See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS
Source:
public-action
URL Source: http://www.public-action.com/911/robotplane.html
Published: Sep 28, 2004
Author: Carol A. Valentine
Post Date: 2006-09-08 08:49:17 by Kamala
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: 911
Views: 553
Comments: 19
Note: At the time this article was published, all external links were alive and functioning. But the Internet is a dynamic forum. Webmasters sometimes change or remove pages, and entire web sites sometimes disappear. Whenever practicable, we have cached copies of the originals. Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS by Carol A. Valentine Curator, Waco Holocaust Electronic Museum http://www.Public-Action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum October 6, 2001--There were no "suicide" pilots on those September 11 jets. The jets were controlled by advanced robotics and remote-control technology, not hijackers. Fantastic? Before I explain, read about the history-making robot/remote-controlled jet plane. Global Hawk: Now You Have It ... The Northrop Grumman Global Hawk is a robotized American military jet that has a wingspan of a Boeing 737. The excerpts below were taken from an article entitled: "Robot plane flies Pacific unmanned," which appeared in the April 24, 2001 edition of Britain's International Television News : "The aircraft essentially flies itself, right from takeoff, right through to landing, and even taxiing off the runway," according to the Australian Global Hawk manager Rod Smith. Here is an excerpt from that article: A robot plane has made aviation history by becoming the first unmanned aircraft to fly across the Pacific Ocean. The American high-altitude Global Hawk spy plane made flew (sic) across the ocean to Australia, defence officials confirmed. The Global Hawk, a jet-powered aircraft with a wingspan equivalent to a Boeing 737 flew from Edwards Air Force Base in California and landed late on Monday at the Royal Australian Air Force base at Edinburgh, in South Australia state... [NOTE: two of the aircraft involved in the 911 crashes were Boeing 757s, two were Boeing 767s] It flies along a pre-programmed flight path, but a pilot monitors the aircraft during its flight via a sensor suite which provides infra-red and visual images. (See: http://www.itn.co.uk/news/20010424/world/05robotplane.shtm or http://web.archive.org/web/20010707000937/http://itn.co.uk/news/20010424/world/05robotplane.shtm or http://www.Public-Action.com/911/itn) ... And Now You Don't Then, on September 20, 2001, The Economist published comments from a former boss of British Airways, Robert Ayling. In a section subtitled "On autopilot into the future," The Economist wrote: Robert Ayling, a former boss of British Airways, suggested in The Financial Times this week that aircraft could be commandeered from the ground and controlled remotely in the event of a hijack ... (See http://www.economist.com/science/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=787987 or http://www.Public-Action.com/911/economist-autopilot) So, even though the ITN article was published on April 24, in September, after the 911 crashes, Mr. Ayling is pretending Global Hawk technology is a thing of the future. Then The New York Times ran this: ... In addition, the president [President Bush] said he would give grants to airlines to allow them to develop stronger cockpit doors and transponders that cannot be switched off from the cockpit. Government grants would also be available to pay for video monitors that would be placed in the cockpit to alert pilots to trouble in the cabin; and new technology, probably far in the future, allowing air traffic controllers to land distressed planes by remote control. ("Bush to Increase Federal Role in Security at Airports," The New York Times, Sept. 28, 2001; emphasis added.) So, then, right after Operation 911 was pulled off, two men of world influence were pretending such technology had not yet been perfected. That was dishonest. And revealing. Run a Google Advanced Search on the phrase "Global Hawk," and you will find additional information. Meanwhile, I have attached the text of the ITN article at the end of this piece. [Note of Jan. 28, 2002: For an historical overview of automated plane landing systems, see "Thwarting skyjackings for the ground," by Alan Staats, posted to FACSNET, October 2, 2001, at: http://www.facsnet.org/issues/specials/terrorism/aviation.php3 or http://www/Public-Action.com/911/facsnet/aviation.php3 . The author states: "Controlling the aircraft from the ground is nothing new. The military has been flying obsolete high performance fighter aircraft as target drones since the 1950s. In fact, NORAD (the North American Air Defense Command) had at its disposal a number of U.S. Air Force General Dynamics F-106 Delta Dart fighter aircraft confingured to be remotely flown into combat as early as 1959 under the auspices of a program known as SAGE. These aircraft could be started, taxied, taken off, flown into combat, fight, and return to a landing entirely by remote control, with only human intervention needed being to fuel and re-arm them."] With this technology, we could have a "suicide" airplane fly into a building without a suicide pilot. Robotics and remote control technologies have developed to the point that a high-altitude Global Hawk (or a low-altitude Tomahawk cruise missile) can be guided into collision with a target without a Kamikaze pilot in the cockpit. America And Its Allies Would Never Attack America! Now, hold it there! This is US military technology. We all surely know that the US and its allies would not conspire to attack America! Or do we? The Army's School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS ) thinks Israel is capable of doing exactly that. On September 10, 2001, The Washington Times ran a front page story which quoted SAMS officers: "Of the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service, the SAMS officers say: 'Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target US forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.'" ("US troops would enforce peace under Army study," The Washington Times , Sept.. 10, 2001, pg. A1, 9.) Just 24 hours after this story appeared, the Pentagon was hit and the Arabs were being blamed. These SAMS officers are obviously interested in protecting their country, but not all Americans are. Some are traitors and pay allegiance to Israel. Recall the June 8, 1967, Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, and American complicity in the attack. During the Six Day War, the Liberty, an American intelligence gathering ship, was sailing in international waters. Israeli aircraft and torpedo boats attacked it for 75 minutes. Read the story at the USS Liberty Memorial Website, at http://www.USSLiberty.com When four US fighter jets from a nearby aircraft carrier came to protect the Liberty, President Johnson, through Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, ordered the jets NOT to come to the Liberty's aid. Johnson reported said he did not care who was killed or what happened to the ship, he just didn't want his allies embarassed. http://157.238.204.10/lewis.txt Mirror of this page: http://www.public-action.com/911/USSLiberty-lewis.txt The Israeli attack was allowed to cotinue. Thirty-fourAmericans were killed and 171 wounded, thanks to the treason of an American president and defense seretary. Now consider Operation Northwoods: In 1962, US military leaders designed a plan to conduct terrorist acts against Americans and blame Cuba, to create popular sentiment for invasion of that country. Operation Northwoods included: Plans to shoot down a CIA plane designed to replicate a passenger flight and announce that Cuban forces shot it down. Creation of military casualties by blowing up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blaming Cuba: "....casualty lists in the US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation," and Development of a terror campaign in the Miami and Washington, DC. Information on Operation Northwoods can be found in James Bamford's Body of Secrets, (Doubleday, 2001), and at the following URLs. http://www.baltimoresun.com/bal-te.md.nsa24apr24.story http://www.earlham.edu/archive/opf-l/May-2001/msg00062.html http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/ http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html In other words, US allies and people within the US military establishment are not opposed to killing Americans, given the right goal. Why Take Chances? Put yourself in the shoes of the masterminds of Operation 911. The attacks had to be tightly coordinated. Four jets took off within 15 minutes of each other at Boston, Dulles, and Newark airports, and roughly two hours later, it was over. The masterminds couldn't afford to take needless chances. Years ago I saw a local TV news reporter interview a New York mugger about the occupational hazards of his trade. "It's a very, very dangerous trade," the mugger informed the interviewer. "Some of these people are crazy! They fight back! You can get hurt!" If a freelance New York mugger realized the unpredictable nature of human behavior, surely the pros who pulled this job off must have known the same truth. Yet we are asked to believe that the culprits took four jet airliners, with four sets of crew and four sets of passengers -- armed with (depending on the news reports you read) "knives," "plastic knives" and box cutters. Given the crazy and unpredictable nature of humans, why would they try this bold plan when they were so poorly armed? A lady's handbag -- given the weight of the contents most women insist on packing -- is an awesome weapon. I know, I have used mine in self defense. Are we to believe that none of the women had the testosterone to knock those flimsy little weapons out of the hijackers' hands? And what of the briefcases most men carry? Thrown, those briefcase can be potent weapons. Your ordinary every-day New York mugger would never take the chances that our culprits took. Flight attendant Michelle Heidenberger was on board Flight 77. She had been "trained to handle a hijacking. She knew not to let anyone in the cockpit. She knew to tell the hijacker that she didn't have a key and would have to call the pilots. None of her training mattered." ( "On flight 77: 'Our Plane Is Being Hijacked'," The Washington Post, September 12, 2001, pgs. A 1, 11.) That's right, The Washington Post for once is telling the whole truth. Heidenberger's training didn't matter, the pilots' training didn't matter, the ladies handbags didn't matter, the mens' briefcases didn't matter. The masterminds of Operation 911 knew that whatever happened aboard those flights, the control