New details on the flight 93 hijacking-- does this make any sense?

I've never heard these details before.

http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010916phonecallnat3p3.asp

"Beamer said he could account for 37 of the plane's 38 passengers. The hijackers had forced 27 of them into the first-class compartment near the front.

Beamer, nine other passengers and five flight attendants were ordered to sit on the floor in the rear of the plane.

He did not know the whereabouts of the pilot, copilot and the remaining passenger. He said a flight attendant had told him the pilot and copilot had been forced from the cockpit and may have been wounded.

Two of the hijackers were in the cockpit with the door locked behind them. The man with the bomb stayed in the back of the plane, near Beamer's group."

Does this make any sense for a hijacking strategy?

Put most of the passengers up in first class, then put the flight attendants and some other passengers in the back, with one hijacker between these two groups of passengers?

Even if the hijacker had a bomb, he is incredibly vulnerable to being attacked by the passengers. This makes no sense to me.

By the way, if Beamer is on the floor in the back of the plane, how can he count all the passengers in the front?

Also, first class only has 12 seats and there is not so much aisle space-- how did they squeeze 27 people up there?

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757family/pf/pf_seating_charts.html

from the Post-Gazette

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=23179&mesg_id=39887

is felt supposed to be the one "missing" passenger? maybe he was in the toilet for a long time.


also you'd think they would want most, if not all, of the passengers way at the other end of the plane, away from the cockpit. ... 2 hijakcers in the cockpit, one back with the passengers and the fourth in the middle of the plane as another buffer.

but he made his call very late. Why? And why was he not aware of the insurgency against the hijackers that was so obvious in the other flight 93 phone calls.

http://www.physics911.org
Do people think the calls might have really been real?

someone who visits my blog regularly has tested his cell phone on plane flights and says there is no signal 5 minutes past take-off and it only comes back at landing. That fits the physic911 results.

And, were the planes maybe flying at a lower altitude thus allowing cell phones to be in range of cell towers?

Cell Phone Call Experimental Evidence ( 911 calls likely faked) http://physics911.ca/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6

Towards the end of the call, the operator could hear "an awful commotion", men's voices raised and hollering, women screaming "oh my god", "god help us" and "help us Jesus". Todd talks to someone away from the phone then says "You ready? Okay, let's roll."

From the article above-- after Beamer left the phone, there was silence on the line, and the operator hung up at 10am.

Question: why was there so much commotion BEFORE the passenger revolt but then silence once it started? What were people so freaked out about BEFORE the hijackers started careening the plane around to disrupt the passengers (according to the official story)?

And what happened to the hijacker guarding them????? If the passengers took him out, why would they be screaming like that?