phone calls although for some very strange reasons only a very short account of one call is public.

 

Edward Felt: Cell phone. As he called from the restroom it must have been a cell phone. Beginning: 9:58, Length: 1’ 12’’ (according to reports from the emergency dispatcher and his supervisor). The call got disconnected.

 

Andrew Garcia: Most likely a cell phone. This assumption is based on the fact that the call got disconnected after Garcia said only one word. The name of his wife. The time of the call is unknown.

 

Jeremy Glick: Contradicting accounts. As shown in the article on Glick’s phone call the first reports mentioned that he used a cell phone. Until today the majority of reports write this. As the call lasted much longer than 20 minutes the use of a cell phone at cruising altitude would of course be a real “miracle”. As reports are not clear we won’t count it as a cell phone call though it is very possible that indeed he used one.

 

Lauren Grandcolas: Very likely a cell phone. She is known to have passed “her phone” to her neighbour Elizabeth Wainio. It makes absolutely no sense that they do share an airphone. There were more airphones in coach section than passengers aboard! Therefore we take it as a fact what all newspapers wrote or implied: She used a cell phone. Beginning: Just before 9:50, Length: 30’’ (my estimation based on accounts of the call). She hangs up.

 

Linda Gronlund: Unclear. She did several phone calls from 9:53 though as in the case of her boy-friend Joe DeLuca only one call is reported.

 

CeeCee Lyles: Cell phone. Her husband Lorne Lyles who managed to take her second call reported that he saw her ID therefore we can assume that she used a cell phone. A flight attendant using a cell phone is of course extremely strange given the fact that she should very well know that there are airphones aboard and it is much more likely to come through using this kind of phone. Call 1: Beginning: 9:47, Length: unclear as no indication what she left as a message on her answering machine. But we can assume from the fact that she managed to leave a message that the length was at least: 15’. Call 2: 9:58, Length: 1’ 00’’ (my estimation based on accounts of the call). She got disconnected.

 

Louis J. Nacke II: Most likely cell phone. It is unclear till today if he in fact did a phone call. If the message his wife received that contained only “noise and a click” was indeed from him we should assume that he used a cell phone and got disconnected.

 

Unknown Flight attendant: Unclear She made her call at 9:35 to the San Franciscio maintenance center.

 

Elizabeth Wainio: Very likely cell phone. See the explanation given for Linda Gronlund who is supposed to have handed her phone to Elizabeth Wainio. Beginning: 9:51, Length: 11’ 00’’ (time given in reports. She witnessed the beginning of the passenger attack. For further information check out: “Deconstructing the lesser known phone calls”). She hangs up.

 

 

So, what we do have is an absolute minimum of 4 passengers using their cell phones (Britton, Burnett, Felt and Lyles) plus 4 passengers who most likely used them (Garcia, Grandcolas, Nacke and Wainio). We can add that we have two cases of extremely contradicting accounts: )Bingham and Glick. Two passengers we have no more details about (DeLuca and Gronlund) and in fact just a single person we definitely know that he used an airphone: Todd Beamer. Unfortunately the account of his phone call is the one that contains by far the biggest amount of contracitions.

 

Let’s just wait here for a second: Why do four and even most likely 8 passengers take their cell phones? Why does even a flight attendant go for her cell phone? Why do passengers that got disconnected NEVER try again to reach their beloved ones by using an airphone?

 

Fortunately for us we have one passenger using his cell phone: Tom Burnett. His use of his cell phone is beyond dispute. Contrary to several phone calls at the end of the flight where we might take into consideration that the altitude was far below normal cruising altitude at least the first three calls of Burnett have been made at cruising altitude. In fact his second call must have happened at a moment when according to the Commission UA 93 reached an altitude of 40,700 feet. His second and his third calls lasted approximately 1’ 30’’ each. And he never got disconnected. In fact the connection was that good that Deena Burnett heard him talking to his neighbours.

How is it possible that a cell phone works so well at an altitude of 35,000 to 40,700 feet and at cruising speed of 500 mph?

Furthermore how is the case of Elizabeth Wainio to be explained: She used most likely a cell phone and it worked for 11 minutes without getting disconnect?

And how on the other hand does Bingham’s airphone get disconnected after only three minutes? (I just assume for the sake of the argument that he is not lying).

[lord_casek]

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

 

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: We want to bring you up to date now on the latest on United Flight 93 -- that is the flight that was going from Newark to San Francisco when it crashed in Pennsylvania. Dozens of volunteers have found more debris and remains this weekend from the crash of that flight in Pennsylvania, which, of course, took place on September 11th. No additional victims though have been identified.

 

Forty-four people were on board that flight and died in the crash but not before a violent struggle with the hijackers. And we have an update now on the investigation for you from our Eileen O'Connor.

 

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

 

EILEEN O'CONNOR, NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Investigators are struggling to piece together the final moments of United Airlines Flight 93 listening over and over and over again to the cockpit voice recorder -- difficult to understand due to damage from the crash and also, sources say, the abundance of angry American voices shouting over yelling in a foreign tongue believed to be the hijackers.

 

To help clarify the confusion agents have been reviewing with family and friends final phone calls made from the plane.

 

Investigative sources tell CNN they now believe that passengers were successful in overcoming some of the hijackers but are puzzling over who had control over the plane when it went down.

 

The questions left unanswered -- if the United pilot was successful in regaining control, why crash the plane? Were there still other hijackers in the back who he believed might try to take back the cockpit and fly the plane to its intended target? And did he intentionally down it in a deserted field to limit the loss of life on the ground? Or was he already dead and the struggle was strictly one between hijackers and passengers causing the crash?