of the planes was in their hands. Even if the crew and passengers fought back, my hypothesis is that they could not have regained control of the planes, for the planes were being controlled by Global Hawk technology. Flight 77: "The Plane Was Flown With Extraordinary Skill" Once again: Operation 911 demanded that the attacks be tightly coordinated. Four jets took off within 15 minutes of each other at Boston, Dulles, and Newark airports, and roughly two hours later, it was over. If we are to believe the story we are being told, the masterminds needed, at an absolute minimum, pilots who could actually fly the planes and who could arrive at the right place at the right time. American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, took off from Dulles Airport in northern Virginia at 8:10 a.m. and crashed into the Pentagon at 9:40 a.m. The Washington Post, September 12, says this: "Aviation sources said that the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm, possibly one of the hijackers. Someone even knew how to turn off the transponder, a move that is considerably less than obvious." According to the article, the air traffic controllers "had time to warn the White House that the jet was aimed directly at the president's mansion and was traveling at a gut-wrenching speed--full throttle. "But just as the plane seemed to be on a suicide mission into the White House, the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver. The plane circled 270 degrees from the right to approach the Pentagon from the west, whereupon Flight 77 fell below radar level, vanishing from controller's screens, the sources said." ("On Flight 77: 'Our Plane Is Being Hijacked'," The Washington Post, September 12, 2001, pgs. 1 & 11) Meet Ace Suicide Pilot Hani Hanjour Let's look at what we know about the alleged suicide pilot of American Airlines Flight 77, Hani Hanjour. According to press reports, Hanjour had used Bowie's Maryland Freeway Airport three times since mid-August as he attempted to get permission to use one of the airport's planes. This from The Prince George's Journal [Maryland] September 18, 2001: Marcel Bernard, the chief flight instructor at the airport, said the man named Hani Hanjour went into the air in a Cessna 172 with instructors from the airport three times beginning the second week of August and had hoped to rent a plane from the airport. According to published reports, law enforcement sources say Hanjour, in his mid-twenties, is suspected of crashing the American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon. ... Hanjour had his pilot's license, said Bernard, but needed what is called a 'check-out' done by the airport to gauge a pilot's skills before he or she is able to rent a plane at Freeway Airport which runs parallel to Route 50. Instructors at the school told Bernard that after three times in the air, they still felt he was unable to fly solo and that Hanjour seemed disappointed ... ... Published reports said Hanjour obtained his pilot's license in April of 1999, but it expired six months later because he did not complete a required medical exam. He also was trained for a few months at a private school in Scottsdale, Ariz., in 1996, but did not finish the course because instructors felt he was not capable. Hanjour had 600 hours listed in his log book, Bernard said, and instructors were surprised he was not able to fly better with the amount of experience .S Pete Goulatta, a special agent and spokesman for the FBI, said it is an on-going criminal investigation and he could not comment. (pg. 1.) If you were the mastermind who planned this breathtaking terrorist attack, would you trust a man who took 600 hours of flying time and still could not do the job? Who was paying for Hanjour's lessons, and why? Yet this is the man the FBI would have us believe flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon "with extraordinary skill." He could not even fly a Cessna 172! Yes, maneuvering a Boeing 757 into a 270 degree turn under tense conditions (remember, the culprits were outmanned and had crude, non lethal weapons) demanded the skill of a fighter pilot. But why would those bad, bad, Muslims want to do such a thing? By shifting the plane's position so radically, Flight 77 managed to hit the side of the Pentagon directly opposite the side on which the offices of the Secretary of Defense and Joint Chief of Staff were located. (Coincidentally, Flight 77 hit the offices of Army operations [US News and World Report, Sept. 14, 2001, pg. 25]. Recall, it was the Army that warned of the possibility that Israel's Mossad might make a terror attack against the US.) The masterminds of Operation 911 were prepared to sacrifice the rank and file, but carefully avoided touching a hair on the head of the brass. It reminds one of Operation Northwoods, doesn't it? Remember the rank and file sailors who were to be sacrificed on a US Naval vessel in Guantanamo Bay, in order to justify war with Cuba? No, neither Hanjour nor any other Muslim suicide pilot was at the controls of this plane. It had been fitted with Global Hawk technology and was being remotely controlled. Let's Meet The Other Aces According to The Washington Post (September 19, 2001, "Hijack Suspects Tried Many Flight Schools," Mohammed Atta, alleged hijacker of Flight 11, and Marwanal-Al-Shehhi, alleged hijacker of Flight 175, both of which crashed into the World Trade Center, attended hundreds of hours of lessons at Huffman Aviation, a flight school in Venice, Florida. They also took lessons at Jones Aviation Flying Service Inc., which operates from the Sarasota Bradenton International Airport. According to the Post, neither experience "worked out." A flight instructor at Jones who asked not be identified said Atta and Al Shehhi arrived in September or October and asked to be given flight training. Atta, the instructor said, was particularly difficult. "He would not look at your face," the instructor said. "When you talked to him, he could not look you in the eye. His attention span was very short." The instructor said neither man was able to pass a Stage I rating test to track and intercept. After offering some harsh words, the instructor said, the two moved on .... "We didn't kick them out, but they didn't live up to our standards." (page A 15.) Or try The Washington Post: Alleged hijackers Nawaq Alhazmi (Flight 77), Khaid Al-Midhar (Flight 77) and Hani Hanjour (Flight 77) all spent time in San Diego. "Two of the men, Alhazmi and Al-Midhar, also briefly attended a local fight school, but they were dropped because of their limited English and incompetence at the controls.... Last spring, two of the men visited Montgomery Field, a community airport ... and sought flying lessons. They spoke to instructors at Sorbi's Flying Club, which allowed them to take only two lessons before advising them to quit. "Their English was horrible, and their mechanical skills were even worse," said an instructor, who asked not to be named. "It was like they had hardly even ever driven a car ..." "They seemed like nice guys," the instructor said, "but in the plane, they were dumb and dumber." ("San Diegans See Area as Likely Target," The Washington Post, September 24, 2001, pg. A7.) But the masterminds would not need competent pilots -- if they had Global Hawk technology. Missing: Air Traffic Control Conversations Now, let's look at the contemporaneous media coverage of Operation 911. Did you notice that during the event and for weeks after, we heard no excerpts from the conversations between the air traffic control centers and the pilots of the four aircraft? Those conversations are recorded by the air traffic control centers. Surely those conversations were newsworthy. They should have been available to the media immediately. Why didn't we hear them? I believe the answer to this question is simple: If we could hear the conversations that took place, we would hear the airline pilots telling air traffic control that the controls of their airplanes would not respond. The pilots, of course, would have no way of knowing that their craft had been fitted with Global Hawk technology programmed to take over their planes. But no, we MUST believe the crashes were the work of Muslim terrorists. Therefore we were not permitted to hear the news as it happened. We will have to wait for the FBI/military intelligence people to cook up doctored and fictional conversations. They will then serve them to the public through the complicitous mass media and strategically placed "investigative reporters," and we will be asked to swallow them. Many of us will. (See The Christian Science Monitor story discussed below, "Communication With Flight 11.") Yassaboss That the airlines cooperated and did whatever the FBI told them to do is no secret. The Washington Post of September 12, 2001, says this: "Details about who was on Flight 77, when it took off and what happened on board were tightly held by airline, airport and security officials last night. All said that the FBI had asked them not to divulge details." Think back to Operation Northwoods in which the Pentagon considered reporting a bogus passenger airplane being shot down by a non-existent Cuban fighter jet. The Pentagon was obviously confident that some airline would go along with the deception. Not surprising, considering many commercial airline pilots and executives are former military pilots, and the government controls the airline industry in many ways. These pilots and executives were trained to do as they are told, and would be out of a job if they broke the rules. [Note of Jan 28, 2002: Some time after this article was published, this author concluded the Operation Northwoods documents are counterfeit. That is, they were produced by the Pentagon, as claimed by James Bamford in "Body of Secrets". See: "Operation Northwoods: The Counterfeit."] Why would the take-off time and the passenger list be held secret? The passengers, crew, and culprits were all dead. The relatives must have known that when they heard the news of the crashes. Flight departure and arrival times had been public knowledge. The masterminds knew the details of their own plans. No, it was the PUBLIC that was being denied information, and the significant information being denied was the conversations between the air traffic controllers and the pilots. Recall that during the Vietnam War, the US "secretly" bombed Cambodia. The bombing was no secret to the Cambodians. It was only a secret from the American public, who were paying for the war and may have objected to the slaughter. And that's the only purpose of the Operation 911 secrecy: To keep the information from the public. Communication With Flight 11 American Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 