Sifting Through
Loose Change

The 9-11Research Companion to

A detailed point-by-point critique of the film
using an illustrated transcript




covering the portion of the film from 01:01:36 to 01:19:35

Which points have value?

Which don't?

Test Your Knowledge of the Attack
and Your Critical Thinking Skills


Hide Replies
Show Replies

But we do know what didn't happen.
"The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every [attack]. I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons. I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders' rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations,"
-Osama bin Laden, from a statement issued to Al Jazeera within days of the 9-11 attacks
Whenever this evidence is presented to people, you'll usually get one of many different questions.
The first one being, if different planes were used, what happened to the original ones? Unfortunately, we may never know what really happened. But if we could examine the black boxes from the planes that were used, we could prove that they weren't the original flights.
There are many aspects of the official story that can be disproved, such as the theory of fire-induced collapse of the Twin Towers and Building 7. Focusing on what we don't know serves as a distraction.
A commercial plane carries two different black boxes. Each black box carries one of two different recorders, a cockpit voice recorder and a flight data recorder. The cockpit voice recorder records sounds from inside the cockpit, including engine noise, stall warnings, and other sounds of interest. Communications between Air Traffic Control, weather briefings and conversations between pilots and crew are also recorded. The flight data recorder records at least 28 different parameters, such as time, altitude, speed and heading. Some also record more than 300 other in-flight characteristics, anything from auto-pilot to smoke alarms. The recorders themselves are made from the most impervious metals known to man, and the information is recorded along with date and time, and spooled into a continuous roll. Any damage that is done to the roll is done to the outside, as opposed to the inside where the data is.
The black boxes are indeed designed to survive extreme conditions, such as virtually any crash would produce, but to suggest they are indestructible is an exaggeration.
The 9-11 Commission says "The CVRs and FDRs from American 11 and United 175 were not found..."
Yet, the FBI claims to have found the passport of Satam al-Suqami, which managed to fly out of his pocket, through the explosion and onto the streets of Manhattan below. So, four different black boxes, made from the most resilient materials known to man, were destroyed. Yet, a passport, made from a fragile material known as paper, managed to survive? Who writes this stuff?
This is somewhat misleading, because the Commission's claim that the black boxes from Flights 11 and 175 were not found is not the same as claiming they were destroyed.

The alleged recovery of Satam al-Suqami's passport is particularly incredible given that he supposedly piloted Flight 11, which crashed squarely into the North Tower, such that only a piece of landing gear punched all the way through.
Ted Lopatkiewicz, spokesman for the National Transportation Safety Board, told CBS News that "It's extremely rare that we don't get the recorders back. I can't recall another domestic case in which we did not recover the recorders."
Turns out Ted's right. Nicholas Demasi, a firefighter who helped the recovery efforts claims in the book Behind the Scenes: Ground Zero,
At one point I was assigned to take Federal Agents around the site. To search for the black boxes from the planes. There were a total of four black boxes. We found three.
I guess it all comes down to who you'd rather believe. FBI Director Robert Mueller said Flight 77's data recorder provided altitude, speed, headings and other information, but the voice recorder contained nothing useful. And Donald Rumsfeld said the data on the cockpit voice recorder was unrecoverable.
As for Flight 93, it was the only flight where the cockpit voice recorder was recovered. It was played for the families in April, 2002, but not before they signed an agreement saying that they wouldn't talk about it. They couldn't even take notes.
And for some reason, the last three minutes of the tape was unaccounted for. The FBI had no explanation for the discrepancy. Why would the 9-11 Commission tell us Flight 11 and 175's recorders weren't found? Why would Robert Mueller tell us that there's nothing interesting on Flight 77s? What's on the last three minutes of Flight 93's cockpit voice recorder? These are vital questions that need to be answered.
Loose Change fails to note that the 9/11 Commission disposed of the issue of the missing three minutes by setting the crash time of Flight 93 at 10:03 instead of 10:06. Since the reasons for this are unconvincing it is evidence that Flight 93 was shot down.
It's an interesting postscript that Flight 93 was spotted on April 10th, 2003 at Chicago's O'Hare by David Friedman, a United Airlines employee who records all of his flights. The tail number, N591UA was spotted on Flight 1111, a United Airlines 757. And according to the FAA, both N591UA and N612UA, Flights 93 and 175, are still valid. But Flights 11 and 77 are listed as destroyed. Not to mention that they were not even scheduled to fly on September 11th.
The tail number for Flight 1111 is listed at N594UA. Perhaps David Friedman made a mistake. The fact that tail numbers of destroyed planes are still valid does not mean that they are active -- corresponding to planes. The tail numbers N591UA and N612UA are reserved for American Airlines, for possible future use.