 

What they do know, sources say, is that at 8:41 a.m. United Flight 93 took off from Newark en route to San Francisco. Seated in first class sets 3C and 3D men identified as investigators as two of the four suspected hijackers on board -- Saeed Alghamdi and Ahmed Alnami. Right behind those two were Mark Bingham, a San Francisco publicist. Next to him, Tom Burnett, an executive for a west coast health care company.

 

In Economy Plus Jeremy Glick sat in row 11. Right behind him was DeLuca on his way to California to visit a client. And back in the main cabin Todd Beamer.

 

Unbeknownst to them another aircraft, American Airlines Flight 11 was heading straight toward the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Two other planes had also been hijacked and sources say there were bomb threats called in to air traffic control centers adding to the chaos including Cleveland's center, which routinely takes control of the United Airlines Flight 93 as it heads west.

 

Twenty-four minutes after United Flight 93 was airborne a second plane hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center.

 

Another 35 minutes later the plane out of Dulles Airport slammed into the Pentagon. About that time on the radio frequency Flight 93 used air traffic controllers in Cleveland hear screams and shouting, "Get out of here! Get out of here!" Then nothing.

 

The tower tries to contact the pilot, Captain Jason Dahl, but there is no response. A special code used to signal a hijacking is not answered. His family said Dahl always said he would never relinquish control of the cockpit without a fight.

 

BILL HEIDERICH, RELATIVE OF PILOT: Jason often talked and just recently about the heroes of the line. Pilots with crews who perform their duty meet sacrifice -- often the ultimate sacrifice -- for the safety of their passengers.

 

O'CONNOR: Within minutes Flight Attendant Cece Lyles, using her cell phone calls her husband Lorne.

 

LORNE LYLES, HUSBAND OF FLIGHT ATTENDANT: She said, "Babe?" She said, "My plane has been hijacked." And she said, "They forced their way into the cockpit."

 

O'CONNOR: In the back after trying to use his credit card unsuccessfully on the air phone Todd Beamer was routed to a customer service center. The supervisor there called the FBI.

 

LISA BEAMER, WIFE OF PASSENGER: He called the GTE air phone operator at 9:05 in the morning and started reporting to her what was going on in the plane including that there were hijackers and they had taken over the cockpit and possibly killed the crew.

 

O'CONNOR: Meanwhile first class passenger Tom Burnett was telling his wife Deanna what was happening.

 

DEENA BURNETT, WIFE OF PASSENGER: He said, "They've already knifed a guy. They're saying they have a bomb. Please call the authorities."

 

O'CONNOR: She patched his phone call through to the FBI but the FAA was already alerting them to Flight 93's predicament. At about 9:38 -- nearly one hour into the flight air traffic controllers saw a dangerously tight turn executed near Cleveland. United Airlines Flight 93 was now heading east towards Washington, DC and climbing to 41,000 feet at a rate of 1,500 feet a minute. Sources say controllers had to quickly reroute a jumbo jet now heading straight at Flight 93. Then air traffic controllers heard a heavily accented voice saying, "There is a bomb on board. This is the captain speaking. Remain in your seats. There is a bomb on board. Stay quiet. We are meeting with their demands. We are returning to the airport."

 

Tom Beamer's wife said he wasn't fooled.

 

BEAMER: The plane began to fly erratically and he was aware that this was a situation that was not a normal hijacking situation and he informed the operator that he knew he was not going to make it out of this.

 

O'CONNOR: Jeromy Glick, a new father, was on the phone to his wife asking if it's true two other planes had crashed into the World Trade Center. Now realizing the hijackers' intentions, investigators believe it's about that time that at least five of the men -- Burnett, Bingham, Glick, Beamer and Knacky and perhaps some of the flight attendants and others decided to take action.

 

BEAMER: He told the operator that he and some other people on the flight were deciding to jump on the hijacker with the bomb strapped around his waist.

 

O'CONNOR: Mark Bingham is on the phone with his mother, Alice Hoglan, but he seems distracted.

 

ALICE HOGLAN, MOTHER OF VICTIM: I said, "Mark, I love you, too." And I said, "Who are these guys?" And then he seemed to be pulled away from the phone for a minute.

 

O'CONNOR: Todd Beamer asked the operator to deliver a personal message for his wife and then to join him in the Lord's Prayer.

 

BEAMER: And the last thing the operator heard Todd say at 10:00 a.m. -- 15 minutes into the call was, "Are you ready? Let's roll."

 

O'CONNOR: Cece Lyles' husband couldn't tell what was going on.

 

LYLES: I didn't know what to think because my last words with my wife was of her screaming.

 

O'CONNOR: Todd Beamer never came back on the phone to the operator.

 

BEAMER: She heard some screams and some commotion. And she stayed on the line for 10 more minutes until the flight went down but she did not hear back from anyone in particular and did not know what happened after that.

 

O'CONNOR: What is unclear to investigators is whether United pilot Jason Dahl was already dead. Or had he somehow regained control with the help of his passengers and crew and then made the decision to put the plane down in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania to minimize the loss of life?

 

Supporting this theory is an intriguing piece of evidence -- a recording of the air traffic control data showing the plane's track and transponder information. It shows in the last few minutes the transponder code for the destination changing to DCA. The FAA designation for Washington's Reagan National Airport -- a stone's throw from the White House.

 

What is clear, say investigators, is there was an heroic struggle for control of the plane -- a struggle by people who were willing to die in an effort to save others.

 

BURNETT: He went down fighting -- I know he did. He -- his adrenaline was going. He was not whispering -- we was talking quickly and he was ready to do something.

 

O'CONNOR: Eileen O'Connor, CNN, Washington.

 

(END VIDEO TAPE)

 

KAGAN: And incredible story of people who surely were heroes.

 

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT http://www.fdch.com