767, left Boston at 7:59 a.m. on its way to Los Angeles. It was allegedly piloted by Mohamed Atta, one of the pilots who couldn't fly, discussed above. Flight 11 crashed into the north tower of the WTC at 8:45 a.m. Boston airport officials said they did not spot the plane's course until it had crashed, and said the control tower had no unusual communications with the pilots or any crew member." (The Washington Post, September 12, 2001, "At Logan Airport, Nobody Saw Plane's Sharp Turn South," pg. A 10.) Sorry, this report is not credible. Airplanes are tracked constantly. The skies over the US are far too busy for us to have a lackadaisical attitude. Note the date of The Washington Post story: September 12. Now compare it to the very different story that appeared a day later, in The Christian Science Monitor: An American Airlines pilot stayed at the helm of hijacked Flight 11 much of the way from Boston to New York, sending surreptitious radio transmissions to authorities on the ground as he flew. Because the pilot's voice was seldom heard in these covert transmissions, it was not clear to the listening air-traffic controllers which of the two pilots was flying the Boeing 767. What is clear is that the pilot was secretly trying to convey to authorities the flight's desperate situation, according to controllers familiar with the tense minutes after Flight 11 was hijacked. The story goes on to say that the conversations were overheard by the controllers because the pilot had pushed a "push-to-talk" button. "When he [the pilot] pushed the button and the terrorist spoke, we knew. There was this voice that was threatening the pilot, and it was clearly threatening. During these transmissions, the pilot's voice and the heavily accented voice of a hijacker were clearly audible ...." There are some logical problems with this account, of course, not the least of which is that a) we are told the pilot's voice was seldom heard, b) it was not possible to tell which pilot was at the controls, and c) during the transmissions the pilot's voice was clearly audible. This accounting is spook talk. Let's get to the heart: All of it was recorded by a Federal Aviation Administration traffic control center. Those tapes are now presumed to be in the hands of federal law-enforcement officials, who arrived at the flight-control facility minutes after Flight 11 crashed into the World Trade Center. The tapes presumably could provide clues about the hijackers -- and may become even more important if they plane's 'black boxes' are damaged or never found. ("Controllers' tale of Flight 11," The Christian Science Monitor, September 13, 2001) So, yes, the same "federal law-enforcement" machinery that cooked up the David Koresh negotiation tapes and arranged to destroy the evidence at the Mt. Carmel Center in the April 19 inferno will be handling these records, too. Flight 175 The Washington Post reported a similar story for United Airlines Flight 175, which crashed into the south tower of the World Trade Center tower at 9:06 a.m. Less than 30 minutes into a journey that was to have taken six hours, Flight 175 took a sharp turn south into central New Jersey, near Trenton, an unusual diversion for a plane heading west, airline employees said. It then headed directly toward Manhattan. Somewhere between Philadelphia and Newark--less than 90 minutes from Manhattan--the aircraft made its final radar contact, according to a statement released by United Airlines. (The Washington Post, "Everything Seemed Normal When They Left' Boston Airport," September 12, 2001, pg. A10.) Once again, there was no contemporaneous, detailed, first hand information from the air traffic controllers about communication from the air traffic controllers. Of course the controls would not respond to manual directions if they were under the control of Global Hawk. Flight 11/Flight 175 Hijacker Passport Found We have just mentioned the distinct possibility that the masterminds of Operation 911 will manufacture evidence. Well, here is a CNN story for your consideration: In New York, several blocks from the ruins of the World Trade Center, a passport authorities said belonged to one of the hijackers was discovered a few days ago, according to city Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik. That has prompted the FBI and police to widen the search area beyond the immediate crash site. ("Leaders urge 'normal' Monday after week of terror," September 16, 2001 Posted: 7:07 p.m. EDT (2307 GMT) http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.america.under.attack cached at http://www.Public-Action.com/911/cnn-passport We are asked to believe that one of the hijackers brought his passport with him on a domestic fight, even though he knew he would not need it then, or ever again; that upon impact the passport flew from the hijacker's pocket (or was he holding it in his hands?), that the passport flew out of the aircraft, that it flew out of the burning tower, and that it was carried by the air currents and landed safely, where it could be discovered, several blocks away ... Lawd, WHO WRITES THIS STUFF? Flight 93 United Airlines Flight 93, a Boeing 757, was scheduled to leave Newark Airport at 8:01 a.m. for San Francisco. We are told it crashed into an abandoned coal mine near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 10:37 a.m., one hour and 50 minutes after the first World Trade Center tower was hit. Without a doubt, Flight 93 was shot down. The first TV network reports said exactly that: Flight 93 had been shot down by a military jet. That information even made it into the print media. Local residents said they had seen a second plane in the area, possibly an F-16 fighter, and burning debris falling from the sky. [FBI Agent] Crowley said investigators had determined that two other planes were nearby but didn't know if either was military. ("Stories swirl around Pa. crash; black box found," USA Today, September 14, 2001.) Pieces of the wreckage have been found as far away as New Baltimore, about eight miles from the crash site. When the eastbound plane crashed, a 9-knot wind was blowing from the southeast, [FBI Agent] Crowley said. ("Bereaved may visit Flight 93 site," Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Friday, September 14, 2001.) On September 11, "[r]esidents and workers at businesses outside Shanksville, Somerset County, reported discovering clothing, books, papers, and what appear to be human remains. Some residents said they collected bags-full of items to be turned over to investigators. Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly six miles from the crash site." ("Investigators locate 'black box' from Flight 93; widen search area in Somerset crash," [Pittsburgh] Post Gazette, September 13, 2001.) http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010913somersetp3.asp cached at http://www.Public-Action.com/911/postgazette-09-13-01 The Washington Post reported that, just as Congressional leaders were discussing shooting the plane down, they learned it had crashed. ("Jetliner Was Diverted Toward Washington Before Crash in Pa," Sept. 12, 2001, pg. A10.) The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and the FBI denied that the plane had been shot down. The FBI blamed the spread of debris over an 8-mile area on a 10 mph wind that was blowing at the time. Of the debris, TIME Magazine of September 11 says: "The largest pieces of the plane still extant are barely bigger than a telephone book." (Pages in this edition are not numbered: this quote appears on what should be pg. 40). Planes that crash do not disintegrate in this manner. However, the assertion that the hijackers had a bomb on board, and the bomb exploded, might provide an explanation for the disintegration. There is a problem with this story, however: Hijackers who planned to crash the plane into the Capitol would not want, or need, a bomb. In fact, a bomb might be counterproductive: Suppose it went off before the plane hit the Capitol? The mission would be ruined. Bringing a bomb on board would greatly increase chances the hijacker who carried the bomb would be detected when boarding. And it's hard to imagine why hijackers would mutilate and dismember passengers with plastic knives and box cutters when they were planning to blow them up, anyway. No, the bomb story does not wash. You can read one such story at: http://www.msnbc.com/news/632626.asp cached at http://www.Public-Action.com/911/postgazette-09-13-01 More Missing Air Traffic Control Conversations According to a an ABC news report by Peter Dizikes on September 13: "Federal Aviation Administration data shows Flight 93 followed its normal flight plan until it neared Cleveland, where the plane took a hard turn south. "That marks the point at which the plane must have been hijacked, investigators say. Then it took a turn east." Note that the investigators used the phrase "must have been" hijacked. Didn't they know? Weren't the air traffic controllers in touch with the pilots? But the direction changes with the next paragraph: ABCTV NEWS has learned that shortly before the plane changed directions, someone in the cockpit radioed in and asked the FAA for a new flight plan, with a final destination of Washington. Now THAT conversation must have been interesting! You can imagine the response of the air traffic controller: "Excuse me? Flight 93, you're in the middle of a scheduled trip to San Francisco, but you're just changed your mind and want to spend the day in Washington? Please explain." According to an MSNBC story of September 22, 2001, Flight 93 was late taking off, and did not make its way down the runway until 8:41 a.m. ("The Final Moments of Flight 93" http://www.msnbc.com/news/632626.asp) cached at http://www.Public-Action.com/911/postgazette-09-13-01 It was aloft for almost two hours, crashing at 10:37 a.m. Making a rough estimate from the distances traveled and the time in the air (see TIME Magazine, September 11, "The Paths of Destruction" ), Flight 93 went off course sometime between 9:45 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. Recall that both towers had been hit by 9:06 a.m., and the New York airports had been closed since 9:17 a.m. It would have been impossible for an air traffic controller on duty between 9:45--10:00 a.m. not to know that commercial air traffic in the US was in a dire emergency from "suicide planes." And now Flight 93 calls in, asking permission to do a U-turn, fly east an hour and a half, and land in Washington DC ??? What, the pilot was nervous and didn't know there were airports in the midwest? I'd love to hear the REAL conversation between Flight 93 and the air traffic controllers, wouldn't you? But I think we'll have to wait a while ... Come to think of it, why would