NK - 9 Keys To 9-11

[TonyGosling]

9 Keys To 9-11
By Nick Kollerstrom, Phd

The following ‘keys’ outline a chronological unfolding of our understanding of major mysteries of the 9/11 event, from 2002 to 2004. This manner of approaching the topic may be helpful and I’ve used it in workshops. We still don’t know who designed the greatest conjuring trick of all time. But, a group of ‘911 Sceptics’ have been meeting in London to mull over any emerging consensus; one of these attended the first hijackology conference at San Francisco in March 2004, at which seven hundred people were present. President Bush gave evidence to the 9/11 Commission on April 29th 2004 – not under oath, with Cheney beside him, for 2-3 hours, and off the record. The whole world needs a proper enquiry into this event, with Bush being asked questions on oath and on the record. For example:

* How come his brother Marvin was on the governing board of Securacom, the company in charge of security for the WTC complex when it was hit? (1)
* Why did his brother Jeb visit the Florida training school of the ‘hijackers’ a mere 12 hours after the 9/11 event, and together with FBI agents confiscate all of the archives and records of that flight school (Key No. 7)?
* Why, on the morning of 9/11, did his father George Bush met with Osama bin Laden's brother, Shafig bin Laden, at a conference sponsored by the Carlyle Group in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Washington, DC?
* How come none of these facts were mentioned in the 9/11 Commission report?

US lawyer Stanley Hilton, a senior advisor to Republican Senator Bob Dole who has personally known Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz for decades (2), has stated: ‘This [9/11] was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation.’ (10th September 2004 Alex Jones show) {*} Was this so, Mr President? Some crucial Keys have now come into existence – every one omitted by the best-selling ‘9/11 Commission Report’. That Report mainly consists of long stories of how people, mainly Muslims, moved around, and allegedly plotted things, with virtually all of its references uncheckable – FBI memos, CIA memos, etc. It has testimony from ‘interrogations’ – maybe under torture? It tells a gripping yarn, which is not, however, true. It has failed to examine the scientific and factual evidence. As a member of staff at a Science & Technology Studies Dept (UCL), I reckon that these Keys should focus upon verifiable, scientific-technological issues. They are given in chronological order, with the months when they appeared.

Key no. 1 – Silverstein ‘pulls’ WTC7 Sept, 2002

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey signed a deal transferring ownership of the World Trade Centre complex to the Silverstein-led Westfield America, which was finalised and celebrated on the 23rd July 2001 — just seven weeks before almost the entire complex was destroyed. Let’s quote Larry Silverstein’s words here: "This is a dream come true," he had said. "We will be in control of a prized asset, and we will seek to develop its potential, raising it to new heights." {*}

This complex included WTC-7, the 47-storey building used by the CIA, a block away from the Two Towers. It collapsed at 5.20 pm in a perfect implosion, for no discernible reason, taking 6.5 seconds to fall, into its own footprint. No high-rise steel building had ever collapsed due to fire, before that day. The official FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) report had sparks jumping across from the Twin Towers and then smouldering for five hours, igniting oil stored in the ground floor {*}.

Larry Silverstein stated in a September 2002 documentary program a year later, that on that day, ‘… I said to the firemen, we have had such a terrible loss of life, maybe the smart thing to do is to pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.’ That casual remark has to imply, that the building was wired with explosives some days or weeks before, for a deliberate demolition. {*} A building cannot be thus ‘pulled’ unless it has previously been mined, can it? He received $860m compensation to rebuild – no questions asked - about double what the original building was worth.

Liquid pools of molten steel remained below ground – in common, as we shall see, with the rubble of the Twin Towers. Some bits of this story do strain credulity. Seismic vibrations registered at its instant of collapse (at Columbia University, 21 miles due North), one-tenth the magnitude of those registered for the Twin Towers. Videos of the demolition {*} clearly show a controlled process, with ‘squibs’ going off on a sequence of lower floors, to bring about the collapse. Likewise, a slow-motion video clearly shows controlled demolition moving down through the Two Towers, with sequential detonation (3): {*}.

