Talk:Flight 93 Cockpit Transcript

- I have a feeling this addition will be deleted by a admin busy-body:

''Note: The official NTSB seal is missing. Source of transcript is not identified. This and many other unusual features described here (external link)''

yet it would be good additional info. After all. The document as presented to the court is bizarre, if not an outright invention nobody wanted to put his name to. The simple stamp GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT is not an identifier, its a joke. But you can check it. This is what the court had in front of it.??


 * And maybe Shakespeare really stole Bacon's scripts...but that's not our role. This is the official transcript, as translated by the US Government, and released following court orders in the past 6 weeks. Sherurcij 19:05, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

-

All I can find on Jassim is that it's a common Arabic name - does it mean something in Arabic that I'm not finding, or what's wrong with this picture? Any help would be great. Also, I couldn't find the Arabic term for "I bear witness that...", though my memory of Islamic Studies in University tells me that there is one we should wikilink. Sherurcij 20:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Two points : 1. The flight took off at 8:42 - this transcript starts just before 9:32, AFTER the hijack, so we learn nothing about how it was achieved. The first line is one of the hijackers talking, as if the plane was hijacked the minute it took off - complete nonsense. Where's the rest of the tape ? 2. Count up the total silences - not even "unintelligible" - lasting 30 seconds or longer in the 31 minutes the tape lasts, and you will find they come to more than 18 minutes. Is it credible that we could have a 142-second complete silence (from just before 9:42) in the cockpit of a hijacked plane ? What were they doing - playing patience ? The transcript is pure and utter BS - another insult to the intelligence from the biggest bunch of liars ever to hold office in the USA. Les Raphael 12 July 2006 - &lt;email obfuscated in case of spambots>


 * Without addressing your points directly, it really bothers me when people use such superlatives to describe the Bush administration (And I'm actually quite an opponent myself, but I disliked Clinton just as much), but have you people really never taken an American history course? I mean, because Franklin D. Roosevelt was a Democrat, people overlook the fact that he lied to the media more than any other President, he had reporters jailed for refusing to accept his official stories, and he tried to pack the Supreme Court. People who talk as though the Bush administration is the first corrupt, dishonest or self-serving administration are really just showcasing their own ignorance of past presidencies - and it's really just a mark against your own education system. That said, I don't know if you've seen V for Vendetta or not, but the media in there sums up my feelings succinctly - "We're the (Wikisource), we don't make the news up. That's the government's job" - our role isn't to question who truly wrote Shakespeare's works, or if The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is inherently racist...we're just here to copy what already exists, so others can find and read it, and make their own judgments. Sherurcij (talk) (CRIMINALS ARE MADE, NOT BORN) 14:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I never said the Bush administration was the ONLY bunch of liars - yes, Clinton and Roosevelt were liars too - not as bad as this lot. I used the superlative with full knowledge of past US history. 212.219.240.201 10:15, 15 July 2006 (UTC)Les Raphael 15 July 2006


 * Well, you concede some ground, so will I. I agree with you that it's most frustrating and not serving the public knowledge, for them to release half of the transcript, I would like to hear the beginning pre-hijacking myself - maybe one day we will, let's hope :) Sherurcij (talk) (CRIMINALS ARE MADE, NOT BORN) 20:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Why should we think there's more transcript? It's a half-hour long, and Cockpit voice recorder says that the FAA requires that the CVR be able to record a half-hour of voices. I suspect the combination is not a coincidence.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:37, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

A US government work?
The things said by those people on the plane are copyright of the people themselves. Just because the US Government has made it into a transcript, does not mean they take the copyright from the people who said the things and make it their own.

At least, that's my interpretation of this text. Daniel (talk) 05:59, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * You have copyright over things you affix permenantly, writing them down, yourself. You do not have copyright over words you speak aloud in conversation. Sherurcij Collaboration of the Week: William Lyon Mackenzie King 06:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Although I appreciate there may be different rules between the UK and the US, the principle you cite above is not universally applicable. Could you please give me a link to where a US government department/US Act says what you say above? Daniel (talk) 11:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Our latest discussion on speeches was WS:S(2008-04#Copyright clarifications from Mike Godwin), which came about due to this. Enjoy, -- John Vandenberg (chat) 14:26, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, so it has been discussed before - thanks John for the link. A very interesting proposition by Mike, indeed. The benefits of experience :) Daniel (talk) 15:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Proofreading?
"09:32:18 Slop." - should this be "Stop"? TwoMightyGodsPersuasionNecessity 17:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, changed. --Yarnalgo (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Now available as DjVu
I have converted and uploaded the PDF file and it is now at File:Flight 93 Cockpit Transcript.djvu, not sure if someone wants to create the requisite Index: and Page: files. billinghurst (talk) 05:23, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I have created the Page: files. Evil saltine (talk) 06:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)