|
2.1 The Fictitious Hijackers Even
without any direct documentation, some critical thinking about the story of the
hijackings reveals it as an absurdity. In the event of a hijacking, the crew has
only to punch in a four digit code accessible from several different places, in
order to alert ATC (air traffic control) to a hijacking. No such distress code
was received from any of the allegedly hijacked planes. We are expected to
believe that hijackers took over a plane by the crude method of threatening
the passengers and crew with box cutters, but somehow managed to take control of
the plane without the crew first getting a chance to punch in the hijacking
code. Not just on one plane - but on all four. This alone is almost impossible.
Then we are expected to believe that all four pilots were able to navigate the
planes successfully to their targets, in spite of their training being
restricted to Cessnas and flight simulators, that with the exception of the
plane which was allegedly brought down by the passengers, they were able
to exhibit breathtaking piloting skills in being able to hit small targets
accurately at high speed, and that none of the hijackers in any of the four
groups got cold feet about committing suicide in such a horrible fashion. In a
miraculous co-incidence, the ringleader's luggage was somehow left behind at the
airport, and was found to contain instructions to the hijackers. This has
the credibility of a cartoon script. Nevertheless, there is solid
documented proof that no such hijackings took place. If 19 Arabs
hijacked the planes, why are there no Arabic names on any of the passenger
lists? If they used non-Arabic aliases, which of the " innocents " on the lists
are alleged to be the hijackers? 2.1.1
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html
UAL 93 (allegedly Pennsylvania
crash) The perplexing puzzle of the
published passenger lists. By Gary North. Oct 13 2001. 2.1.5 http://www.rense.com/general15/perplexingpuzzle.htm 2.1.6 STILL No Arabs On Flight 77
By Thomas R. Olmsted, MD. June 23 2003. http://www.rense.com/general38/77.htm If they are
alleged to have been using non- Arabic aliases (19 obviously Arabic men got on
board using non-Arabic ID, with 100% success rate ? ), why did the FBI claim
that they were traced through the use of credit cards to buy tickets and rent
cars in their own names? By what means were the false IDs traced so quickly
to their real IDs ? Why, nearly 3 years later is their no confirmation of which
names they are alleged to have actually used? If 9 of the
alleged hijackers were searched before boarding, as claimed in this
article 2.1.7 http://www.policetalk.com/9_hijackers.html why is
there no airport security footage of them? Where is the airport security footage
of any of the 19 ? Were they invisible? How did they (allegedly) get on
board with knives, guns, and electronic guidance systems, while being
searched, but somehow avoiding security cameras and not being on the passenger
lists? What
aliases are they alleged to have been using when they were searched, and if
they were not using aliases, why are they not on the passenger
lists? There are
numerous media reports that some of the alleged hijackers are still
alive. (Some of
the links from 2.1.8 through 2.1.18 are alternative sources for
similar stories) Hijack "suspects" alive and
well. BBC News. Sept 23, 2001 2.1.8 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm 7 of 19 FBI identified
hijackers located after WTC attacks. by Dick Fojut March 4
2002 2.1.9 http://www.rense.com/general20/alives.htm Hundreds dying as US missiles
and bombs hit Afghan villages. Muslim Media October 2001 2.1.10http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/world01/afgwar-die.htm Still alive? FBI mixed up true
identities of perpetrators. by Christopher J. Petherick American Free
Press. Seven of the WTC hijackers
found alive! 2.1.12 http://propagandamatrix.com/seven_of_the_wtc_hijackers_found_alive.html Tracking the 19 hijackers.
What are they up to now? At least 9 of them survived
9/11. 2.1.13 http://www.welfarestate.com/911/ Six men identified by FBI as
dead hijackers are still alive. By Syed Adeeb. 2.1.14 http://truedemocracy.net/td4/24s-c-6men.html Banks enlisted in trailing
terrorists. Albuquerque Tribune 2.1.15 http://www.abqtrib.com/archives/news01/092001_news_trail.shtml Revealed: The men with stolen
identities. UK Telegraph news. By David Harrison. Sept 23
2001. 2.1.16 http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/23/widen23.xml Alleged hijackers alive and
well. World messenger 2.1.17 http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/alive.html Doubts emerge over indentities
of hijackers in US attacks. Islam online Sept 20. 2001. 2.1.18 http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2001-09/21/article12.shtml In spite of
all this, the same 19 names and faces of the alleged hijackers have been
consistently pushed through the mainstream media ever since the FBI first
"identified" them. According
to this article FBI Agent: Hijackers probably
used gas. by Adam Tanner. 2.1.19 http://newsmine.org/archive/9-11/911-gas-theory.txt the FBI now
claims that the hijackers used gas to subdue the passengers and crew. If they
used gas they would have been affected themselves - unless they had masks. The
story gets better all the time. They somehow got on board with masks, gas, guns,
knives and electronic guidance systems, in spite of being searched, didn't show
up on the airport security cameras, and were not on the passenger lists. They
left flight manuals in Arabic in rented cars outside the airport ( last
minute brushing up on the way there, about how to fly the things! ) and
then exhibited breath taking displays of skilled piloting. Just to make
sure we knew who they were, their passports were conveniently found in spite of
fiery crashes which incinerated the planes and occupants. So they got on board
with false IDs but used their real passports ? If the
hijackers of AA 11 went on a 25 minute killing and threatening spree before
gaining control of the cockpit, then why was no distress code sent from the
plane? Why had the plane already turned off course before the hijackers got into
the cockpit? 2.1.20 9/11 Redux: (The
Observeršs Cut) American Airlines Flight 11, Re-examined By David L.