The 9/11 Commission Report has a whole chapter on the WTC complex with two diagrams both showing WTC7. However, its detailed account of events of that day gives no hint that it collapsed, in an identical manner to the other buildings. That can only be interpreted, as intent to deceive.
Key no. 2 – Video analysis report November 2002

The Swiss Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence in Lausanne was commissioned by France-2 television to analyse the ‘Bin Laden’ video that appeared in mid-November 2001, of which the Pentagon produced an ‘English translation’ on Dec 13th. It expressed confidence that the voice heard was not that of Bin Laden: {*}. As the figure in the video did not greatly resemble Bin Laden that was hardly a surprise. Two weeks after 911, the Taliban were requesting some evidence for Bin Laden’s complicity, as a condition of giving him up, which was not forthcoming: this translation was the only evidence the US produced as to why it believed the engineers of 911 were in Afghanistan. Bin Laden gave a statement to Al-Jazeera on 16th September and another more detailed one to the Pakistani newspaper ‘Ummaut’ on 22nd September, both denying any involvement: {*}He had had an operation in a US hospital in Dubai for kidney trouble on 4th of July then reappears in a military hospital in Rawalpindi on September 10th again for kidney dialysis (4). The fake bin-Laden video was put out in mid-November 2001 as the real OBL was dying, and in the last month of his life. Radio transmissions of his voice from Tora Bora had been regularly intercepted, and ended on 14th December, 2001: {*}. The funeral of Osama Bin Laden was reported in Pakistani and Egyptian newspapers, as having taken place on 16th December 2001, at an undisclosed location in Pakistan{*}.
Key No. 3 – Mobile phone investigation February 2003
Canadian computer-science Professor Dewdney took up an aeroplane at comparable altitudes and speeds to the hijacked planes, to see whether mobile phones would work: they didn’t, he discovered, and for two reasons. The altitude was too great, and, with the phones taking half a minute or so to establish a ‘handshake’ with the nearest radio mast, and at speeds of over 500 mph this just wasn’t feasible. “Cellphones become useless very quickly with increasing altitude. In particular, two of the cellphone types, the Mike and the Nokia, became useless above 2000 feet”. {*} His finding was concordant with other researches, which indicated that the calls supposedly made failed to show up on the phone bills belonging to the passengers. A phone call by Barbara Olsen was supposedly made from a Boeing 757 (The AA flight 77) a plane probably not equipped with in-flight satellite telephone, whereas Boeing 767 and 777s were: {*} Sixteen hours after the event, CNN ran the story from an interview with Ted Olsen, US Solicitor-General. This report was the first to allege that hijackers, armed with nothing more than box-cutters, had taken over the plane. There was no record of the cost of this call on any bill, but it had to be claimed that she had made a reverse-charge call, even though she would have needed a credit card to operate the call. Olsen stated elsewhere his ‘Its OK to lie’ philosophy: ‘It is easy to imagine an infinite number of situations . . . where government officials might quite legitimately have reasons to give false information out. It's an unfortunate reality that the issuance of incomplete information and even misinformation by government may sometimes be perceived as necessary to protect vital interests.’
Key no. 4 – tiny hole made in Pentagon April 2003
A photo of the Pentagon was released in April 2003, taken about half a minute after impact and showing just a small hole about 20 feet wide at point of entry, at the ground-floor level, before the whole front wall collapsed (A Boeing 757 has a 125 feet wingspan). This established that no plane with jet engines on its wings had entered the Pentagon, but one with a single jet only, at its rear. Possibly there was a small fracture on the first floor, made by the tail fin of whatever entered, between two windows. {*}Hijackologists have been fairly unanimous that whatever impacted into the Pentagon at 9.37 am at first floor level leaving an undisturbed grass lawn in front, could not have been the Boeing 757 that took off from Washington, for about five reasons: no trace of wing wreckage was found (one chunk of engine was for a short time lying in front of the wall - quickly removed by the FBI); whatever went in had enormous penetrating power and went right through several Pentagon walls; the entry and exit holes remaining were too small for the Boeing; no-one can be found who believes that Arab hijackers ignored the far easier-to-hit White House, sailed past it, and then smoothly came in at ground level to hit the Pentagon; DU (depleted uranium) was detected after the impact and cruise missiles are weighted with uranium. {*}An air-to-ground missile seems to have been used in the surgical attack, fired by an F-16 while the Boeing 757 overflew the explosion and landed at Reagan National only one mile ahead. Hundreds watched the Boeing flying towards the Pentagon, while only a few saw the small, much faster killer jet hugging the ground flying below radar level. The Boeing approached the Pentagon at about eighty feet above ground level, while the killer jet came in at a 52° angle to the wall, so low that it left a trail of downed lamp-posts, in a straight line with the small hole it finally made at its exit point after passing through several thick walls. All planes in the sky had instructions to land, so the Boeing would have been hardly noticed in the tumult of planes coming out of the sky at Reagan National airport. It was a ‘spook’ plane anyhow as the usual flight 77 Washington to LA was not flying that day (Key No. 7). Debates continue over the path of 5 flattened street-lamps approaching the Pentagon, and how wide a wing-span it indicates. They were on a hill, above the Pentagon’s ground-level, indicating the craft’s ground-hugging capability: a small F-16 drone could have done that, coming in at ground level – impossible for a passenger plane. On Eastman’s hypothesis, it was turbulence of the ground-hugging drone coming in at near-Mach speed that lifted the lamp-posts, none of which were physically struck (5). The drone fired off a missile just before entry (compare the planes entering the Twin Towers) to knock a hole in the two-foot thick, newly-reinforced Pentagon wall, enabling its entry, without which it could merely have bounced off, ending up as debris on the front lawn. After the impact, FBI agents moved swiftly, to confiscate security videos at the nearby Citgo gas station and Sheraton Hotel.