a hijacker call in to ask for an OK to change directions? Conflicting And Unbelievable Reports The networks dropped the story that Flight 93 had been shot down and now said that Flight 93 passengers called their families and described a hijacking. The hijackers were armed with box razors, and overwhelmed the passengers and crew, and told the passengers they planned to crash into the Capitol in Washington, DC. The hijackers also mutilated and dismembered the passengers, presumably with their plastic knives and box cutters. What a messy job that must have been! We were not told if the hijackers chatted to the passengers about their plans before, after, or while they were committing the mutilation/dismemberment. (I heard the mutilation/dismemberment story once while watching network TV coverage. Then the story was dropped.) On the other hand, TIME Magazine reported that one of the passengers called home to say: "We have been hijacked. They are being kind." (TIME, Sept. 24, pg. 73.) Are we believing this? I'm not. No. Something went wrong with the masterminds' plan. They could not afford to have Flight 93 make a conventional landing and allow the pilots and passengers to talk about their experience. They could not afford to have the "hijackers" survive and the electronic controls of the plane examined. So Flight 93 was shot down. Who Were Those People, Anyway? Before September 11, the combined forces of US military and domestic intelligence -- the CIA, the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency -- were clueless that such a catastrophic event would occur. Yet a day or so later, the FBI had secured the names and mugshots of each of the 19 hijackers. How did the FBI know who the hijackers were? After all, all the eyewitnesses are dead. How could the FBI distinguish between "regular" Muslims and hijacker Muslims on those flights? Or did they just go through the passenger lists culling out the Muslim-sounding names and labeling the people bearing those names as hijackers? "You're Muslim so you're a hijacker..." On September 30 I looked at the passenger lists of those four flights. To my surprise, the lists contained none of the hijackers' names. Here are the URLs I checked: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html cached at http://www.Public-Action.com/911/flt-11-list http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html cached at http://www.Public-Action.com/911/flt-77-list http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua175.victims.html cached at http://www.Public-Action.com/911/flt-175-list http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua93.victims.html cached at http://www.Public-Action.com/911/flt-93-psng-list Then I went searching on Usenet for more information. I found that had noticed the hijackers' names were not on the passenger lists on September 27, on alt.culture.alaska, "Re: BLACK BOXES AND BODIES -(2). " I don't know what you'll find when you look at the passenger lists, but the historical record is there. The FBI may be lying, of course, and the airlines telling the truth: Perhaps none of the "hijackers" were passengers on those four planes. If that is true, the airlines are helping the FBI commit a most grievous fraud on the public. What does that say for the airlines' integrity? In either case, we can place little confidence in the veracity of the information in those lists. Names could have been added just as easily as deleted. NOTE: As late as February 3, 2002, United Airlines displayed on its website a copy of its September 12, 2001 press release, issued days before the alleged hijackers were "identified." The press release listed all the passengers on Flights 175 and 93 on September, 11, 2001. The names of the alleged hijackers did not appear -- and United Airlines could not have removed them, for the "hijackers" had not yet been "identified." So, clearly, none of the "highjackers" were aboard those two flights. On February 3, 2002, the United press release was located at this URL: http://www.ual.com/site/primaryPR/0,10026,1534_885,00html It was cached here: http://www.Public-Action.com/911/uapassngerlist Don't Take The Credit, Take The Blame By now you've realized that it's OK to believe in conspiracies provided they are Muslim conspiracies. In fact, we MUST believe that a man who dresses in sheets lives in a tent or a cave in the middle of nowhere - Osama bin Laden -- was the mastermind. He used his $300 million fortune to pull off Operation 911. Come to think of it, how do we know the size of his fortune? Does the FBI know his banker? And given that the world's banking system is highly centralized and in the hands of Mr. bin Laden's avowed enemies, how could our terrorist tent-dweller have retained his fortune all these years? If Mr. bin Laden could have pulled this off in New York, why didn't he pick on his more direct enemy, Israel, and do a 911 on them? Brilliant as Mr. bin Laden is, he forgot to take credit for the attack. Even worse, he forgot to issue any demands. He allowed his operatives to use their Muslim names and leave a clear trail for the FBI to follow. Mr. Atta, the pilot of Flight 11 (north World Trade Center), was particularly helpful. He kindly left his car at the Boston Airport. Luckily, an unnamed source drew the FBI's attention to this car. According to radio reports, the FBI found a suicide note written in Arabic and a copy of the Koran in the car. Mr. Atta liked to write in Arabic; he wrote a second, long document in that language, which, for some reason, he put in his luggage. Coincidentally, this luggage did not make it to Flight 11, so the FBI found it at the airport. Another lucky break! But why Mr. Atta would take luggage on a suicide mission has not been explained. The same note was carried by one of the hijackers on Flight 93, and, Mother of Miracles! survived the crash, even though the airplane itself was torn into shards. Everything was so amazing that Bob Woodward, the man who talks to the dead, was called in to write a story about it all. See "In Hijacker's Bags. A Call to Planning, Prayer, and Death," The Washington Post, September 28, 2001. Formerly at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37629 2001Sep27.html Read Mr. Woodward's article. Mr. Atta sounds like a Jewish lawyer with his wires crossed, exhorting his co-conspirators to remember their wills and reminding them that Mohammed was an "optimist;" exhorting his fellows to "utilize" (ugh--there's a lawyer's word for you -- what's Arabic for "utilize"?) their few hours left to ask God's forgiveness. God's forgiveness for what? They were about to die Muslim heros, Muslim martyrs in Allah's holy cause ... what need would Allah have to forgive them? Sure, we believe every word. We swallow the whole story. On the other hand, here is the International Television News article on the Global Hawk: Robot plane flies Pacific unmanned http://www.itn.co.uk/news/20010424/world/05robotplane.shtm or http://web.archive.org/web/20010707000937/http://itn.co.uk/news/20010424/world/05robotplane.shtm or http://www.Public-Action.com/911/itn (ITN Entertainment April 24, 2001) --- "The aircraft essentially flies itself, right from take-off, right through to landing, and even taxiing off the runway." - Australian Global Hawk manager Rod Smith. A robot plane has made aviation history by becoming the first unmanned aircraft to fly across the Pacific Ocean. The American high-altitude Global Hawk spy plane made flew (sic) across the ocean to Australia, defence officials confirmed. The Global Hawk, a jet-powered aircraft with a wingspan equivalent to a Boeing 737, flew from Edwards Air Force Base in California and landed late on Monday at the Royal Australian Air Force base at Edinburgh, in South Australia state. The 8600 mile (13840 km) flight, at an altitude of almost 12.5 miles (20 km), took 22 hours and set a world record for the furthest a robotic aircraft has flown between two points. The Global Hawk flies along a pre-programmed flight path, but a pilot monitors the aircraft during its flight via a sensor suite which provides infra-red and visual images. "The aircraft essentially flies itself, right from takeoff, right through to landing, and even taxiing off the runway," said Rod Smith, the Australian Global Hawk manager. "While in Australia, the Global Hawk will fly about 12 maritime surveillance and reconnaissance missions around Australia's remote coastline. "It can fly non-stop for 36 hours and search 52,895 square miles (37,000 square km) in 24 hours. Australia is assessing the aircraft and might buy it in the future. "Emerging systems such as the Global Hawk offer Australia great potential for surveillance, reconnaissance and ultimately the delivery of combat power," said Brendan Nelson, parliamentary secretary to the Australian defence minister. "Nelson said the Global Hawk could be used in combat to 'detect, classify and monitor' targets as they approached the Australian coast." [Note of August 12, 2002] Supporting News Story: "Amid crashes and hype, military shows off latest robot plane" -- Associated Press, July 11, 2002. That Associated Press article states that since 9-11 there has been an enormous interest in robot planes ... NO KIDDING! That article is a testimonial to the effectiveness of Public-Action's articles on the use of remote controlled planes on 9-11. But AP is covering for the military when it it pretends that remote control technology is in its infancy. "In fact, NORAD (the North American Air Defense Command) had at its disposal a number of U.S. Air Force General Dynamics F-106 Delta Dart fighter aircraft configured to be remotely flown into combat as early as 1959 under the auspices of a program know as SAGE. These aircraft could be started, taxied, taken off, flown into combat, fight, and return to a landing entirely by remote control, with the only human intervention needed being to fuel and re-arm them." -- Alan Staats, "Thwarting skyjackings from the ground," posted to FACSNET Oct. 2, 2001, published in Quill magazine, February 1998. http://www.facsnet.org/issues/specials/terrorism/aviation.php3# cached at http://www.public-action.com/911/facsnet/aviation.php3 [The article was revised on September 28, 2004. Notes added as indicated.] See other 9-11 articles by Carol A. Valentine at http://www.public-action.com All original works copyright 1996-2004 Carol A. Valentine On loan to Public Action, Inc. PO Box 15430 Wedgwood Station, Seattle, WA 98115 http://www.public-action.com SkyWriter@public-action.com See the handiwork of the world's leading terrorist organization, the FBI: Visit the Waco Holocaust Electronic Museum
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Kamala (#0)
Not only revealing, damning.
Thanks for this one.
