Do You Know Anyone That Died On 911, On the Planes Only...

I don't think this is true. There seems to have been real people on these flights, although far fewer than there would naturally have been.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Angell

I've been doing a lot of searching into the social security death index pertaining to the names of people on the flights and there are so many people missing from the index that should be there.

There are only 9 listed from flight 93 on the actual index.

I have been thinking if we could ever organise our funds on this forum that a good private investigator would be worth investing in to do some great leg work on some of these names.

I can think of one name in particular that would be at the top of my list to have checked into.

but were they on the PLANES or actually IN the WTC?

honestly if you are going to respond please atleast read the entire post.

if you read his post .... one could quite easily deduce that they were in the WTC.

i could deduce, but then that leaves a margin for error. through clarification i reduce the margin to 0.

I do not know anyone killed on the planes. AND i have enver heard from anyone who did know someone.

Mark Bingham (Flight 93) was definitely a real guy. I played rugby in SF (women's team), and had friends on the SF Fog rugby team. Mark played for the SF Fog, and although I didn't know him personally, I knew his friends.

Who knows what actually happened to Mark, but he was definitely a real person. His mother had a very hard time, too, and I would doubt she was "paid off." (I don't doubt the 9/11 inside plot, but I'm cautious of believing that all the families were involved, too)

If there really were (staged) hijackers on that plane, I have no doubt Mark, indeed, would have stepped up and fought. He was the most well-liked guy on the team, and they created the "Mark Bingham Cup" tournament in his honor.

Let's keep pushing for the truth!

so if you were a total sheep and you read this thread, you'd come up with the follwoing truth, or evidence:

that nobody related to plane victims filed for compensation
that nobody knows somebody that died on the planes
that family members have been "paid off" to keep quiet
that familymemebrs are heavily involved in the truthmovement.

none of you needs to proove it, because this thread prooves it, now all we need to do is disseminate the information to a few other conspiracy sites, and prehaps we can convince 10,000 people of those 4 "truths".

finsish your artilces with "think northwoods" and there you have it - history in the making, family members backstabbed by the LC community for being "paid off", but they do get a free copy of LC at teh same time... because its aufully inportant to convince the family members they were "paid off" by the cia..

do you people even relise what backstabbers you are to the victims and their families ?

Well, I think the most obvious ones would be the producer of "Frasier", as well as his wife. Everyone knew them, I'm sure most people have watched it.

One of the Truth movement videos mentions Derill Bodley, father of a flight 93 victim (his daughter) who was at a truth movement meeting (unansweredquestions.org ? ).

Concerning Todd Beamer, let me quote Nineteen Eighty-Four. In the first part, Winston Smith is confronted to a difficult task. Big Brother made a speech which must be completely re-written (rectified), because Big Brother is never wrong. Instead of writing a new speech on the same topic, Winston decides to write something completely different :

"Suddenly there sprang into his mind, ready made as it were, the image of a certain Comrade Ogilvy, who had recently died in battle, in heroic circumstances. There were occasions when Big Brother devoted his Order for the Day to commemorating some humble, rank-and-file Party member whose life and death he held up as an example worthy to be followed. Today he should commemorate Comrade Ogilvy. It was true that there was no such person as Comrade Ogilvy, but a few lines of print and a couple of faked photographs would soon bring him into existence."

Todd Beamer, 2001's Ogilvy ?

This post has been edited by nicolas on Sep 2 2006, 01:17 PM

You're obviously not from the United States. Why does it matter to you?

You're obviously not from the United States. Why does it matter to you?

do you know what?

I totally HATE that attitude!

just because sumone isnt from America, doesnt mean 911 hasnt affected them in some way or isnt close to their heart, and it certainly doesnt mean they cant have an opinion on what went on

yes, i support/agree with the truth movement and i`m from britain, and? so?

are u saying i shouldnt bother because i aint american?

if you are, get ur head out your butt!

You're obviously not from the United States. Why does it matter to you?

do you know what?