Graham http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/redux.html 2.1.21 Media Published fake
passenger lists for American Airlines flight 11. By Gerard Holmgren. May 16,
2004 http://www.911closeup.com/index.shtml?ID=65 If the
mythical Arab hijackers really were on the planes and airport security systems
failed due to incompetence ( not once but 19 times! ), where is the major
inquiry? I have seen bigger inquiries into racehorse doping
scandals. The
question arises " then who were the suicide pilots ? " Nobody - because we
will now demonstrate that the objects which hit the Pentagon and the WTC
were not passenger jets. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. 2 The Pentagon hoax It is
alleged that that American Airlines 77, a hijacked Boeing 757, crashed into the
Pentagon. This is clearly not true. A Boeing 757 has a wingspan
of 125 ft and a length of 155 ft. The tail height is about 40 ft. The hole
in the Pentagon wall was about 40 ft wide, about 25 ft high, and only the outer
ring of the building - about 40 ft deep - collapsed. And yet there is no
sign of any aircraft debris - either inside or outside the building. And no
damage to the lawn outside. A giant plane has supposedly passed through a hole
many times smaller than itself and then vanished without a
trace. This photo
of the damage to the Pentagon wall 2.2:1 http://www.crc-internet.org/june2a.htm
proves that
whatever crashed into the pentagon was not AA 77. For a quick
overview of the impossibility of the official story 2.2.2 http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm 2.2.3 The amazing Pentalawn. http://www.geocities.com/pentalawn2000/ For a full
physical
analysis of
the crash scene Physical and mathematical
analysis of Pentagon crash. by Gerard Holmgren Oct 2002 2.2.4 http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WTCDEMO/wot/holmgren/index.html Eyewitness
evidence does not confirm a large passenger jet hitting the
Pentagon. Did AA 77 hit the Pentagon?
Eyewitness accounts examined. by Gerard Holmgren June 2002 2.2.5 http://hamilton.indymedia.org:8081/front.php3?article_id=1786&group=webcast 2.3 What hit WTC towers? They are
alleged to have been AA 11 and UA 175, both Boeing 767's. A close
viewing of the videos reveals that neither object was a Boeing
767. 2.3.1 http://thewebfairy.com/911 2.3.2 The 9/11 video footage
of the planes striking the WTC was fake. By Scott
Loughrey http://www.media-criticism.com/911_video_fakes_01_2004.html Given that
a close examination of the 2nd WTC crash video demonstrates that it cannot be a
real plane, but the incident was shown live, here is the documentation that
realistic looking objects can easily be edited into a live broadcast in real
time. 2.3.3 Lying with Pixels. By
Ivan Imato MIT's Technology review. July/August 2000 http://www.nodeception.com/articles/pixel.jsp 2.3.4 Having demonstrated that none of the objects which hit
the three buildings were the planes alleged by the govt to have been
involved , then where did those planes go? Official aviation records
records say that AA11 and AA77 did not exist . "What really happened to
American Airlines Flights 11 and 77 on Sept 11, 2001. by Gerard Holmgren Nov 13
2003. http://sydney.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=36354&group=webcast If one were to use media
reports to support the existence of AA 11, one would have to suggest that there
were two such flights that day. Flight 11 - The Twin Flight -
by Woody Box Although
official aviation records confirm that UA 93 and UA 175 did exist, they also
indicate that the planes never crashed. On the date that this compilation was
last updated , both aircraft were still registered as valid. Go to the FAA aircraft
registry http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/acmain.htm and do an "n
number" search for N591UA ( UA 93 on Sept 11) and N612UA (UA 175 on Sept
11). Why is neither plane listed as destroyed? In addition to the video evidence
establishing that UA 175 did not hit the WTC, this would indicate that UA 93 is
not what crashed in PA. 2.4 What was shot down in PA? The mystery
of the PA crash (allegedly UA 93) is less well understood than the other
three planes. Nevertheless, the aircraft registry search as above indicates that
the UA 93 did not crash. There are
also indications that whatever did crash in PA was shot down. What did happen to Flight 93?