It reminds one of Operation Northwoods, doesn't it? Remember the rank and file sailors who were to be sacrificed on a US Naval vessel in Guantanamo Bay, in order to justify war with Cuba? No, neither Hanjour nor any other Muslim suicide pilot was at the controls of this plane. It had been fitted with Global Hawk technology and was being remotely controlled. Carol Valentine bump. BTW, Carol was banned from TOS1 years ago. I haven't read this one in a little while, but wonder if Carol mentioned that before 911, the Airports Authority was working on landing airplanes at Reagan National by computer, the rationale being that it is one of the most difficult airports to maneuver, particularly in inclement weather. I just did a brief search, and did not find what I was looking for, but did find the following which I think may be pertinent: ------------------------------- "Home Run" Electronically Hijacking the World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Copyright Joe Vialls, October 2001 In the mid-seventies America faced a new and escalating crisis, with US commercial jets being hijacked for geopolitical purposes. Determined to gain the upper hand in this new form of aerial warfare, two American multinationals collaborated with the Defense Advanced Projects Agency (DARPA) [ATKHWDI note: search **** "Dov Zeikham DARPA" , also: $2.6 Trillion missing from DOD.]on a project designed to facilitate the remote recovery of hijacked American aircraft. Brilliant both in concept and operation,“Home Run” [not its real code name] allowed specialist ground controllers to listen in to cockpit conversations on the target aircraft, then take absolute control of its computerized flight control system by remote means. From that point onwards, regardless of the wishes of the hijackers or flight deck crew, the hijacked aircraft could be recovered and landed automatically at an airport of choice, with no more difficulty than flying a radio-controlled model plane. The engineers had no idea that almost thirty years after its initial design, Home Run’s top secret computer codes would be broken, and the system used to facilitate direct ground control of the four aircraft used in the high-profile attacks on New York and Washington on 11th September 2001. Before moving on to the New York and Washington attacks, we first need to look at the ways in which an aircraft is normally controlled by its pilot, because without this basic knowledge, Home Run would make no sense. In order to control an aircraft in three-dimensional space, the pilot uses the control yoke (joystick) in front of him, rudder pedals under his feet, and a bank of engine throttles located at his side. Without engine thrust the aircraft would not fly at all, so the throttles are largely self explanatory: For more speed or altitude increase throttle, for less speed or altitude decrease throttle. In order to raise or lower the nose of the aircraft, the pilot pulls or pushes on the control yoke, which in turn raises or lowers the elevators on the horizontal tailplane. To bank the aircraft left or right, the pilot moves the control yoke to the left or right, which in turn operates the ailerons on the outer wings. Lastly, to turn left or right at low speed or “balance” turns at high speed, the pilot presses the left or right rudder pedals as required, which in turn move the rudder on the vertical stabilizer. Back in the early days of flight, the control yoke and rudder pedals were connected to the various flight control surfaces by thin cables, meaning the pilot had direct physical control over every movement the aircraft made. This was no great problem for an average man flying a small biplane, but as aircraft grew ever bigger, heavier and faster over the years, the loadings on the control yoke and rudder pedals became huge, certainly well beyond the ability of a single pilot to handle unaided. By the late fifties we were well into the age of hydraulics, where just like the power steering on your automobile, hydraulic rams were placed in line between the pilot’s control cables and each individual control surface. Now when the pilot moved the control yoke, the cables activated sensors, which in turn activated one or more hydraulic rams, which in turn moved one or more control surfaces. For the first time since Bleriot and the Wright brothers, pilots were of necessity being steadily distanced from direct control of their own aircraft. When the multinationals and DARPA finally came on the scene in the mid- seventies, aircraft systems were even more advanced, with computers controlling onboard autopilots, which in turn were capable of controlling all of the onboard hydraulics. In combination these multiple different functions were now known as the “Flight Control System” or FCS, in turn integrated with sophisticated avionics **** capable of automatically landing the aircraft in zero visibility conditions. In summary, by the mid-seventies most of the large jets were capable of effectively navigating hundreds of miles and then making automatic landings at a selected airport in zero-zero fog conditions. All of this could be accomplished unaided, but in theory at least, still under the watchful eyes of the flight deck crews. In order to make Home Run truly effective, it had to be completely integrated with all onboard systems, and this could only be accomplished with a new aircraft design, several of which were on the drawing boards at that time. Under cover of extreme secrecy, the multinationals and DARPA went ahead on this basis and built “back doors” into the new computer designs. There were two very obvious hard requirements at this stage, the first a primary control channel for use in taking over the flight control system and flying the aircraft back to an airfield of choice, and secondly a covert audio channel for monitoring flight deck conversations. Once the primary channel was activated, all aircraft functions came under direct ground control, permanently removing the hijackers and pilots from the control loop. Remember here, this was not a system designed to “undermine” the authority of the flight crews, but was put in place as a “doomsday” device in the event the hijackers started to shoot passengers or crew members, possibly including the pilots. Using the perfectly reasonable assumption that hijackers only carry a limited number of bullets, and many aircraft nowadays carry in excess of 300 passengers, Home Run could be used to fly all of the survivors to a friendly airport for a safe auto landing. [ATKHWDI note: friendly airport like Rockefeller-controlled military/commercial Yeager in West Virginia? Note Carol's "blip" of Flight 77 in West Virginia. Barbara Olson of Flight 77 has been rumored to be caught in Europe with briefcase of huge sum of Vatican cash.] So the system started out in life for the very best of reasons, but finally fell prey to security leaks, and eventually to compromised computer codes. In light of recent high-profile CIA and FBI spying trials, these leaks and compromised codes should come as no great surprise to anyone. Activating the primary Home Run channel proved to be easy. Most readers will have heard of a “transponder”, prominent in most news reports immediately following the attacks on New York and Washington. Technically a transponder is a combined radio transmitter and receiver which operates automatically, in this case relaying data between the four aircraft and air traffic control on the ground. The signals sent provide a unique “identity” for each aircraft, essential in crowded airspace to avoid mid-air collisions, and equally essential for Home Run controllers trying to lock onto the correct aircraft. Once it has located the correct aircraft, Home Run “piggy backs” a data transmission onto the transponder channel and takes direct control from the ground. This explains why none of the aircraft sent a special “I have been hijacked” transponder code, despite multiple activation points on all four aircraft. Because the transponder frequency had already been piggy backed by Home Run, transmission of the special hijack code was rendered impossible. This was the first hard proof that the target aircraft had been hijacked electronically from the ground, rather than by [FBI-inspired] motley crews of Arabs toting penknives. The Home Run listening device on the flight deck utilizes the cockpit microphones that normally feed the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), one of two black boxes armored to withstand heavy impact and thereby later give investigators significant clues to why the aircraft crashed. However, once hooked into Home Run, the CVRs are bypassed and voice transmissions are no longer recorded on the 30-minute endless loop recording tape. If Home Run is active for more than thirty minutes, there will therefore be no audible data on the Cockpit Voice Recorders. To date, crash investigators have recovered the CVRs from the Pentagon and Pittsburg aircraft, and publicly confirmed that both are completely blank. The only possible reason for this, is data capture by Home Run, providing the final hard proof that the attack aircraft were hijacked electronically from the ground, rather than by “Arab terrorists”. Many readers might by now be indignant; convinced this is incorrect or misleading information because of “those telephone calls from the hijacked aircraft”. Which telephone calls exactly? There are no records of any such calls, and the emotional claptrap the media fed you in the aftermath of the attack was in all cases third-person. We had the media’s invisible “contact” at an airline who “said” a hostess called to report a hijacking, and we had a priest (?) who “said” he received a call from a man asking him in turn to call his wife and tell her he loved her. Presumably this man would have had his wife’s name filed in his cellphone, and faced with imminent death would have called her direct. The FAA helped out by claiming that it had “overheard” a heated argument from a cockpit where the radio transmit switch had been left in the “on” position. When push came to shove, the FAA was forced to retract, and admit that the mythical argument was not on the tapes at all. Critically, the passenger manifests for all four aircraft serve as the final (independent) proof that no alleged hijackers or anyone of Arabic name boarded any of the four aircraft used in the attacks. As Laurence T. May points out: "On September 11, airline check-in counters were the only places in the United States that required travellers to present a photo ID in order to travel. A photo ID meant (and still means) a card issued by some branch of civil government. Years ago, the United States government took the first step toward a national ID card when it mandated the requirement that all passengers present a photo ID card before being allowed to get on a commercial airplane. "This means that the tightest security that the typical American ever confronts is airport security. This is the model for all other security systems governing the general public. Let's go through the check-in routine together. Pretend that it's September 11, and you are a check-in agent at either a United Airlines counter or an American Airlines counter. It is your job to ask the standard questions. "Did you pack your own luggage? Have you had it in your possession at all times?" Then you ask for a photo ID. The name on the ID must match the name on the ticket. The photo must match the person presenting the card." .. And, you guessed it, the name on the ID must match that on the passenger manifest held by the airline ground staff! [See NO ARABS ON FLIGHT 