I totally HATE that attitude!

just because sumone isnt from America, doesnt mean 911 hasnt affected them in some way or isnt close to their heart, and it certainly doesnt mean they cant have an opinion on what went on

yes, i support/agree with the truth movement and i`m from britain, and? so?

are u saying i shouldnt bother because i aint american?

if you are, get ur head out your butt!

That is funny. Someone comes from wherever to this forum and tells us we shouldn't ask questions because we're backstabbing the families of the victims by doing so.
I dare ask him/her why it matters to him/her that we question the official version and seek the truth, then you... ah well this is too stupid.
And I'm French, by the way.

so really you have double standards

if they believe in the official story (which unfortunately a lot of americans do, never mind people from other countries!) then it has nothin to do with them

but if they question the official story, thats great?

whilst i dont agree with his post, i equally dont agree with your reply to it

This post has been edited by littleali on Sep 3 2006, 09:15 AM

9-11 LAWSUITS SUPPRESSED

VICTIMS’ FAMILIES ANGERED OVER SILENCE FROM MEDIA

rss202

By Christopher Bollyn

While the media plays up the significance of the government show trial of the seemingly deranged “20th hijacker” Zacharias Moussaoui, not one 9-11 victim’s lawsuit has been allowed to be heard in a trial by jury. Why have the 9-11 victims’ families not been given the same right to have their cases heard in an open trial?

Ellen Mariani, who lost her husband Neil on United Air Lines (UAL) Flight 175, filed the first 9-11 wrongful death lawsuit against UAL on Dec. 20, 2001. Mariani was interviewed on national television in May 2002 by Bill O’Reilly of Fox News, who repeatedly questioned her about why she had chosen to pursue litigation instead of accepting the government fund.

“I want justice,” Mariani said. “I want accountability. Who is responsible? I want the truth.”

Today, Mariani, like the other 9-11 plaintiffs, is under a gag order which prevents her from speaking about her ongoing lawsuit. Likewise, thousands of employees of federal agencies like the Federal Aviation Administration have received gag orders in the mail keeping them from telling what they know about the events of 9-11.

After more than four years, however, Mariani’s determined pursuit for the truth about 9-11 through the court system has failed to yield any answers or discovery about who is responsible for 9-11. Today, she is no closer to obtaining what she has stated she wanted from the beginning—a trial by jury.

Why have the many victims’ cases like Mariani’s, brought by relatives of loved ones lost on 9-11, not been allowed to be heard in a trial by jury—a basic American right? And why have the foreign-owned security companies involved in the shocking security lapses, which enabled the attacks of 9-11,
been granted immunity by the U.S. Congress?

All of the relatives’ wrongful death criminal lawsuits against the airlines and their security companies have been consolidated by the presiding judge into a negligence lawsuit, which is a civil case and much less likely to be argued or investigated in an open trial with a jury. The 9-11 wrongful death and personal injury cases against American Air Lines (AA) or UAL or any of the foreign security companies, namely Argenbright Security (British), Globe Aviation Services Corp. (Swedish) and Huntleigh USA Corp. (Israeli) are being handled by U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of the Southern District of New York.

In the case of at least one of these security defendants, Huntleigh, there would seem to be a conflict of interest for the judge because the airline security company who is responsible for the shocking security lapses at both the Boston and Newark airports on 9-11 is a wholly-owned subsidiary of an Israeli company (ICTS) headed by men with clear ties to Israel’s military intelligence agency, Mossad.

Hellerstein, 73, on the other hand, has deep and longstanding Zionist connections and close family ties to the state of Israel. A Zionist is a supporter of the state of Israel. Hellerstein’s wife is a former senior vice president and current treasurer of a New York-based Zionist organization called AMIT. AMIT promotes Jewish immigration to Israel and stands for Americans for Israel and Torah. AMIT’s motto is “Building Israel—One Child at a Time.”

Hellerstein is a member of the Jewish Center of New York and a former president of the Board of Jewish Education of Greater New York.

