I understand we should always be critical thinkers, but that also means you should think critically about your own assumptions. I therefore repeat: what could possibly be significant about the three missing minutes of audio?

all i'm saying is that it doesn't seem as simple as terrorists crash plane. why was plane debris found within 16 miles of the wreckage? why was one engine found miles away from the wreckage. why is the plane impact recoreded three minutes after the transcipt? why was teh black box never released? what was the "white smoke" one lady was heard saying on the phone? these are just some of many questions that just don't add up. and like you, i agree with you, i'm all for killing innocent people if it means saving the white house, but unfortuanly there are to many bleeding hearts that would have a field day if that was indeed announced.

this is just one of many sites that shows weird "coincidences" that just don't add up.

http://www.flight93crash.com/

uh, let see, maybe someone said "oh look us fighter jets here to help us. wait why are they shooting at us?" of course this is just part of a theory but if 3 minutes of tape haven't been shown, you have to ask why?

First, engage in conversation and don't treat me like I'm a child. Treat me with as much respect as I'm treating you.

If the military took down the plane, I imagine they would have done it quickly. That is, without the passengers and pilot of United 93 knowing. At that point the plane was a confirmed hijack. There were three crashes already. I don't imagine the military would try to flag the plane down before taking it out.

Can we take the conspiracy theories to a different forum, please? This thread is for discussion of the film.

Sounds like a good idea, and I wouldn't mind my posts and others being pruned. :thumbsup:

i apolgize. i just thought it was obivious what i thought would be on the missing 3 minutes. and yes, i know they wouldn't flag it down, they'd just shoot it. but i don't think "if" they blew the plane up that big, f-16 missles wouldn't blow it up, they'd have to hit critical parts. a) an engine (an engine was found many miles away from the rest of the wreck.) now again, this is just speculation, but based on everything i've read, this is the only thing that would make sense. the people were getting into the cockpit. terrorists were getting ready to crash or just trying to shake them. trsnscipt ends. in the 3 minutes there could've been the planes arriving and shooting. i'm sure a plane getting hit bny a missle would be noticebale and there'd be dialogue within that 3 minute span to acknowledge that, but the gov't wouldn't want that being heard.

again, that was just a scenario that would fit all the weird stuff that doesn't fit.

if it was just a terrorists crash plane scnerio, to much stuff just doesn't add up. i mean it could be the engine just fell off. the airplane clock was 3 minutes off. the white jet was just a random jet. the explosion caused debris to fly miles away from the wreck. that is just to much stuff to "assume" imo.

i apoligize. i've already been warned and probably be reprimanded but no one had posted anything in politics and it kept coming up in here. i apoligze.

This is ridiculous that everyone keeps on saying "don't talk about politics, it doesn't belong in here." If this movie is semi-documentary as everyone says, then the subject is heroics, emotion, politics and/or conspiracy. If it's okay to talk about the heroics portrayed in the movie, then it's okay to counter that and say that there were no heroics and there was no airplane that crashed (a conspiracy view). Or if one says the cinematography was awesome, someone can counter and say the filmmaking sucked...What exactly should be talked about when talking about this movie then? How are people going to react when someone comes in here and posts "this movie sucks, the acting was bad, the camerawork was amateurish, the story was false and based on lies, etc."? The UNITED 93 supporters will probably curse them out. Why? Because that's a political reaction, not a reaction to the actual filmmaking...

I find it wierd that there are film characters played by the actual people due to the following example:
Let's say you watch your whole family get killed by a serial killer. Hollywood thinks it's an interesting movie and they want to cast the film. They get actors to play your family, but then the producers get you to play yourself, which means you act out your reaction to the serial killer killing your family. How authentic!!!
This is why I see film characters played by the actual people a bit sleazy and wierd in UNITED 93.

...

Sometimes I wonder why I even read these replies.

You do realize that the passengers on the plane were not played by the actual passengers from flight 93, right?

So what exactly is the problem with, for example, an air traffic control person playing themselves in this movie?

They're just looking for something to bitch about.

I'm sickened by the lack of respect for the people that died in this crash. I feel this movie honors their memory but there seem to be some people that just don't get it.

or don't care

Just saw the movie. Amazing.

You've proved my point.

Thanks! Lack of any type of conscience is not a good quality in case you didn't know.

why should people care about people who die? people die every day tragic events and no one thinks twice, then low and behold people die on a plane in america and it's time to feel sorry? when the tidal wave hit asia were there any people feeling sorry for them as they did the us? when serbia had it's ethnic cleansing, was there any interest? but when a tragedy happens in the us, we have to make movies and feel sorry? so it's ok to feel sorry for the us and not the rest of humanity?

No one thinks twice? my ass. People donated millions of dollars to disaster relief funds for the tidal wave relief effort. People cared about serbia, but it wasn't covered on the media extensively here.

Also, it's natural for people to care more about something that hits closer to home.

This movie wasn't made to make people feel compassion for the victims of this horrific day, it was made to honor the people on that flight who wouldn't stand by and let these terrorists destroy more life, instead they took the initiative to do something about it. There's a difference between feeling sorry for and honoring people.

Someone here is just too into conspiracy theories.

yes, because me not caring has soemthing to do with conspiracy theories. great statement. :rolleyes:

You appeared to be justifying your commitment to these conspiracy theories based on the idea that you don't care that people died.

whats the total gross so far and who gets to keep the money? victim families? I sure hope so.

I believe I read that 10% of the first weekend's gross would be donated. I think the opening gross was around $12 million---so about $1.2 million will be donated. I would have liked to see more than 10% donated, or at least more than 10% of one weekend, but I suppose business is business even when 9/11 is involved. That's what corporations do---make money. :shrug:

no, whether i cared or not wouldn't change the fact that i see many strange coincidences people don't see or choose to ignore. but i'm done with the conspiracy theory talk. i've been warned enough.

I'm sorry, I can't let this one go. What exactly is a "self phone"?

Bellsofwar... you didn't happen to get 7 tickets in one day a couple months ago, did you?

yup, if one doesn't support UNITED 93, then one is with the terrorists. If one doesn't support UNITED 93, then that means one doesn't care about the deaths on 9/11. It all makes sense now. I can't wait til UNITED 93 plays in the local Baghdad multiplex theater. After watching this movie, they will understand now why they are getting "cared" for by the US govt./military...