77 and STILL NO ARABS ON FLIGHT 77 sierratimes?] It seems highly likely that these revealing passenger manifests will magically disappear when the American Government realizes the dangers of allowing the public access to such incriminating documents. For that reason I have listed the full manifests on a separate page. To visit that page and copy the lists, click here. Whether more information will be forthcoming about Home Run is unknown, but nowadays there are large numbers of people apart from the author privy to the basic data. As long ago as the early nineties, a major European flag carrier acquired the information and was seriously alarmed that one of its own aircraft might be “rescued” by the Americans without its authority. Accordingly, this flag carrier completely stripped the American flight control computers out of its entire fleet, and replaced them with a home grown version. These aircraft are now effectively impregnable to penetration by Home Run, but that is more than can be said for the American aircraft fleet. A casual count indicates that more than 600 aircraft in the USA and elsewhere are still vulnerable and could be used in further attacks at any time, which might help explain why America has been bombing the Afghans primarily with bags of wheat. For the first time in US history, American officials appear to be genuinely fearful of future reprisals, and justifiably so with 600 giant bombs parked on the wrong side of their missile defence shield. It is a “Catch 22” situation. In order to make all of the aircraft safe, the flight control systems would have to be stripped out and replaced, at a cost of billions of dollars the airlines cannot afford because they are going broke. Nor is there enough time. The most innovative anti-hijacking tool in the American arsenal, has now become the biggest known threat to American national security. For the purpose of public reassurance I would like to publish a complete list of aircraft which cannot be affected by Home Run, but I cannot do so for legal reasons. Any aircraft manufacturer not on the list might feel inclined to sue me for defamation and I can’t afford that. However, there is nothing to stop me publishing my personal choice of aircraft for a flight from, say, Atlanta to Singapore via JFK, Frankfurt, and Kuala Lumpur. From Atlanta to JFK I would probably travel on a Boeing 737, and connect with a Boeing 777 for the onward flight to Frankfurt. At Frankfurt I would probably board an Airbus A340 for Kuala Lumpur, and finish the journey on a DC9 or a Fokker 100. Naturally I might be unlucky and pick an aircraft with an intoxicated pilot, or an unrelated mechanical problem, but apart from those minor risks I’d feel pretty safe. 15 October 2001 After this page had been hit on by more than 10,000 curious visitors, the current issue of "Business Week" (22Oct) decided to publish an unusual letter, suggesting that the events of the 11th of September would have ended rather differently if there was a capability for Ground Tower Control to "take over the controls of a hijacked plane" (issue still available at any US newsagent). [ATKHWDI: That's what I was looking for. I am pretty SURE it WAS OPERATIONAL AT REAGAN LONG BEFORE 911.] Remember, the American Federal Government kept Reagan National airport in downtown Washington, DC shut, despite the fact that none of the "hijacked" planes came from there. However, if it were possible to "take over the controls" of a plane, then it would take less than a minute for planes close to DCA airport to be diverted to a target anywhere in the capital. There were just two aircraft types involved on the 11th of September. Eventually, after much reluctance, the government has now opened up Reagan National airport again, but ONLY for planes with less than 156 seats. Now what kind of planes previously operating happily out of Reagan National will this new "seating" restriction exclude? Hint: Among a few others, the Boeing 757 and 767. Cynics might be tempted to conclude that, as usual, "important" politicians and bureaucrats are being provided with discreet special protection from Home Run, while everyday Americans are left to take their chances as best they can, and run the continual risk of being shot down by one of their own F16 fighters. Ignorance may be bliss for some folk, but not for those who have studied this page and realized the implications. 18 October 2001 Suddenly, more than five weeks after the attack and for no apparent reason, the most powerful newspaper in the western world published a major article "reinforcing" the myth that physical hijackers were responsible for the attacks on 11 September. No hard facts of course, no corroboration at all, just the usual pathetic series of media "sources", all of them far too "secret" to reveal. Within hours of this newspaper going to press, television reporters across the entire western world repeated the fiction to their own viewing publics. From London in England to Sydney in Australia, everone woke to this new "proof" that Arabs were the real culprits. Never mind public safety, please believe what we, your trusted and experienced news peddlers, are telling you. To read the propaganda, click here. 19 October 2001 During the past few days I have received many emails asking for a written explanation of who was behind the attacks on 11 September, and why. As an investigator I can prove how the attack was carried out, but I cannot prove why or by whom. Of all the work I have seen on the Internet, the closest to the truth is probably this imspired report called "Orient Express" written by journalist Israel Shamir. To read "Orient Express", click here. [posted below for safekeeping] 25 October 2001 Though I do not agree with the financial rationale where this report is concerned, the Colonel and his highly specialized group provide valuable additional insights into the impossibility of "hijackers" flying the attack aircraft on 11 September. To read "The Enemy is Inside The Gates", click here. 20 January 2002 Former German Minister Von Buelow Already Knew About Remote Control In his interview with the German daily "Tagesspiegel" on January 13th, former German Secretary of Defence Andreas Von Buelow made the following statement:- "There is also the theory of one British flight engineer: According to this, the steering of the planes was perhaps taken out of the pilots' hands, from outside. The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s, whereby they could rescue hijacked planes by intervening into the computer piloting [automatic pilot system]. This theory says, this technique was abused in this case..." Not quite so much a theory as might first appear. When I released the above report about "Home Run" remote control in October 2001, I mentioned that one European flag carrier was aware of the technology, though at that precise point in time I thought it prudent not to name the actual airline:- "As long ago as the early nineties, a major European flag carrier acquired the information and was seriously alarmed that one of its own aircraft might be "rescued" by the Americans without its authority. Accordingly, this flag carrier completely stripped the American flight control computers out of its entire fleet, and replaced them with a home grown version. These aircraft are now effectively impregnable to penetration by Home Run, but that is more than can be said for the American aircraft fleet..." The European flag carrier which completely stripped the American flight computers out of its aircraft was Lufthansa, the German national airline. [ATKHWDI And WHO???? was patrolling and "protecting" OUR skies after 911? Germany!!!] Bearing in mind his former posts as Secretary of Defence and Minister of Science and Technology, Herr Von Buelow would have known all about this mammoth but secretive task. How very clever (and discreet) of Von Buelow to sort of "drop the information" into the middle of an interview about the 9/11 attacks! Home Run Part 2, click Here The author is a former member of the Society of Licenced Aeronautical Engineers & Technologist, London This report may be republished unedited for non-commercial purposes in the interests of public safety "Home Run" Used To Electronically Hijack World Trade Center Aircraft http://www.geocities.com/ mknemesis/homerun.html -------------------------------------------------- On The Trail of the World Trade Center Bombers "Orient Express" - Copyright Israel Shamir, Jaffa Like the Four Riders of the Apocalypse, the unknown kamikaze rode their giant crafts into the two visible symbols of American world domination, Wall Street and the Pentagon. They vanished in flames and smoke, and we do not yet know who they were. Theoretically, they could be practically anybody: American Nationalists, American Communists, American Fundamentalist Christians, American Anarchists, anybody who rejects the twin gods of the dollar and the M-16, who hates the stock market and interventions overseas, who dreams of America for Americans, who does not want to support the drive for world domination. They could be Native Americans returning to Manhattan, or Afro-Americans who still have not received compensation for slavery. They could be foreigners of practically any extraction, as Wall Street and the Pentagon ruined many lives of people all over the globe. Germans can remember the fiery holocaust of Dresden with its hundreds of thousands of peaceful refugees incinerated by the US Air Force. Japanese will not forget the nuclear holocaust of Hiroshima. The Arab world still feels the creeping holocaust of Iraq and Palestine. Russians and East Europeans feel the shame of Belgrade avenged. Latin Americans think of American invasions of Panama and Granada, of destroyed Nicaragua and defoliated Colombia. Asians count their dead of Vietnam war, Cambodia bombings, Laos CIA operations in millions. Even a pro-American, Russian TV broadcaster could not refrain from saying, 'now Americans begin to understand the feelings of Baghdad and Belgrade'. The Riders could be anybody who lost his house to the bank, who was squeezed from his work and made permanently unemployed, who was declared an Untermench by the new Herrenvolk. They could be Russians, Malaysians, Mexicans, Indonesians, Pakistanis, Congolese, Brazilians, Vietnamese, as their economy was destroyed by Wall Street and the Pentagon. They could be anybody, and they are everybody. Their identity is quite irrelevant as their message is more important than their personalities, and their message is read loud and clear in the choice of targets. I wonder whether the Fourth Rider headed for Hollywood or for the Washington Post? Their identity is quite irrelevant for an extra reason: the Jewish elites already decided: it has to be Arabs. One would think, after Oklahoma, we should become less hasty with out conclusions. But my countrymen, Israeli politicians are impatient folk. The flames in Manhattan did not die out yet, they started political profit taking. Mr Ehud Barak came live on BBC, and said 'Arafat' within three minutes flat. On CNN, his twin Bibi Natanyahu appropriated the blame to Arabs, Muslims, Palestinians. Shimon Peres, an old wizened wizard, spoke against suicide as a psychiatric adviser, reminding his audience of Palestinian attacks. He looked worried-. it is hard to enslave people who are not afraid to die. This old killer of Kana even mentioned Gospels. The Density of Israelis on air approached saturation point. They insinuated and incited, pushing their shopping list into the chalk-white face of shell-shocked America.