This theory was originally proposed by Thierry Meyssan, and widely dismissed as absurd, until the photos showing the tiny hole in the Pentagon were released, since when it has been developed and refined by Eastman. A government conspirator could not have risked trusting a hijacker pilot, who could well have hit the wrong side of the Pentagon: none of the top brass were injured by the detonations, the casualties being in a sector where civilians were doing the refurbishment. For an illogical view re-advocating that a real Boeing struck the Pentagon, see {*}. Here one has to hang onto rational logic: why has no-one been able to produce any photo whatsoever of this extraordinary event? A passenger aircraft impacting the Pentagon would have been the strangest sight ever seen in America. The jet engines on the wings would have been the densest and therefore the highest-momentum component of that plane, and as such would have been the most likely part to have penetrated through the various two-foot thick Pentagon walls, yet there was no sign of any such impact, in the pictures. One member of our London 9/11 Sceptics Group has found that, on showing pictures of the pentagon ‘crash’ site to people, no-one ever surmises that it was caused by a plane crash {*}. In contrast, pictures of the Lockerbie site clearly shows where a real plane did crash.

The official conspiracy theory has three different levels of impossibility: firstly, that no planes even attempted to intercept the plane which flew towards the Pentagon; second, that the Pentagon’s ground-to-air missile-defence system, constructed precisely for such an event, failed to activate, and third that no photographs of the event exist.

Key No. 5 – Game simulation gets too real May 2003

‘Operation Amalgam Virgo’ was the code name of a war-game to be played out by NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) that simulated the simultaneous hijacking of two planes in the United States, and this was supposedly then in the planning – or so the 911 Commission in Washington DC was informed on 23rd May, 2003. A NORAD official described how ‘scriptwriters’ for these drills included the idea of hijacked aircraft being used as weapons: ‘threats of killing hostages or crashing were left to the scriptwriters to invoke creativity and broaden the required response,’ explained Major General Craig McKinley, to the 9/11 Commission. ‘Is this part of the exercise?’ was the first response of General Arnold at NORAD on hearing of the hijackings. {*} It seems that a clutch of Muslim hijackers could have been written into the script to help ‘invoke creativity’ for the war-game players.