Much has been made of the absence of Flights 11 and 77 from the BTS database by no-plane theorist Gerard Holmgren, but perhaps the entries were removed because the flights were destroyed.
Next. What about the cell phone calls? For starters, the calls themselves are extremely peculiar. Most of them are only a couple sentences long, before the callers end the conversation, only to call back later.
We don't know how long most of the calls were, since, with the exception of the Betty Ong call, they were not recorded. What Loose Change presents as transcripts of the Flight 93 calls were compiled from news reports that related what recipients of the calls remember. Also, it's not surprising that many of the calls were short and repeated, since callers may have been attempting to be discrete.
Flight Attendant Betty Ong allegedly placed a call from Flight 11. According to the 9-11 Commission, although the conversation lasted 23 minutes, only 4 and a half minutes was recorded.
What is your name?
Ok, my name is Betty Ong. I'm number 3 on Flight 11.
And the cockpit is not answering their phone. And there's somebody stabbed in business class. And there's... We can't breathe in business class. Somebody's got mace or something. Okay. Our number 1 got stabbed. Our purser is stabbed. Nobody knows who stabbed who, and we can't even get up to business class right now cause nobody can breathe. Our number 1 is stabbed right now. And who else is...
Okay, and do we...
and our number 5 ... our first class passengers are ... first class ... galley flight attendant and our purser has been stabbed. And we can't get into the cockpit, the door won't open.
Does Ms. Ong sound like a woman on a hijacked plane who just saw three people murdered? Why is nobody in the background screaming?
The lack of screaming may have been due to the competent way in which the flight attendants managed the emergency. According to a BBC News story passengers in coach were under the impression that there was a routine medical emergency in first class. Furthermore, we don't know if the stab victims were dead, and, according to her call, Ong did not witness the attack.
Flight attendant Madeline Sweeney allegedly talked with her ground manager Michael Woodward for 25 minutes. She describes 4 hijackers. The FBI says there were 5. She says the hijackers were in rows 9 and 10. The FAA says there were all in row 8. Near the end, she screams, "I see buildings. Water. Oh my God!" Madeline was a flight attendant out of Boston for twelve years. I think she would have recognized Manhattan.
Some discrepancies between the ad-hoc flight attendant reports and the FAA reports would hardly be surprising. According to Woodward, Sweeney made the remark about buildings and water "very slowly, very calmly, very quietly."
A man claiming to be Mark Bingham called his mother, Alice, who was visiting his sister-in-law. The caller says, "Mom? This is Mark Bingham." When was the last time you called your mother and used your full name? "I just want to tell you that I love you. I'm on a flight from Newark to San Francisco and there are three guys on board and they have taken over the plane and they say they have a bomb. I'm calling you from the Airphone," and then "You believe me, don't you, Mom?" "Yes Mark, I believe you, who are these guys?" Then he was interrupted by someone who was speaking in a low-toned male voice, speaking what sounded like English. After 30 seconds of muffled sounds, the caller repeats "I'm calling you with an Airphone." His mother asks him again, "Who are these guys?" After another pause he returns and asks again, "You believe me, don't you, Mom?" There was another pause, and the phone just trailed off.
Alice is on record stating that she has no doubt that the caller was Mark. As for Mark using his full name -- it's not hard to imagine someone doing that when they're under extreme duress.
To date, none of the calls, except for Betty Ong's call to American Airlines, has been released to the public.
It is not clear that any of the other calls were recorded.
But to be honest, none of that matters.
Why? Because none of these calls could have taken place.