- please, destroy Iran! And Iraq! And Libya, plees! The first twenty four hours of maximal exposure were utilised by the Jewish propaganda machine to its utmost. Not a single fact was yet known, but racist anti-Arab slurs became a commonplace. While we Jews quite reasonably object to any reference to the Jewishness of a bad guy, we really do not mind producing revolting racist drivel of our own. A noble-minded activist warned in al-Awda: "Making broad, all-inclusive statements and insinuations about "Jews" completely marginalizes and discredits your organization". But how come the endless stream of 'broad, all-inclusive statements and insinuatione, about 'the Arabs’ did not 'completely marginalize and discredit' the Jewish organisations and media? Apparently, it is a Jewish right to decide who will be marginalized in America and who will not. The connection was in the minds, as Israel is just a small-scale model of their new brave world of globalisation. As there were no hard facts against Palestinians, the Israelis and their agents in Western TV networks made their damnedest from the scenes of joy supposedly shot in East Jerusalem. It is a great distortion of truth. Nobody celebrates the fiery death of innocent civilians, while people may rejoice at the collapse of the hated symbol. America celebrated its victory in V-day, not deaths of Germans and Japanese. When Americans rejoiced at 'precise hits' of their missiles at Baghdad 1991, they were celebrating their achievement, not enjoying the pleasing smell of burned human flesh. So-called Palestinian celebrations are, therefore, an ugly brainwashing device, straight from the Nazi propaganda box. It reminds one of the previous Jewish invention, that of Palestinians sending their children to die for profit. Both lies are so inhuman, so outrageous, that they speak mainly about their designers. I am sorry for the Palestinians, the most vilified folk on earth, I am even more sorry for the Americans who imbibe the poison of their own media. They do not see that Israel’s agents try to hitch a ride on dead Americans. Forget Palestinians, there was a lot of cheering all over the world. In Agatha Christie's Murder on the Orient Express, her favourite detective M. Poireau encounters an unusual complication: all passengers on board the train have had a good reason to bump off the unpleasant old gentleman. My dear American friends, your leaders placed your great country into the old gentleman's shoes. Israelis used the event to the max. They killed twenty Palestinians including a nine year-old girl, brought tanks into Jenin and Jericho, destroyed few Goyiish houses in Jerusalem. The reports were rather gleeful, in the style 'we told you', and the experts of Israeli TV concluded by one o'clock, the attack 'was good for the Jews'. 'It is very good', said Bibi Netanyahu. Why? It would strengthen American support of Israel. The kamikaze attack could do exactly that. America could enter a new cycle of violence in its troubled relations with the world. Revenge will follow revenge, until one of the sides will be obliterated by nuclear blast. It appears President Bush prefers this course. He declared war on his and Israel's adversaries. Bush did not even understand that the war was declared by the US many years ago, only now has it started to come home. So many people were sick of America's ham-fisted approach, that the countdown for the next attack began. Alternatively, America could see this painful strike at her Wall Street and her Pentagon, as the last call to repent. She should change her advisers, and build her relations with the world afresh, on an equal footing. Probably she should rein in the domination-obsessed Jewish supremacist elites of Wall Street and the media, and part company with Israeli apartheid. She could become again the universally loved, rather parochial America of Walt Whitman and Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Abe Lincoln. Now it is President Bush's choice between the Old Testament drive for revenge and the New Testament spirit of love. WTC Electronic Hijack Page Vialls Investigations http://www.geocities.com/m knemesis/orient.html ---------------------------------------- For more on the religious connection between 911 see also: Merry Christmas, and OFF WITH YOUR HEAD! by Carol A. Valentine, May 15, 2002: What does the establishment of a world-wide Jewish theocracy have to do with ... http://www.public- action.com/christmas.html [500 Rabbis from around the world convene at Pentagon slaughterhouse for first anniversary OF 911. "But is it good for the Jews?"] ------------------------------------------ Remote Controlled 9/11 Planes and the Pentagon's Missing Trillions ... Dov Zakheim resigned as Pentagon Comptroller and Chief Financial Officer at the ... www.oilempire.us/remote.html "Pentagon missile" hoax distracts and discredits the 9/11 skepticsc. a Global Hawk robot plane d. a flying saucer piloted by giant lizards from ... Dov Zakheim, the PNAC member who was Pentagon Comptroller (the money man) ... www.oilempire.us/pentagon.html - Smoking Mirrors: Those Fat Little Lying Whores in their Spandex ...It is further interesting to note that Dov Zakheim was the man in charge at the pentagon when something in excess of one trillion dollars went missing http://smokingmirrors.blogspot.c om/2006/ 04/those-fat-little-lying-whores-in- their.html International | Police State Video of the test shows that planes that fly at full speed into concrete ... One of the authors of this report was military industry official Dov Zakheim, ... http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/ 2006/08/12/18296516.php?printable=true New Records Show Fmr. Top Bush Official Met With Reporter During ...ZAKHEIM? He owns the technology required to fly commercial aircraft into tall buildings ... just one day prior to 9/11 that $2.3 Trillion had gone missing: ... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006 /08/ 21/new-records-show-fmr-top_n_27735.html?p=2 - PhysOrgForum Science, Physics and Technology Discussion Forums ...Put this name into your system: Dov Zakheim BACKGROUND ... The questions remain who has the $3.3 trillion plus missing from the US Treasury? .. http://forum.physorg.com/in dex.php?act=Print& client=printer&f=17&t=6421 Vanguard News Network » Blog Archive » Kaminski: Can a Jew Tell ...Or perhaps Rabbi Dov Zakheim? The man who coordinated the Pentagon budget just before Rumsfeld announced $2.3 trillion was missing. ... http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork. com/?p=925 informationliberation - The news you're not supposed to know...Think of this as part two of Recherche du trillions perdu, my Online Journal article on Dov Zakheim, former Bush appointee as Pentagon Comptroller from May ... http://www.informatio nliberation.com/index.php?p=80 - 101k - Cached - Similar pages Free Money! : Miami IMC 2.6 Trillion Missing from Pentagon prior to 9/11 [ Post 293827352 ] ... $2.6 trillion missing from the Pentagon/DOD budget under Comptroller Dov Zakheim. ... http://miami.ind ymedia.org/news/2006/02/3680_comment.php JohnJKokal He stated that he was aware of only $1.1 trillion missing from the Pentagon ... In one respect alone, Bush and Blair have been making plans for the day when ... ---------------------------------------- http://dks.thing.net/JohnJKokal.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SEE ALSO: THE PENTAGON ATTACK PAPERS: Seven Hours in September: The Clock that Broke the Lie #40. To: Ferret Mike (#39) They took on chances to make sure the Pentagon got hit, and had that happen in a spot and with the means to insure th survival of the building. And I learned yesterday it was hit where the auditing is done. The day before Sept 10, 2001, Rumsfeld gave a press conference on the trillions 'lost' at the Pentagon. http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=33832&Disp=15#C15 We've mentioned Dov Zakheim many times here as Comptroller of the Pentagon at the time these trillions, 2.6 went 'missing'. He resigned and there was no investigation. Then he was made Undersecretary of Defense 2001 - 2004. Dov Zakheim also sold military hardware to Israel for pennies on the dollar (literally). From what I've read, Zakheim is not in it for the money, he drives an old car. But, he is very religious, he and his father are Orthodox rabbis. And Zakheim as a member of PNAC, co-authored the infamous "new Pearl Harbor" PNAC report, "Rebuilding America's Defenses". In 2001, Dov Zakheim just happened to be CEO of a business that builds remote-controlled aircraft, SPC International. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dov _Zakheim http://onlinej ournal.com/artman/publish/article_1047.shtml http:/ /www.whatreallyhappened.com/archives/cat_israeli_spying.html Judicial Inc’s bio of Dov (linked below) tells us Zakheim was/is a dual Israeli/American citizen and an ordained rabbi and had been tracking the halls of US government for 25 years, casting defense policy and influence on Presidents Reagan, Clinton, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. ... Judicial Inc points out that most of Israel’s armaments were gotten thanks to him. Squads of US F-16 and F-15 were classified military surplus and sold to Israel at a fraction of their value. "If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country." - Daniel Ellsberg Author, Pentagon Papers robin posted on 2006-09-03 12:05:13 ET --------------------------------------------- "[Upon seizing the reins of government, the new Noachide leaders will move quickly to implement a full agenda of reform. ... Full support will be given to Israeli forces to reinvade PLO-controlled areas, with military assistance offered where necessary. Jewish courts ... will be granted full legal sovereignty over Jewish citizens within each country, who will no longer be subject to the authority of gentile courts. The pre-existing Noachide judges and courts will replace the existing court system of each country, and the legal code will be drastically rewritten to conform to halacha.... .... And law and order will be fully restored through the establishment of internal security measures, again in accordance with Torah law. — Committee for Israeli Victory]........." http://www.cephas- library.com/nwo/nwo_noachide_judge_and_courts_will_replace_ours.html Missing from that quote is the part about paying off the national debt, "probably with government land holdings". "Government land holdings" include not only parks, forests, Historical Sites, schools, hospitals, ROADS, bridges, etc. etc., but also all the property in this country, being collateral on the Jewish banksters' fraudulent debt piled on the people of this country. [BANKRUPTCY OF THE UNITED STATES Americans [slaves] and their property as collateral http://www.apfn.net/Doc-100_bankruptcy.htm ]. Bush I signed the Executive Order into COLOR OF LAW authorizing the sale of ["privatizing",]OUR infrastructure, paid for by US, so that he and all their FASCIST cronies could chip us and extract more monies through TOLLS forced on us by FOREIGNERS WHO ARE BUYING UP OUR COUNTRY. See: All the Notes on My Investigation ...part 1 The high cabal, NON Project Echelon on Dominica and the murderers of Danny Casolaro are exposed. ... Some have called this power base "the Octopus". ... www.wine-storage.com/octopus.html All the Notes on My Investigation The high cabal, NON USA Project Echelon on Dominica, and the murderers of Danny ... of linking Dillon, the Octopus companies, and the secret Dominica base. ... www.wine-storage.com/dominica.html
Anyone, What is that black streak in the Flight 175 pic, heading for [?] the towers, AFTER they both had been "hit"?