War-gaming exercises had been scheduled for that very morning, involving civilian planes crashing into government buildings, as initially revealed by Barbara Honneker (see earlier article). This ‘game’ had no less than four different foci: the White House where Vice-President Cheney was in charge of the game, the Pentagon, NORAD and the ‘eye in the sky’ the top-secret National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) that controls satellite surveillance. The NRO first released the story in April 2002. Some further details emerged on April 12, 2004 from the watchdog group, ‘The Project on Government Oversight’, as their response to the 911 Commission, in the form of an e-mail written by a former NORAD official. This referred to a proposed exercise targeting thePentagon, including one operation, planned in July 2001 and conducted ‘later’, that involved planes from airports in Utah and Washington state that were ‘hijacked.’ For further insights on how wargaming metamorphosed into the real thing, see {*}, from the International Citizen’s Enquiry into 911 Part Two held in Toronto (May 2004), with top expert Mike Ruppert evaluating the matter (Ruppert’s book ‘Crossing the Rubicon’ accuses Cheney of involvement in the war-gaming process that morning, that somehow transitioned over into real-life).

This looks rather like ‘The Brandon Lee Effect’ - actor Brandon Lee, son of Bruce Lee, was shot dead with a gun, supposed to contain only blanks, while acting in a film. Did something similar develop on 911? Both the character of the event and its date appear increasingly as chosen from within the fabric of American government.
Key No. 6 – Flight 175 ‘adjusted’ June 2003
The Spanish University of Mataro’s image-processing department analysed various photographs of the second impact (‘flight 175’) into the South
tower Report by la Escola Universitaria Politécnica de Mataró. They concluded (a) that it could not have been the plane that took off from Boston airport at 8.15 that morning, because its dimensions were those of the more bulky Boeing 767-300, not a Boeing 767-200; and (b) that the plane had been especially modified with two extra items strapped to its fuselage. The latter would have taken at least a week to prepare. These conclusions were sent to Boeing as a query, and the Boeing experts, having first said they would be happy to collaborate, then declined to comment ‘for national security reasons.’ {*}This report was followed by anguished letters in the Spanish press, as to what were the implications of this finding - but the University image-processing dept. remained silent. It was observed moreover, that photographs showed a flash of light emerging from the extra fuselage equipment just before entering the South Tower, as if it were an incendiary device: {*}, {*}. As to why such bolt-on additions were necessary for the Boeing 767, analysis of past plane crashes show that their crashes just don’t explode in massive fireballs, {*}, kerosine the jet fuel is just not a volatile enough material. The one film fortunately taken of the first plane entering the North Tower (the ‘fireman’s video’) showed: quite a small plane, compared to the windows of the North tower, that it clearly fired off something just prior to entry, and that it lacked engines on its wings (Boeing 767s have wing-mounted jet engines). The Spanish report had a major transformative effect. Hijackologists may have previously been inclined to doubt whether the Pentagon and North tower were hit by the hijacked planes as alleged, but such a scenario seemed so fantastic that few wanted to go down that route. But then a top-level university image-analysis of the plane dimensions on film, ascertained that the big impact seen by all the world was not by the hijacked aeroplane but by something else. This soon led to the implication that none of the three impacts were by the alleged hijacked aeroplanes!

There is one great advantage to this rather surreal twist in the story. No-one had been able to argue convincingly that a passenger aeroplane could be flown by remote control into a target. It is established that fairly small ‘drone’ craft can be so piloted, but no more. If all three planes flown into their targets were not the ones that took off, and if those flown into the Twin Towers were specially tampered with to facilitate ignition, then it becomes more feasible that they should have been fixed up to be remotely guidable (6).

