I don’t think you need to read the book, just read this article cited here. Quite interesting.
excerpt:
The FBI kept the contents of the voice recorder secret until it was forced by bereaved relatives to play the tape under heavy security at a hotel in April 2002.
The family members later reported they heard sounds of an on-board struggle beginning at 9.58am, with a final ‘rushing sound’ at 10.03am, when the tape fell silent. Could the ‘rushing sound’ have been made by the plane being holed? And what of the moment when the plane hit the ground?
‘There is no sound of the impact,’ said Kenneth Nacke, whose brother Lou had been on Flight 93. There is a further twist. In 2006, when the judge at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui ordered a transcript of the cockpit voice recorder, it ended with the sound of the hijackers shouting praises to Allah.
Just where had those praises been in 2002 when the tape was first played to relatives? For many, their sudden appearance confirmed suspicions of tape tampering.
The easy thing about conspiracies is to ask questions. Even when a logical explanation exists, just keep repeating your questions, only louder this time. Claim there is a cover-up. But the one thing you don’t want to do is offer any credible evidence, it might be debunked.
I see a cigar shaped airliner flew into the Pentagon and left no wreckage or remains behind; at least that’s what the visual evidence suggests.
Lots of wreckage. 184 of 189 passenger remains identified.
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg2.html
Been hiding out with Osama for the last little while? at least that’s what the visual evidence suggests.
RBG
Take a paper napkin and drop it on the floor. It arrives in one piece. That’s an “impact area”.
Take the same napking tear it up into pieces and drop it. Watch the pieces scatter over a wide area.
That’s a “debris field”.
Now conjecture on how a plane without any bombs on board, breaks up in mid-air to create a debris field 8 miles in width over areas not on its glide path.
Easy. Read my # 22 above. Then cite specifics of just what was found outside the impact area.
RBG
If anyone is still reading this thread:
I just read the 9-11 “Norad Tapes” transcriptions/audio recordings with additional commentary from Vanity Fair. Chilling reading & listening:
http://www.vanityfair.com/features/general/060801fege01
A couple things are pretty clear: The military response to 911 might best be described as “controlled chaos.” Without clear primary radar and timely, reliable FAA reports, much of NORAD’s time was chasing ghost aircraft. (They even intercepted themselves as reports of sightings of their own aircraft got back to the pilots.) But it’s pretty clear from the transcripts that the military could and would have shot down a threatening airliner if it came to it. So I don’t know why there needs to be a conspiracy coverup. They would have shot it down and clearly stood behind their decision. Except a “don’t shoot” order was given because they were absolutely paranoid that, in all the confusion that prevailed, one of their fighters might accidently shoot an innocent/non-hijacked passenger jet out of the sky. For this reason, and the fact that they never were in any position to shoot at anything threatening anyway due to serious information delays, the military shot nothing down on 9-11.
RBG
“Twelve eyewitnesses state seeing another jet nearby.
They claim they saw an F-16 move closer in and fire what were probably two Sidewinder missiles, one of them catching at least one of the Boeing?s huge engines, after which the ?plane dropped like a stone?.
Someone else ?heard a loud bang? and saw the airliner plummet. A Vietnam War veteran said he ?heard a missile?, a sound he knew well. It is debatable how seriously we should take these reports”
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/United_Airlines_Flight_93