LINK http://freedom4um.com/cgi- bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=33832 ---------------------------------- Judicial Inc’s bio of Dov (linked below) tells us Zakheim was/is a dual Israeli/American citizen and an ordained rabbi and had been tracking the halls of US government for 25 years, casting defense policy and influence on Presidents Reagan, Clinton, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. ... Judicial Inc points out that most of Israel’s armaments were gotten thanks to him. Squads of US F-16 and F-15 were classified military surplus and sold to Israel at a fraction of their value. Andreas Von Buelow made the following statement:- "There is also the theory of one British flight engineer: According to this, the steering of the planes was perhaps taken out of the pilots' hands, from outside. The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s, whereby they could rescue hijacked planes by intervening into the computer piloting [automatic pilot system]. This theory says, this technique was abused in this case..." Itisalmostoolate, do you have your Dov Zakheim link handy?
I was banned for this. How To Fly Jets By Remote Control into Landmark Buildings http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=47202
The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its' original size
bookmarked
"If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country." - Daniel Ellsberg Author, Pentagon Papers sorry. The flight paths were here: The Official Truth in Three Versions "As you study the flight paths of the four 9-11 jets, consider this: The "hijackers" or "suicide pilots" were said to have shown "an incredible degree of organization or skill." If that is so, why did the suicide pilots use planes from Boston to hit the WTC? Hijacking planes from Kennedy or LaGuardia to hit New York targets soon after take-off -- before NORAD had a chance to react -- would be the obvious plan to anyone with common sense, let alone "skill." Likewise, skilled or organized suicide pilots would take a plane from National, Baltimore-Washington, or Dulles airports and hit the Pentagon soon after take off. Why meander all the way to Ohio? There was no reason, and the wasted time would endanger their mission. Remember, "real" suicide pilots would believe NORAD was on the job. Duh . . . That is the fingerprint of a military/intelligence operation: Military/intelligence operatives believe everyone is as stupid as they are. The routes taken by the jets are just one more sign that there were no real "suicide pilots." .........." http://www.public- action.com/911/4flights.html see also: Flight Of The Bumble Planes by Snake Plissken as told to Carol A. Valentine
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=47202 34. To: tribe (#33) http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-18-norad_x.htm NORAD had drills of jets as weapons By Steven Komarow and Tom Squitieri, USA TODAY WASHINGTON — In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties. One of the imagined targets was the World Trade Center. I was going to post here the FEMA booklet, but I see you already had it covered in your post #40 August 1997 - On the cover of FEMA's "Emergency Response to Terrorism" self- study course booklet is a picture of the WTC with a gun scope's cross-hairs aimed at the one of the towers. See a full copy of it at: the7thfire Itisa1mosttoolate posted on 2004-04-26 I'd say you've been vindicated! robin: #8.
Here's another one at http://sweetliberty.org. Unfortunately, I don't know how to post the pic: America's New War? Or War On Americans? 1999 Justice Department Terrorism Reponse Booklet [pic] "Webmaster's note: The above right photo, a clearer and easier to read photo, was added on April 1, 2002 and is from a different source than the one on the left. (Identity of sender withheld) A picture is worth a thousand words. This is the cover of a booklet that fell into my hands today as they were being destroyed at our place. Notice the EXACT placement of the crosshairs on the twin towers! THEY KNEW YEARS BEFOREHAND!! THESE USELESS MASONIC BASTARDS PERPETRATED IT ALL!!! This is just my humble opinion. You have permission to spread these all over the internet. Just leave my name out of it. This is as good as I can do. My digital isn't as good as I would like it to be. I'll just tell you what is printed on each section. Upper right hand corner: FEMA/USFA/NFA-ERT:SS AUGUST 1997. Seals: Left: Dept. of Justice, Center: The American eagle, WITH IT'S HEAD BOWED AS IF IN SURRENDER, Right- Fema's seal. Below the print is as follows: U.S. Dept. of Justice Office of Justice programs--Bureau of Justice assistance. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Under that: United States Fire Administration-National Fire Academy." http://www. sweetliberty.org/issues/war/response2terrorism.htm and what did the "United State Fire Administration-National Fire Academy" know, and when did they know it? If I were a fireman, or the family of a fireman murdered on 911, I sure would want to know. I did a small search on them once, in relation to controlled burns I think, but really don't remember. While I think firemen are about the only government workers worth their weight in gold, I came away from that little search not feeling quite the same about the US Fire Administration, but now several years later, I could not tell you exactly why.
Is this the picture you wanted to post but can't?
It is amazing how people are led around like they have rings in their noses.
"Never has so much military and economic and diplomatic power been used so ineffectively, and if after all of this time, and all of this sacrifice, and all of this support, there is still no end in sight, then I say the time has come for the American people to turn to new leadership not tied to the mistakes and policies of the past." Richard M. Nixon
DO NOT CLICK ON THIS LINK!!DANGEROUS INFORMATION THE GOVERNMENT FEARS INSIDE!!!!
Yes. Thank you, Mike.
I guess the bottom line question would be: is it possible for two minimally trained (per my understanding) pilots to fly 2 commercial jets into two buildings separately standing next to each other? That's pretty good precision flying, I would think. Maybe it's possible, but I'd like to hear some pilots discuss this openly and honestly. I've flown a small plane once, and it wasn't too hard, but that was just around the field and I wasn't aiming for the tower....
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
I remember reading a flight on 911 that had to change course quickly to avoid colliding with one of the planes that hit the WTC. The "hijacked plane" did not adjust course. Most untrained pilots would have swerved. I remember thinking at the time that this indicated that the "hijacked planes" were remotely controlled.
The Truth of 911 Shall Set You Free From The Lie
This has all been covered elsewhere. It is a whole different ballgame in a jumbo jet compared to a small aircraft.
"Never has so much military and economic and diplomatic power been used so ineffectively, and if after all of this time, and all of this sacrifice, and all of this support, there is still no end in sight, then I say the time has come for the American people to turn to new leadership not tied to the mistakes and policies of the past." Richard M. Nixon
The radio control technology has existed since the 60's. The probability of radio-controlled planes - not worth mentioning; that from a 757 pilot. Flight 93 shot down? Not a chance. There would have been major aircraft pieces discovered, for many miles around - not the itty-bitty pieces, also found at the Pentagon. Add the missing evidence of burning jet fuel. AND - we can be certain that the 'official' flight 93 site was prepped. That would mean planning the shootdown months in advance. AND - why shoot down a radio controlled aircraft - if one believes that theory?
Maybe Flight 93 was never meant to hit a target in the first place. Much like the Northwood plan: fake a radio distress call, pre-rig the plane to blow (in this case the "crash sight" as well), and either then either shoot it down or program it to crash. And presto! Instant martyers for the cause. It's great rallying point for the masses to gather around. Like the poor Germans who died when the Poles assaulted their radio station or the Russians who died to the vile Finnish Artillary attack in 1939; we will avenge our fallen heros! Damn, history really is like a record player stuck in a loop. The same thing over and over and over again.
"The more I see of life, the less I fear death" - Me.
right after Operation 911 was pulled off, two men of world influence were pretending such technology had not yet been perfected. That was dishonest. And revealing.
#2. To: Kamala (#0)
Bookmarked bump.
#3. To: Kamala, robin, Itisalmostoolate, bluegrass (#0)
By shifting the plane's position so radically, Flight 77 managed to hit the side of the Pentagon directly opposite the side on which the offices of the Secretary of Defense and Joint Chief of Staff were located. (Coincidentally, Flight 77 hit the offices of Army operations [US News and World Report, Sept. 14, 2001, pg. 25]. Recall, it was the Army that warned of the possibility that Israel's Mossad might make a terror attack against the US.) The masterminds of Operation 911 were prepared to sacrifice the rank and file, but carefully avoided touching a hair on the head of the brass.
#4. To: Kamala (#3)
http://www.geocities.com/mknemesis/orient.html
#5. To: Kamala, Itisalmostoolate (#3)
SEE ALSO: THE PENTAGON ATTACK PAPERS: Seven Hours in September: The Clock that Broke the Lie
#6. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#5)
#7. To: Kamala (#0)
#8. To: Kamala (#3)
Home Run could be used to fly all of the survivors to a friendly airport for a safe auto landing. [ATKHWDI note: friendly airport like Rockefeller-controlled military/commercial Yeager in West Virginia? Note Carol's "blip" of Flight 77 in West Virginia. Barbara Olson of Flight 77 has been rumored to be caught in Europe with briefcase of huge sum of Vatican cash.]
#9. To: Itisa1mosttoolate, robin (#6)
How To Fly Jets By Remote Control into Landmark Buildings
#10. To: Itisa1mosttoolate (#6)
#11. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#10)
#12. To: Ferret Mike (#11)
#13. To: BTP Holdings (#12)
(Edited)
#14. To: Ferret Mike (#11)
#15. To: Kamala (#0)
#16. To: mehitable (#15)
#17. To: mehitable, SKYDRIFTER (#15)
I guess the bottom line question would be: is it possible for two minimally trained (per my understanding) pilots to fly 2 commercial jets into two buildings separately standing next to each other? That's pretty good precision flying, I would think. Maybe it's possible, but I'd like to hear some pilots discuss this openly and honestly. I've flown a small plane once, and it wasn't too hard, but that was just around the field and I wasn't aiming for the tower....
#18. To: Kamala (#0)
#19. To: SKYDRIFTER (#18)
AND - we can be certain that the 'official' flight 93 site was prepped. That would mean planning the shootdown months in advance. AND - why shoot down a radio controlled aircraft - if one believes that theory?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest