Analysis of 9/11 Flights and
Events based on official reports, 9/11 Commission Testimony, and other
evidence
(author is a reliability engineer who
formerly worked in the defense industry)
Site Index:
I.
A History of the 9/11
Plan and Related Events
II.
Prior Warnings to
the Administration, FAA, and Airlines
III.
Evidence of
Complicity of Some Administration and Military Officials,
and Discrepancies in 9/11 Commission
Report from 9/11 Commission
IV.
Strong evidence
that three WTC buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.
V.
Evidence Flight
77 did not hit the Pentagon and the plane that hit the Pentagon was rigged with
bombs,
resulting in damage and blast from
high explosives and radioactive contamination of the Pentagon
and
surrounding area by depleted uranium.
VI.
Considerable
evidence indicates Flight 93 was shot down by the military.
VII.
Pictures, Videos,
and Researcher Analysis of 9/11 Events
VIII.
Alternative
Scenarios for 9/11 Events proposed by researchers based on the available
evidence
IX.
Current
Conclusions of the Author supported by the evidence referenced on this site:
I.
A History of the 9/11 Plan and Related
Events
The events
of 9/11 have been the most dominant factor in setting the priorities and agenda
for the current decade based on
the dominance of the
Administration as documented
in published documents of the Project for a New American Century and in public
statements
had expressed concern for the
declining oil resources of the
current dominant military and
economic situation to ensure absolute military dominance in the new century and
increased control
of oil resources in the areas of
public to increase military spending drastically and support
an agenda to carry out these objectives. Irregardless of who was responsible
or complicit in 9/11 events,
it is clear that the Bush Administration, dominated by PNAC, has used 9/11 as a
New Pearl Harbor type event
to carry out the PNAC goals,
using it to justify wars and occupation of
economic interests in the central Asian region, which has the
most undeveloped oil reserves in the world.
Plans for 9/11
type events were developed and formulated and have been discussed in the
Administration and intelligence community
for a very long time,
apparently first by the
computer disks found when the
terrorists responsible for the first attack on the
made statements that there
were plans to carry out such events in the fall of 2001. There were large numbers of warnings from other countries
intelligence services and
leaders, captured agents, intercepted agent messages, etc. In the period prior to 9/11, and many of
these were
very specific as to the plans and targets. There had been war games based on 9/11 type
events carried out by the Pentagon and military
officials in the year prior to 9/11 and many warnings to the FAA and
airlines of plans for such events in the fall of 2001.
II.
Warnings to
Administration Officials Prior to 9/11
Plans for 9/11 type events had
been known and commonly discussed by Administration and Military Officials for
several years,
including conducting war-game exercises similar to the 9/11 events
on several occasions and issuing many warnings to FAA
officials and the airlines
regarding 9/11 type events. The Administration had hundreds of warnings of plans for 9/11 type
events
in the period prior to 9/11
from several countries intelligence services, foreign country leaders,
terrorists, other individuals with knowledge of plans for 9/11
events. Some of these warnings were very specific as to targets
and general timing.
Plans for a 9/11 type event in the fall of 2001 were known by many
people in many countries.
At the specific time of the
9/11 Events on
extensive war games involving 9/11
type events at some of the same sites as the actual 9/11 events. This caused some military jets
normally on alert in the East
Coast to be not
available when alerted and caused other confusion as to which of the planes
were real
hijacked planes and which might
be part of the war games. In some cases
it also appears to have caused confusion as to which
planes were involved at the
9/11 event sites, the original scheduled plane or another version of the same
flight that were also
followed and discussed by the
FAA controllers and others during the period of the 9/11 events. It also caused considerable
confusion in coverage by the Media. This confusion has never
been cleared up so the public is unaware of much of this.
Other Warnings Links:
http://www.oilempire.us/wargames.html#ruppert
Paul
Thompson, Center for Cooperative Research,
Complete 911 Timeline, http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project
http://www.flcv.com/911sum.html
III.
Evidence of
Complicity of Administration and Military Officials and Discrepancies in 9/11
Commission Report
from 9/11 Commission Testimony and
other Evidence
[this section only deals with
aspects of the flights, not with physical evidence at the building sites,
where a later section will
provide evidence most of the damage was caused by explosions]
Flight AA11
While American Airlines Flight 11 was
not on the official Logan Airport Schedule reported to the U.S. Bureau of
Transportation
on 9/11, internal
airport records show two Flight 11 planes at Boston Logan, one boarding at
Gate 26 and one at Gate 32. There is evidence
that the Flight 11 at Gate 26
was where passengers scheduled for Flight 11 were boarding but it was delayed at least 30 minutes, and
the
other Flight 11 left on time
and appears to be the plane that was tracked by the FAA to
indicating that any passengers loaded on this plane. One of these planes may have been part of
the war games going on at the time of
these flights. After WTC1 was hit by some plane, some version of the Flight 11 plane was reported
by the FAA as continuing towards
There are many strange circumstances regarding the 4
alleged hijacked planes flight paths.
The choice of planes to hijack and
the timing of hijackings appear to be inconsistent with
what a group of Arabs desiring to attack the Capital and
The NORAD jets protecting the
site in less than 15 minutes. So hijackers would want to hijack flights in
a location and manner to not give NORAD more than 15 minutes
of warning time- else their
plan would likely be unsuccessful. Thus
for the
an airport like Kennedy close to
circumstances a flight from
Also
if Arab hijackers knew how to turn off transponders, doing so would seem to be
a mistake offering no advantages and
making the hijacking less
likely to be successful since it would call attention to the flight and make it
certain that NORAD would be
notified immediately.
And it offers no advantages since the plane can still be tracked by FAA,
NORAD, and other defense system radar.
The only obvious advantage
would be to a hijacker that wanted to make an exchange of planes such as for a
remote controlled version
or to confuse officials about
which of the planes was headed for which target. The 9/11
planes all had unusual deviations in flight plans
that took them to locations
near airports and to locations at boundary of FAA ATC regions and where another
of the planes crossed paths.
This pattern would make the
success of a mission to attack the
to the flights, while not
offering any advantages other than the ability to switch with another plane
without a transponder on (two planes
close to each other without transponders on show up as only
one radar blip). (see
later discussion of WTC)
http://www.flcv.com/offcom11.html
Flight AA77
There
is much confusion in the official reports regarding Flight 77. The flight was
not reported as scheduled on 9/11 in the airport report
to the
in
flight tracking
report as too far west
to be the plane that hit the Pentagon. Another version of Flight 77 may
have actually hit the Pentagon
or one of the planes out of
after being notified by the
FAA that Flight 11 was heading towards D.C.
Vice President Cheney and Pentagon officials were aware for
a considerable time of a
plane approaching the Pentagon but apparently chose not to shoot it down. All of a group of commercial and
military pilots at a
symposium on 9/11 events believe that
the plane that hit the Pentagon could not have been hijacked and flown by the
alleged Arab hijackers and was being guided by remote
control. The timing of the
hijackings of flights 77 and 93 was very
unusual to be
consistent with a group wanting to insure success of a mission
to attack capital targets.
Both planes were allowed to
fly far west before turning off transponders, ceasing radio contact, and
changing directions. But these actions
are known to cause
notification of NORAD by FAA so in both cases close to an hour was provided by
the hijackers of sure notification
and interception time, making neither mission very likely
to succeed if the FAA and NORAD are
following normal procedures. After
much speculation that the
crash scene did not appear consistent with a 757 crash, the Pentagon
unofficially released some slides
supposedly from the Pentagon
video cameras that seem to show attack by a small plane with a missile. However there is evidence
that these photos
have been manipulated and are fraudulent- though it’s not clear why the
pentagon would withhold several sets
of Pentagon and confiscated
private company videos showing the crash while releasing a fraudulent partial
set. www.flcv.com/offcom77.html
Flight UA175
There
were reports indicating that UA175 was confused with one of the versions of
AA77 at one point in its flight between
of a
white jet at the WTC2 site when the plane crashed and some speculate that this
jet might be the same as the white jet later
observed
by many at the
Flight UA93
The
FAA reported that the transponder of UA93 was off and they had lost contact
with the flight near
However
there was also a report by the FAA and Media that UA93 had landed
at the Cleveland Airport because there was
a report
that there was a bomb on board. Due to
this report the
the
Media that the plane was taken to a remote area of the
the
approximately 200 passengers were questioned at a NASA facility at the
airport. Also a private Netjet
owned by
Warren
Buffet’s Mitre Company, a defense contractor company involved in
remote control of planes, was monitoring
a
plane that they reported to the FAA appeared to be UA93 all the way to where it
crashed in
considerable evidence including a report by a retired
military and Pentagon arms negotiator that the plane that crashed
in
unidentified
and unmarked white jet at the crash
site. A C130-H military plane that had
also been at the Pentagon crash
scene
was also near the
control
guidance and jamming equipment. However
another strange aspect of the flight is that the pilot of UA93 had
turned
on the transponder and requested a new flight plan to
before the flight crashed or was shot
down. Many assume this pilot might have
been one of the original pilots and indicated
that
control of the plane had been taken back from the hijackers. The change in
flight plan was confirmed by 9/11 Commission
testimony. There is discrepancy of a missing last 3
minutes in the plane black box recording that might confirm whether this
is
true but the last 3 minutes of the tape, between
IV.
Strong evidence
that three WTC buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.
There
were hundreds of witnesses at the WTC buildings who observed explosions in the WTC buildings,
including fire fighters,
building
engineers, janitors, other occupants, reporters, etc. There are large numbers of pictures and videos of the explosions
that
destroyed
the WTC buildings. There is a large amount of evidence supporting controlled
demolition of the WTC buildings and that
the
official
story of a pancake effect is implausible and contrary to the evidence. The owner of the buildings stated publicly
that he
ordered WTC7 to be
“pulled”(that is, destroyed by controlled demolition) (there are also statements by firemen that a
decision to
let the
building burn was made to avoid further risks to firemen lives since many had
already died in the towers)
V.
Flight 77
could not have hit the Pentagon and much of the damage at the Pentagon was caused
by high explosives, as
confirmed by
Pentagon employees surviving the explosions. There is evidence
of radioactive contamination among the
Pentagon
debris and that depleted uranium was used in the
explosives, likely in a bunker buster bomb. Two
French engineers
who
are also pilots along with advise from a French weapons expert examined the
official reports on Pentagon damage and
the
witness statements and concluded that a large plane rigged with bombs hit the
Pentagon, and that it was
likely
flown by remote control perhaps by the C130 electronics warfare plane
that was observed to follow it in at the Pentagon
and flew
through the smoke afterward. A group of
commercial and military pilots convened for a symposium on 9/11 unanimously
agreed
that the hijackings by the poorly trained Arabs could not have taken place as
the official story suggests and that the planes
were
likely piloted by remote control which is a commonly available technology for
such use. White House and Pentagon
officials
were aware of the approach of the plane that hit the Pentagon and apparently allowed the crash to happen.
VI. Considerable evidence indicates Flight 93 was shot down by the military.
flying out of Langley
Field on 9/11. Other military related people have said
similar.
VII.
Pictures, Videos, and Researcher Analysis of 9/11 Events
http://www.observer.com/pages/frontpage2.asp
VIII.
Alternative Scenarios for 9/11 Events
proposed by researchers based on the available evidence
IX.
Current Conclusions of the Author
supported by the evidence referenced on this site:
1.The official public story of 9/11 did not happen as stated in any
aspect,
4. None of the planes that hit
buildings on 9/11 were flown by Arab hijackers;
of the site and
surrounding area.
7. Flight 93 was shot down by an F-16
military jet out of Langley AFB, Virginia.