This raises the obvious question about why, in the 9-11 terror case in which an Israeli security company is a key defendant and in which individuals from Israeli military intelligence are suspected of being involved, was Hellerstein chosen to preside over all 9-11 victim lawsuits?

Huntleigh USA is a wholly owned subsidiary of an Israeli company called International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS) International N.V., a Netherlands-based aviation and transportation security firm headed by “former [Israeli] military commanding officers and veterans of government intelligence and security agencies.”

Menachem Atzmon, convicted in Israel in 1996 for campaign finance fraud, and his business partner Ezra Harel, took over management of security at the Boston and Newark airports when their company ICTS bought Huntleigh USA in 1999. UAL Flight 175 and AA 11, which allegedly struck the twin towers, both originated in Boston, while UAL 93, which purportedly crashed in Pennsylvania, departed from the Newark airport. ICTS also operates the German port of Rostock on the Baltic Sea.

Some victims’ families brought lawsuits against Huntleigh claiming the security firm had been grossly negligent on 9-11. While these relatives have a right to discovery and to know what Huntleigh did or did not do to protect their loved ones on 9-11, Huntleigh, along with the other security companies, was granted complete congressional protection in 2002 and will not be called to account for its actions on 9-11 in any U.S. court.

Hellerstein, however, is not the only player overseeing the 9-11 litigation process who has close ties to Israel. In fact, all of the key players and law firms involved are either active Zionists or work for firms that do a great deal of business representing Israeli companies and/or the state of Israel.

Kenneth R. Feinberg, for example, the special master of the federally funded Victims’ Compensation Fund, is also a dedicated Zionist. Feinberg single-handedly administered the $7 billion fund that paid out U.S. taxpayer money to some 97 percent of the families who could have sued to recover tort damages for monetary loss and pain and suffering. Those who accepted funds signed away their right to litigate against the government, the airlines or the security companies.

The Kenneth Feinberg Group is listed as one of the top 10 supporters of the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies for 2004-2005. The Jerusalem Institute is an Israel-based Zionist organization that, among other things, supports the building of the illegal separation wall across Palestine.

The Feinberg Group also lists as its clients major insurance and re-insurance companies such as Lloyd’s of London. These are the companies who stood to lose billions of dollars if 9-11 victims’ lawsuits had gone forward.

Feinberg was appointed special master by then Attorney General John Ashcroft. Ashcroft, a dedicated Christian Zionist and supporter of such groups as Stand for Israel, is today working as a lobbyist for Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI), Israel’s major military aerospace company, which hired the former U.S. attorney general to help secure the U.S. government’s approval to sell an Israeli weapons system to the South Korean Air Force.

The Israelis hired Ashcroft to improve their chances against a system built by Chicago-based Boeing.

(Issue #17, April 24, 2006)

Latest Developments in the 9/11 Litigation

The litigation process has already exposed several widely held misconceptions concerning the September 11 hijackings and the legal proceedings available to the families of the airline passenger victims. These misconceptions have been spread by innumerable inaccurate media reports, by governmental, airline and security company spokespersons, by those promoting the Fund, by legal analysts in print and on TV, and by others.

Several Misconceptions

1. Were box cutters permissible carry-on items aboard airlines on September 11, 2001?

Almost immediately we were all told that the carriers and screeners did nothing wrong because box cutters, the most commonly mentioned weapon of the hijackers, were items that were allowed to be carried on board commercial aircraft. Almost every news account emphasized how box cutters were permissible. These accounts were false. We have discovered that the airlines themselves specifically listed box cutters as prohibited items. The airlines failed, therefore, in each instance, to discover, confiscate and bring to the attention of a supervisor, the presence of prohibited box cutters. (See the relevant page of the airlines’ list of proscribed items, in effect since 1994.)

2. Will the families who sue be able to recover anything?

This notion has been especially raised with regard to United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 11 which crashed into the World Trade Center towers. These carriers have been sued by most plaintiffs -- American, United and US Airways -- because they cleared two hijackers through security in Portland, Maine to board a Colgan Air flight to Boston, Logan. It has been widely reported that each of the hijacked flights had insurance coverage of at least 1½ billion dollars. Each flight had several policies. (See the lists.) Part of this insurance is specifically reserved for the passengers’ benefits. For example, US Airways’ insurance policy in effect on 9/11 states "with respect to passengers - $1,500,000,000" and "with respect to other than passengers - $25,000,000." (See the copy of the declaration page of the US Airways policy.) We believe the policies of United and American contain similar provisions. However, there are several more policies, as stated by the carriers to the U.S. Government.

3. Did the carriers have a duty to protect from terrorism?

Absolutely. By federal law, the carriers were required to protect passengers from hijacking and terrorism. The carriers admitted this in a pleading they filed in these 9/11 cases. See the statements of American Airlines. American Airlines, in its Memorandum of Law in Support of the Motion of the Aviation Defendants to Dismiss Ground Damage Claims, filed on January 17, 2003, claim that "the Duty of Air Carriers in the Circumstances of September 11 Extended Only to the Protection of Passengers and Crew." (See the applicable portion of the Memorandum.) They moved to dismiss all ground claims. This month the judge will rule on their motion.

4. Will lawsuits against the airlines bankrupt them?

The Airline Stabilization Act of 2001 was supposedly passed to protect the airlines from the financial devastation caused by their negligence on September 11. That Act created a "Fund" for victims in addition to, and instead of, the normal litigation remedies.

In point of fact, United Airlines filed for bankruptcy in Chicago on December 9, 2002 without having paid one dime in actual claims to September 11 victims.

US Airways filed for bankruptcy in Alexandria, Virginia on August 11, 2002 without having paid one dime to September 11 victims.

American Airlines (after its smaller insurance policies on Flights 11 and 77 paid out $28,735.63 and $42,372.88, respectively) has also been considering bankruptcy.

These two airlines’ bankruptcies and American’s financial plight, have been brought about, not by any September 11 victim’s lawsuit, but by the arguably excessive salaries and "bonuses" paid to its management for poorly managing the airlines and for helping to bring about the large downturn in air travel by having failed to protect their passengers from hijacking and sabotage as the law required. And this in spite of both United and American having received their share of the 10 billion dollars of taxpayer money paid to airlines in the above "bailout bill." The U.S. Congress is currently considering additional bailout bills.

5. Family members will have an extra six months to file wrongful-death lawsuits under a deal announced recently by New York state leaders. The two-year statute of limitations for filing wrongful-death actions will be extended to March 11, 2004. However, the New York legislature extended the deadline to file lawsuits in New York, with a very misleading statement. Statements were made in the press that they were doing this so families would not have to file a lawsuit to toll (stop the running of) the statutes of limitations (deadlines by which one must file a lawsuit or be barred) while families decided whether or not to go to the Fund, and then later dismiss the case if they went to the Fund. The Fund language is very, very clear on that point. Any suit on file after March 2002, bars an application to the Fund. The state of New York cannot change federal law and regulation. So, this change does not have any effect on the cases currently moving thought the courts, and federal regulation does not permit filing a case and then dismissing and going to the Fund. The first 10 families who filed cases will recall that last summer they actually had to discuss the decision (either in person or on the phone) with a federal magistrate in New York City. Thereafter the Federal judge suspended that requirement to discuss their reasoning with the magistrate because it was painfully apparent to him after our first 10 cases that families were very much aware of the Fund, and had put careful thought into their decisions.

6. Are there deadlines which will pass within the next month affecting the ability to file suit?

Yes. If you wish to preserve a claim against United, you mush file a proof of claim by May 12 in bankruptcy court. The form from the bankruptcy court is available with their instructions. Click here.

If you wish to preserve a claim against US Airways, you must do so by May 15. Click here. We named US Airways in our lawsuits concerning American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 because they cleared Mohammed Atta and Abdul Aziz Alomari through security in Portland, Maine. From there the hijackers boarded a Colgan Air flight to Boston and landed behind security at Logan so they did not have to re-clear security. While those hijackers boarded American Airlines Flight 11, they clearly compromised security at Boston Logan and could have affected both flights.

Regardless of the New York legislature extending the deadline to file a lawsuit, in order to file a law suit against United or US Airways, you have to file a proof of claim in the bankrupty courts by the deadlines in May. If you don't, any future claims against them will be barred. After the May deadlines you may be able to file suit against the security companies and other defendants, but not United or US Airways.

I hope this helps clear up misconceptions for NADA members and friends and aids in their search for justice and accountability.

Sincerely,

Mary F. Schiavo

Baum Hedlund Aristei Guilford & Schiavo

April 9, 2003

© 2003 Mary F. Schiavo

yes there were real people on the planes, you can search the legal documents of the hometowns of any of these people that owned property there and you will see the normal recordations at the county courthouse of deeds, mortgages, etc. All using different lenders, closing attorneys, etc. Impossible to fake all of that in my opinion

I happen to believe there really were people on the planes, but I have to ask, did you actually do the research you are telling us would prove the existence of these people?

Here's one of the passengers who I would like to know more about. Wilson "Bud" Flagg, 63, Millwood, Va. He seems like a very likely candidate for someone who knew too much.

I happen to believe there really were people on the planes, but I have to ask, did you actually do the research you are telling us would prove the existence of these people?

yes, I looked up the ones that were easy enough, whose counties of residence had their public records searchable online. There were a lot of people on planes and in the towers from Monmouth County new jersey and they have a good online search that I used, but also some in VA and MA. Of course I didn't look up every single person's property history, but for the ones I did, it was all different attorneys, all different lenders, no noticeable patterns of dates, times or property types or anything that I could discern. Now, if you were still skeptical, you could go to each of these places and find each attorney to make sure they were real and find all of the property that these people owned over the years and make sure each piece was real, but I am satisfied that the list of people that they gave as having died was pretty real. And yes, I think they are dead.

Millwood is in Clarke County VA and that is quite a tiny place. They do have a website, but noe records online. You would have to go there yourself and research him. What makes you think he is of special interest?

my momz boss from the US Cenus Brueal was on flight 93.

I know someone that died on flight93.

William Cashman

http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...ashmanbiop8.asp

This post has been edited by nedcmk1 on Sep 14 2006, 03:11 AM

He sounded a great guy. Very quiet... and able to break boards in two!
Red belt can indicate very great achievement in a martial art, depending on what school.

If there was a passenger fight back on the plane, Im sure he would have been part of it.

Kind regards

Searcher

wow, this is low. pretending that these people never existed.

i guess the gov't agents just ran all over the country fakeing photos and contructing entire fake histories and families for each alleged hijacker

they obviously made this woman up:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6...k+bingham&hl=en

just to go along with this made up guy:
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/2001...inghambiop8.asp
http://www.markbingham.org

and there's no way that this woman is not a gov't agent:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/11/...in1992824.shtml

oh yeah and they created all of these people:
http://www.september11victims.com/septembe...ictims_list.htm



guys, seriously, 30 seconds on google found all these links.

these people were real.

I think that if some one actually spent the money to run a back ground check on these people or they actually knew some one who had connections to do it for free, I would imagine that some one has already beat you to it and they already have fake identities made for them. It's just amazing how the media is starting to explain everything on discovery channel, years after, now that everyone is starting to see the lies they are being told.

why do a background check? talk to the families

watch this video, at 24:07

they have numerous clips of mark bingham. the man, who actually lived and died. he was real. there's your background check

sorry, this video @ 24:07

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...166640147&hl=en

Yes, my cousins best friends father flew the plane that crashed in PA, apparently. When arguing with my cousin about the attacks of Sept. 11 he always would bring up how his best friends father never came home, so if he wasnt on the plane, then where was he?

It made me think alot.

hush money? threats? false assurances. Just don't want to know the horrible truth? can only imagine.....