by Richard Wallace. The Daily Mirror sept 13, 2002 2.4.1 http://www.unansweredquestions.net/timeline/2002/mirror091302.html 2.4.2 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12192317&method=full&siteid=50143 2.4.3 http://www.thepowerhour.com/postings-three/flight-93-shot-down.htm Why was
591UA (UA 93 on Sept 11 ) officially reported as being two different flights in
two different cities at the same time ? 2.4.4 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/10/300588.shtml 2.4a Are phone calls from planes, of the type allegedly made by
passengers on Sept 11 possible ? Project Achillies Report Part
1. Jan 23 2003 by A.K. Dewdney. Preliminary low altitude cell
phone experiment. 2.4a.1 http://feralnews.com/issues/911/dewdney/project_achilles_report_1_030123.html Project Achillies Report
Part 2. Feb 25 2003 2.4a.2 http://feralnews.com/issues/911/dewdney/project_achilles_report_2_030225.html This
article concerns the economics of air phones. Note that it refers several times
to the competition for business from cell phones and that all such references
take it as given that cell phones do not work while the plane is in
flight. Permanet,nearlynet and
wireless data. by Clay Shirky March 28 2003. 2.4a.3
http://www.shirky.com/writings/permanet.html 2.5 The World Trade Centre Towers and the WTC 7 building were
brought down with controlled demolitions. According
to the official story, the WTC towers collapsed due to a combination of fire and
impact damage. The research below reveals this as a physical impossibility. In
addition, the media doesn't like to talk so much about the identical collapse of
WTC 7 - a 47 story building which was not hit by anything. Apart from Sept
11, 2001, no steel framed skyscraper has ever totally collapsed from fire.
On Sept 11, it allegedly happened 3 times - all three buildings collapsing
miraculously straight down so as not to damage any of the valuable nearby
real estate. Why was the debris rushed away for recycling before any examination
could be held? Why were expert opinions indicating a controlled demolition
quickly suppressed ? 2.5.1 In Curious Battle: An expert
recants on Why the WTC collapsed by John Flaherty and Jared Israel Dec 26,
2001. http://emperors-clothes.com/news/albu.htm For a series of engineering
articles and informative videos on the WTC collapse, see 2.5:2 http://home.comcast.net/~jeffrey.king2/wsb/html/view.cgi-home.html-.html 2.5:3 Muslims suspend laws of
physics by J. McMichael Nov 25 2001 http://www.public-action.com/911/jmcm/physics_1.html 2.5:4 Muslims suspend laws of
Physics. part 2 by J.McMichael http://serendipity.lich/wot/mslp_ii.htm Selling out the investigation
by Bill manning Fire Engineering Magazine Jan 2002 2.5.5 http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/MAN309A.html 2.5.6 A fire-fighter says "we think
there were bombs set in the building" http://www.prisonplanet.com/louie_cacchioli.html 2.5.7 Documentary footage from the
scene of the WTC attacks, and eyewitness accounts from fire-fighters at the
scene reveal serious flaws in the official accounts. http://sandiego.indymedia.org/en/2002/03/912.shtml 2.5.8 Evidence of explosives
in South WTC Tower collapse http://la.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/23816.php 2.5.9 The jet fuel. How hot did it
heat the World trade Center? http://members.fortunecity.com/911/wtc/how-hot.htm 2.5.10 Where's the
inferno? http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_fire.htm WTC-7: The Improbable Collapse
by Scott Loughrey 10 August 2003 5.17 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/LOU308A.html Although
the excerpt linked below was published in Oct 2001, the book in
question was written in 1999, and argued that the WTC was built as a
"pre-packaged ruin". It was a financial and logistical disaster occupying
valuable real estate. The process of creating a
ruin. Business week online Oct 5 2001. Excerpt from "Divided we
stand" by Eric Darton 5.18 http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/oct2001/nf2001105_5320.htm Steel melts
at about 1540 degrees. Jet fuel (kerosene) burns at a maximum of 800
degrees. Are we seriously expected to believe that burning kerosene towards the
top of the building ( heat travels upwards ) somehow caused both towers to
neatly implode in a manner identical to that of a controlled demolition ?
Where is
the inquiry? I have seen bigger inquiries into suburban house fires. Why is
discussion of the possibility of a controlled implosion completely taboo? Why do
authorities keep inventing ridiculous stories about burning jet fuel melting
steel? 2. 6
Where is the evidence against Bin laden? |