Kee Dewdney of conducted some research of his own. In an experiment called Project Achilles, he took a series of cell phones onto a Cessna 172 and flew up to 8,000 feet to determine the success rate as the plane got higher. At 4,000 feet he had a .4 success rate. At 8,000 feet he had a .1 success rate. For 32,000 feet, cruising altitude for a commercial airliner, he calculated a .006 success rate. Less than one in a hundredth of a chance.
Dewdney's experiments do not support the conclusion that "none of the calls could have taken place."
  • Dewdney's experiment was conducted over London, Ontario -- not the flightpaths of the commandeered jetliners.
  • Dewdney tested only Motorola phones. Certainly there are performance differences between different brands of phones and different service networks.
  • Several of the calls were made on the GTE Airphones installed in the jetliners, rather than cellphones.
  • Since the phone calls were made after the transponders were shut off, we don't know the altitude of the jetliners when the calls were made. Perhaps Flight 93 was flying below 8,000 feet.
Don't believe me? Even American Airlines has put their foot in the government's mouth. On July 15th, 2004, passengers aboard a commercial American Airlines flight were able to send and receive calls from their cell phones as if they were on the ground, thanks to a cell station that was installed into the plane.
It worked great. I called the office. I called my wife. I called a friend in Paris. They all heard me great, and I could hear them loud and clear.
Why would American Airlines spend thousands of dollars on this technology in 2004 When cell phones worked so well on September 11th, 2001?
Cell phones didn't work well on 9/11/01, but they worked well enough to transmit a number of short calls. The new technology announced in 2004 just provided a more reliable and cost-effective service.
The cell phone calls were fake. No question about it.
By stating with certainty conclusions based on transparently flawed analysis, Loose Change dilutes its few conclusions that are valid.
So how is it possible to fake a person's voice? In 1999, the Los Alamos Laboratory in New Mexico revealed their voice morphing technology. General Carl W. Steiner, the former Commander-in-chief of U.S. Special Operations declared on tape:
Gentlemen! We have called you together to inform you that we are going to overthrow the United States government.
Another example was Colin Powell saying, "I am being treated well by my captors." With just a 10-minute recording of somebody's voice, they are able, in almost real time, to clone someone's speech. Steiner was so impressed, he asked for a copy.
These examples, which merely consist of creating static messages, are not at all comparable to the phone conversations from Flight 93, which were real-time two-way conversations.
So what about the hijackers? On September 14th, 2001, the Department of Justice released the names of the alleged 19 hijackers. But on September 23rd, the BBC reported that Waleed Al Shehri was alive and well in Casablanca, Morocco.
[Waleed] ... attended flight training school at Dayton Beach in the United States ... he left the United States in September last year, became a pilot with Saudi Arabian airlines
They also tracked down Abdulaziz Alomari, who is an engineer with Saudi Telecoms, and lost his passport while studying in Denver.
"I couldn't believe it when the FBI put me on their list. They gave my name and my date of birth, but I am not a suicide bomber. I am here. I am alive. I have no idea how to fly a plane. I had nothing to do with this."
-The Telegraph, 9/23/2001
In the same article, FBI Director Robert Mueller admitted that "the identity of several of the hijackers is in doubt."
So how many hijackers turned up alive? At least nine of them. Wail M. Alshehri is alive and well.
[Wail M. Al-Sheri] is a pilot whose father is a Saudi diplomat in Bombay. "I personally talked to both father and son today."
-Gaafar Allagany, Saudi Arabian Embassy, LA Times, 9/21/2001
Mohand Alshehri is alive in Saudi Arabia.
According to eh Orlando Sentinel, the Aaudi Arabian embassy confirmed that ... Mohand Alshehri ... [is] not dead and had nothing to do with [9-11].
-American Free Press, 10/12/2001
Khalid Almihdhar is a computer programmer in Mecca.
"I want to think all of this is a mistake." Almihdhar was watching TV at home when friends saw his photograph on the news and began to call to see if he was still alive.
-Chicago Tribune, 10/04/2001
Salem Alhazmi works at a chemical plant in Yanbu, Saudi Arabia.
Salem Al-Hazmi is alive and ... not one of the people whoe perished in [Flight 77]. His passport had been stolen by a pickpocket in Cairo three years ago.
-The Guardian, 9/21/2001
Saeed Alghamdi is training to be a pilot in Tunis.
"The FBI provided no evidence of my involvement in the attacks. You can't imagine what it is like to be described as a [dead terrorist] when you are innocent and alive."
-The Telegraph, 9/23/2001
Ahmed Alnami is an administrative supervisor for Saudi Airlines.
"I'm still alive, I had never even heard of Pennsylvania." He never lost his passport and found it very worrying that his identity appeared to have been stolen.
-The Telegraph, 9/23/2001
We already covered Waleed and Abdulaziz. And last but not least, Mohammed Atta's father claimed to receive a phone call from his son on September 12th. On September 20th and 27th, Mueller admitted on CNN that there is "no legal proof to prove the identities of the hijackers"
This page provides sources for most of these press reports.
Indeed. After all, not even the official autopsy for Flight 77 lists the hijackers, And the opening paragraph makes no mention of their absence.
The victims were identified through DNA using samples provided by family members. The alleged hijackers were not identified, the official story goes, because authorities had no DNA samples from their relatives.
So if there's no proof the the hijackers were members of al Qaeda, or if they were even on the planes in the first place, what justification do we have for bombing Afghanistan? Oh, that's right. The Bin Laden confession tape. On December 14th, 2001, the government released a tape, allegedly of bin Laden confessing to the attacks of 9-11, which they claimed to find in a house in Jalalabad, Afghanistan.
The 'confession tape' wasn't the official reason for bombing Afghanistan. Rather, the Bush administration demanded that Taliban government hand over Osama bin Laden. The Taliban offered to comply under the condition that the US produce evidence that bin Laden was behind the attack.

Except there's a number of things wrong with this tape. One, the tape itself is of very poor quality. And two, the man in the video looks and acts nothing like bin Laden. According to the FBI's website, Osama is left-handed. Yet, in this video, he is writing a note with his right hand. Not to mention he's wearing a gold ring, which is forbidden by Islamic law, And is never mentioned in the FBI's description of him. Compare this video to four other pictures of bin Laden. Does anybody else see a problem here?
Indeed the man in the tape is an impostor. This comparison of facial features makes it obvious.
Until the government can prove without a shadow of a doubt that Al-Qaeda was behind September 11th, The American people have every reason to believe otherwise.
“It is easy to imagine an infinite number of situations where government officials might quite legitimately have reasons to give false information out. It's an unfortunate reality that the issuance of incomplete information and even misinformation by government may sometimes be perceived as necessary to protect vital interests.”
-Solicitor General Theodore Olson, whose wife Barbara was killed on September 11th, 2001.
True, the burden of proof should be on the government, but we are faced with an administration that shows flagrant disregard for the rule of law and a population that is all too willing to accept rationalizations for outrages from pre-emptive war to illegal detentions to the normalization of torture. In the real world, the burden of proof falls on those working to explose the administration's crimes.
And now for the last question of all. Why would our government do such a thing? I hope you're sitting down. First, we have Larry Silverstein, the man who purchased the World Trade Center in July, 2001. After September 11th, Silverstein demanded $7.2 billion dollars from his insurers, claiming that each plane counted as a separate act of terrorism. However, on December 6th, 2004, the courts only rewarded him with 2.2 billion dollars.
Silverstein didn't purchase the World Trade Center on July 24, 2001, a consortium headed by him closed a 99-year lease giving them control of the complex. The $2.2 billion awarded in 2004 was in addition to awards Silverstein had already received.
Next we have the put options that were placed on United Airlines, American Airlines, and Boeing. According to the San Fransisco Chronicle, more than 2.5 Million dollars has remained unclaimed.
Loose Change brings up a strong point of evidence indicating foreknowledge but fails to explain it.

A put option is a contract allowing its holder to sell a stock at a fixed price before a specified date. If the price declines before that date, the holder can realize a profit by purchasing stock at the lower price and selling it at the option price. In the week before the attack put options soared on stocks hurt by the attack.
As for 9-11 itself, Reuters reported that Convar, a German computer company is responsible for helping companies and accountants in New York restore their data from over 400 hard drives that were recovered from the World Trade Center's rubble. Convar recovered information from 32 different computers that suggested insider trading took place on 9-11. Richard Wagner, an expert at Convar:
There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of the approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts exceeding 100 million dollars. They thought that the records of their transactions could not be traced after the main frames were destroyed.
After their analysis, Convar handed the results over to the FBI. Although the FBI was legally bound to investigate who was responsible, to date they have done no such thing.
This is a different story from the insider trading mentioned a few sentences earlier. According to the Shanghai Star credit card transactions totaling more than $100 million surged through computers in the World Trade Center in the hours before the attack. Convar Systeme Deutschland GmbH used a novel technology to read data from damage hard drives recovered from the rubble.
Moving on. According to Wikipedia, "One of the world's largest gold depositories was stored underneath the World Trade Center." In 1993 the value of the gold was estimated at one billion dollars, rumored to be owned by Kuwaiti interests. When the World Trade Center was destroyed, the amount of gold "far exceeded the 1993 levels." "The gold was finally recovered in its entirety in late 2001."
Or was it?
On November 1st, 2001, the Timesonline reported that a large amount of gold was discovered in the wreckage of the World Trade Center. Mayor Rudolph Giuliani announced that more than $230 million dollars was recovered from Ground Zero. However, the Comex metals trading division was storing gold bars for the Bank of Nova Scotia, Chase Manhattan Bank, The Bank of New York, Hong Kong, and Shanghai Banking, totaling $950 million dollars. And that's just one company.
Rumor has it that over $160 billion dollars in gold was stored in the World Trade Center. So where did all the gold go? Remember the gold that was found in November, 2001? Reuters reported, that it was discovered in the back of a 10 wheel truck, along with several cars in a delivery tunnel underneath World Trade Center 5. No bodies were recovered.
The figure of $950 million was calculated by 9-11 Research and reported here in 2003, but Loose Change fails to credit that source. Loose Change badly botches this story: Reuters didn't report that the gold was discovered in the truck -- rather it reported that the truck had to be removed to access the gold in the vault.
As workers got closer to the gold, authorities began restricting access to Ground Zero, joined by FBI and Secret Service agents. One worker who was directed away from the tunnel told a reporter, "If I tried to go down there, they would have shot me."
Heavy-machinery operators and others worked under the watchful eye of more than 100 armed officers.
So, let me get this straight. Gold from World Trade Center 4 was found underneath World Trade Center 5, in an empty delivery truck, with an empty escort of cars. I think it's safe to say that they were running away from the South Tower. The question is, how did they know to flee from their stash, when not even the firefighters inside the South Tower expected it to collapse?
Loose Change doesn't get it straight: it jumps to a conclusion that the truck under WTC 5 was filled with gold by mis-reading the Reuters report. There may have been a gold heist, but that story about the truck is not evidence for it.
167 billion dollars in gold. 200 million is found. And that's just the money.
Just a few sentences ago, Loose Change called the $160 billion figure a rumor. Now it states $167 billion as if it is an established fact.
After September 11th, President Bush had and continues to have permission to do and say whatever he wants, all under the pretext of 9-11.
The Patriot Act.
The Department of Homeland Security.
It's time for America to accept 9-11 for what it was: A lie which killed thousands of people, only in turn killing hundreds of thousands more, to make billions upon trillions of dollars.
Are you angry yet? You should be. Every single attempt to investigate and uncover the truth behind 9-11 has been blackballed, ridiculed, and harassed by both the government and media alike, for even daring to question the official story.
Loose Change is correct about ridicule, as demonstrated by the Popular Mechanics, Scientific American, and many other attacks,' but blackballing and harassment seems to be hyperbole. Also, what Loose Change fails to note is that most of the ridicule exploits sloppy and misinformed claims such as those that litter the video.
Jimmy Walter, you spent nearly 2 million dollars on an advertising blitz to convince people here in New York and elsewhere that 9-11 was a self-inflicted wound. Jimmy, welcome. Why are you doing this?
Thanks for having me, Geraldo. I'm doing this because a fool and his money are soon parted. I'm a patriot trying to defend this country from the real terrorists, who have damaged and changed our country. I am asking the same questions that the widows and orphans, parents and friends of the victims of 911 are asking, and have not had answered by either the 911 Commission, nor by any real investigation to the mass murders, that 66% of New Yorkers want investigated.
I'll say it again. Why are they hiding from us? What are they hiding from us? And what's it going to take until people in this country give a damn and do something about it? America has been hijacked. Not by Al Qaeda. Not by Osama bin Laden. But by a group of tyrants, ready and willing to do whatever it takes to keep their stranglehold on this country.
So what are we going to do about it?
Share this information with friends, family, total strangers. Hold screenings, conferences, whatever you have to do to get the word out. It's up to you. Ask questions. Demand answers.
More important than any of that, contact the producers of Loose Change and encourage them to check their facts, so that the 3rd edition of their video can't be as easily taken apart as the 2nd edition.


In Plane Site makes Loose Change look like it has high standards of logic -- and that's saying something.

Return to SUMMARY

Copyright 2006,