Flight 175 nearly missed, with the plane zooming in at 590 mph (937 km/h according to the FAA) – that is fast, above its cruising speed - and banking onto its side to make a steep turn, at a 4g acceleration which would have killed its passengers. For comparison, road racers on racetracks have to develop their neck muscles to endure the 2g turns, and space pilots endure 4g at launch only with especially prepared seats. No hijackers unprepared could have remained in the pilot seat at that acceleration. All a (notional) hijacker would have had to do towards the end, was maintain the WTC in the centre view of the cockpit, whereas under remote control it is somewhat easier to imagine that an error with co-ordinates could necessitate that very sharp final turn. Normal passenger planes are programmed to have such sharp turns forbidden, the Spanish report ascertained – and there have been heated cyber-debates on this issue - to avoid spilling the Martinis held by passengers etc. The reprogramming to allow this would have taken at least an hour.

Did the United Airlines Flight 175 plane which took off from Logan airport in Boston at 8.14 am, crash that morning? To answer this, we first go to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, which holds the official records of US civilian flights: it cites the United Airlines flight 175 from Boston airport that morning as a Boeing 767 having a tail-number N612UA (see ‘Key 7’ for how to check this). Then we turn to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) archives, where all data on US civil aeroplanes is kept: {*}. Searching for the plane N612UA, it is given as still having a valid status, i.e. as able to fly:

{*} Thus, there is no record of it having crashed as far as the FAA is concerned. I wrote to the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority about this and they cited a Boeing publication, according to which the plane had crashed on 911. Boeing is one of the world’s largest military companies and without doubt would have to be deeply complicit in the events of 911, if indeed there was government complicity, as the evidence suggests. Those who organised this event were, it seems, not able to corrupt the FAA records. This is a vital conclusion, and confirms the Spanish report, whereby flight UA 175 did not impact into the Twin towers. We find this plane again flying according the UA employee Mr Friedman, who innocuously records how he flew on it on 4th October, 2003 {*}.

Key No. 7 – Eight ‘hijackers’ still alivelate 2003?

Earlier reports had cited between four and seven of the FBI-named hijackers as still being alive, but a more recent analysis has increased the number to eight or nine - almost half of them. Skilful identity-theft has taken place, sometimes with a ‘terrorist’ identity made by merging two different individuals, as must have been prepared beforehand.

{*} In 2004 the 9/11 Commission Report just reproduced the original list of 19 ‘hijackers’ with no hint that for several years, around half of them were claiming to be still alive: who does the Report think they are kidding? This proof of ID fabrication has huge implications concerning who really was or was not on board the ‘hijacked’ planes.

The ‘mohammed atta’ at the Florida flight school was a totally opposite character to the Egyptian Mohammed Atta, the serious-minded and quiet architecture student who lived in Hamburg: the former was described as ‘tall’ while the latter was 5’7”; the former loved partying, strip-clubs, casinos and snorting cocaine while the latter was remote, holding highly austere Muslim principles and showing little interest in women; the former wore jeans and sneakers, owned a red Pontiac and seems to have kept a big wad of 100-dollar notes in a pack around his waist, while the latter had no interest in cars or planes. The owner of the Florida school once tried talking to ‘atta’ in German, and was surprised that he backed away in silence. The Atta who lived in Hamburg had to be given special medicine by his sister when he flew by plane, because he disliked flying so much. {*}

Lawyer Stanley Hilton tracked down an ex-wife of one of the ‘hijackers,’ and has claimed they were double agents not Muslim fundamentalists. In the months after the event, persons who lived nearby in Florida were habitually visited by the FBI to ensure they didn’t talk to the media. The stripper and lingerie model Amanda Keller, girlfriend of mohammed atta, was intimidated into silence {*}. We have to wonder, would a fun-loving, fast-living, coke-snorting, rich young man (who spoke no German) with a pretty girlfriend really want to construct and enact a complicated suicide plot?

‘mohammed atta’ loved eating pork chops, had various different passports and IDs (according to Keller) and could speak Hebrew. She challenged him when he claimed the latter but by demonstrating his skill in Hebrew, he convinced her (7). His e-mail list included people who worked for defence contractors, eg a Canadian firm Virtual Prototypes that worked on avionics. He was involved in drug-running, as emerged from Keller’s testimony when he took her and a couple of others to Key West where they ‘partied for three days’ and he paid for everything. Key West airport is a major drug transit point. The Huffman flight School was purchased by Rudi Dekkers just months before ‘atta’ and the ‘hijackers’ arrived in August 2000. It has since been clearly linked to both Venezuela drug-running and Florida’s governor Jeb Bush. Moreover Dekkers was observed to be rather wealthy after the 9/11 event. Less than 24 hours after 9/11, Jeb Bush arrived with Feds, aboard a C-130 cargo plane going back to Washington, to confiscate all records of this flight school. How come he knew, mere hours after the attack, where to look? “atta’s” closest associates were not Arabs but Europeans, with connections to the drug trade. He was already a licensed pilot before he arrived in Venice, and, although supposed to have left in December 2000 after completing his flight training, he didn’t. Dozens of locals testify to this, though warned not to talk about it by the Feds. (Source for this data: a summary of Hopsicker’s ‘Welcome to Terrorland’ {*}. 12 hours after the attack, the FBI arrived at the bar in Fort Lauderdale which atta was accustomed to frequent and announced he had ‘died on the plane,’ It is doubtful whether any of us have seen his picture, so it’s more likely he just shifted into a different identity. The Egyptian Atta phoned his Father on the 12th September, or so the latter has repeatedly testified, though ignorant as to his son’s location during that final call.

FBI Director Rob Mueller claimed in a speech to the Commonwealth Club at San Francisco on 19 April 2003: ‘In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper -in the U.S. or in Afghanistan - that mentioned any aspect of the September 11th plot.’ This does not well accord with the much-publicised paper-trail of Korans, suicide notes, wills, hijacker-instructions etc. in hired cars, bars etc, which were publicised in the wake of the event: it is quite a turnaround (Despite that complete absence of evidence, after a year and a half, Muller saw no reason to doubt that there had indeed been 19 Arab terrorists, as listed by the FBI a mere 72 hours after the event). Translated from Newspeak, his statement means, I suggest: ‘We have finally shredded all the incriminating documents, and are confident that no paper trail remains in FBI archives that could point to the perpetrators.’ Muller became FBI Director on September 5th, 2001.
Key No. 8 – AA Flights 11 & 77 Weren’t Scheduled November 2003
For years, the ‘Flight 11’ was the American Airlines' early morning transcontinental flight out of Logan airport in Boston, to LA. It was regular as clockwork. It made however its last-ever flight on Monday, 10th September, 2001. The next day it was not scheduled to depart, and then for the week following it was scheduled but cancelled – because it was grounded, like other passenger planes, in the aftermath. On 9/11, the earliest scheduled flight from Boston to Los Angeles departed that morning at 11.15 am. What then started flying again, as the morning flight from Boston to LA, had a different code (which needn’t concern us). United Airlines’ Flight 175 left from the same airport, for the same destination, as that of the suddenly-cancelled Flight 11, just twenty minutes later, and we may therefore accept ‘Holmgren’s hypothesis’ that passengers expecting to board Flight 11 were simply re-scheduled into Flight 175. In a similar manner, Flight AA77, a Boeing 757 from Washington to LA, made its last ever scheduled flight on September 10th (. Because American Airline flights 11 and 77 had always been daily, people could well have turned up just expecting them to fly. Planes must be cancelled seven days in advance for the flight not to be recorded by the BTS (Bureau of Transportation Statistics): so it is not feasible that these flights were merely ‘not recorded’ owing to the confusion of the day. A passenger plane is identified firstly by its design, then by its ID number painted under its wings, and lastly by its specific flight on a given day. Thus, two flights that morning were:

Type Flight ID From to Supposedly
Boeing 767 UA175 N612UA Boston LA hit WTC2
Boeing 757 UA 93 N591UA NY SF crashed in Penn

The world’s media broadcast the ‘fifth hijack plane’ story, an AA43 which supposedly took off from Logan airport to LA at 8.10 on 911, grounded by efficient FBI agents – and containing suspicious-looking Muslim characters! (Sept 17, 2001 Chicago Tribune) The BTS indicate that no such plane flew from Logan to LA, though there was an AA43 from Newark which flew normally, until grounded like all other planes that morning. The Western press never corrected their untruthful tale, despite a whole planeload of AA43 passengers and crew who could have told them.

‘Within minutes’ of the impacts, a ‘public relations’ company of over 75 members had stormed in to American Airlines head office and was ‘assisting’ them in managing the flow of information to the public. To claim insurance after a crash, a company has to identify the ruins of the plane, however no such evidence was ever placed in the public domain enabling AA to do so {*}. As to why the planes would have been de-scheduled that morning, so that no-one could have booked tickets for them, we can only surmise that this was the easiest way to make a plane ‘disappear’ – for it not to have flown in the first place. (See also {*} for insights into which planes went where). Finally, in October 2004, the BTS fiddled its own database, to make it look as if the two American Airlines planes had indeed flown that morning: {*}

Key No. 9 – The fate of Flight 93 June 2004

The United Airlines ‘Flight 93' did indeed take off from Newark airport in New York to San Francisco that morning, and was scheduled, however: ‘United Flight 93, as we have been given to understand it, flew for the first time on 11th September 2001’ {*} - it wasn’t a regular service. So there is something fishy here. It also seems quite feasible that that Flight 93 landed in Cleveland, Ohio This story appeared in June 2004, citing various sources in support - {*}

A plane exploded over a field in Pennsylvania at 10.06 am, leaving no marks on the ground of a crash, but only fine debris spread over a wide area, and this was soon alleged to have been ‘Flight 93’ which had taken off from Newark airport, New York that morning. That plane (N591UA) retains to this day a valid registration in the FAA records; it is not registered as destroyed. A plane was blown out of the sky, and a survey of witnesses who heard and/or saw the event concluded: ‘While many of these accounts conflict, virtually all support a missile strike, because of the common theme of noises and a plane struggling to rise and stay in the air. The plunge doesn't seem to be a deliberate thrust of the plane towards the ground, but instead the result of engine failure’ {*}. In February of 2004, the retired 72-year old US army colonel Donn de Grand-Pre, interviewed on the Alex Jones show, alleged that on that morning a F-11 fighter-jet belonging to the North Dakota Air National Guard took off from Langley Air Base a few miles from the Pennsylvania crash, and shot two Sidewinder missiles that downed the plane at 10.00 am. That Air National Guard division had moved to Langley a few months earlier. The pilot, an old friend of Donn de Grand-Pre, was decorated a year later for this action and he personally attended the ceremony, North Dakota being his home state. He described this fighter group as ‘probably the best interceptors we have in the country.’ Two pilots were summoned at 9.35 and initially didn’t know where they were going. {*} Donn do Grand-Pre was the person who organised the three-day symposium of military and civilian pilots in the immediate aftermath, 16th-19th September - reported only in Portugal, its conclusion concerning ‘the enemy within the gates’ being unpalatable to the American media.{*}. He has written and self-published three weighty volumes giving full details: ‘Barbarians inside the Gates,’ so his testimony seems credible.

The plane must have been equipped to explode, like others used that day, because it didn’t crash into the ground. (9) It therefore could not have taken off from a civilian airport. Due to the rescheduling that happens, one cannot tell with civilian flights which plane will be used until a while before take-off. These arguments are well compatible with the thesis that Flight 93 with its passengers landed at Hopkins airport, Cleveland.

……………………………………

For the anguished question, Who really flew? some databases are relevant:

* the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) records which plane flew on which flight. It gave as we saw flights AA 11 and AA 77 as not scheduled that morning (Key .

* the SSDI Social Security Death Index, the registry of all US Social Security numbers belonging to deceased persons, is a US guide to who has really died: {*}. Rather few of the supposedly-dead passengers turn up on this index, e.g. flight AA11 which supposedly crashed into the North tower, had a flight crew of eleven according to published lists, including pilot John Ogonowski and flight attendants Betty Ong and Madeleine Sweeney: the SSDI list cites only one of these eleven persons as having died on that day. The recent 911 Commission made much of supposedly long messages from the doomed plane by Ong and Sweeney, after which ‘There was scarcely a dry eye in the Senate hearing room.’ One would like to have some official record of their demise before being moved by these messages, which had hardly been heard of in the first two years after 9/11. A larger proportion of the AA11 passengers as compared with the flight crew, 15 out of 76, were registered as dead on this Index. Any comment from ‘bereaved’ families would be invaluable. No-one could get a word out of them (10), until finally Nico Haupt ascertained that: ‘After a while, one of the close correspondents of the family members, told me that Flight 11 family members had been scared to speak out and didn't want to receive further e-mails on that matter’ {*}.

* the FAA, Federal Aviation Administration database, keeps a record of functioning passenger planes and of pilots & co-pilots. As we have seen, it rates the planes of the flights UA 93 (a Boeing 757, N591UA) and UA 175 (a Boeing 767, N612 UA) as both still airworthy, i.e. able to fly. Both pilots and co-pilots are required to hold a valid Airline Transport Pilot license. Fabricating hijacker identities may be relatively easy, in that the media will not object too much if some ‘foreign’ Muslim claims to be still alive: whereas, having pilots and co-pilots die is far trickier to arrange. Jason Matthew Dahl was registered on the FAA database as pilot of Flight 93 and appears to be still alive, just as the plane appears as still registered. Victor Saracini the captain of flight 175 died on 911 (an Endowed Flight Scholarship is being established by his wife, Ellen, in memory of him), even though the plane, a Boeing 767 (N612 UA) is still registered, i.e. able to fly.
Fragments
* Whatever entered at the Pentagon impact seemed to shower down seconds later, from the sky: "All over the highway were small pieces of aircraft skin, none bigger than a half-dollar," Mark Faram; "looked like white confetti raining down everywhere. The 'confetti' was little bits of airplane, falling down after being flung high into the bright, blue sky," Clyde Ragland; "The sky was darker than normal, but still I didn't think much of it. Then I saw little bits of silver falling from the sky" Will Jarvis “There was an enormous fireball, followed about two seconds later by debris raining down," Donald R. Bouchoux {*} - not unlike the fate of the plane shot down in the field in Pennsylvania, which ended up as fine debris spread over several miles.

* Ten Seconds, A Hundred Days: At 9.59 am, the South tower fell in ten seconds, as likewise the North fell in nine at 10.28am, as if in free-fall. That was after firemen had ascended to the plane-impact levels, reporting only minor fires. Pools of molten steel were found in the basement, seven floors down:{*}‘The World Trade Center smoldering pits of molten steel burned for exactly 100 days, despite the constant spray of water being applied. The fires were finally reported extinguished on December 19th’{*}. The towers metamorphosed into fine, powdery white dust, a-blowing in the wind. Clearly, Superman’s enemy had been at work.

The two instants of collapse induced seismic tremors of 2.1 and 2.3 magnitude on the Richter scale, recorded twenty miles north at Columbia University. Both of these tremors gradually increased over five seconds: this reflects, experts believe, the controlled series of detonations which dissolved these towers into dust, beginning at the top of each tower and progressing downwards (Griffin’s New Pearl Harbour, p.20), during those few seconds of collapse.

* A Fictional Digression. In his book, ‘Against All Enemies’, Richard Clarke gives an insider’s view of events that fateful morning: Dale Watson 'counter-terrorism chief at the FBI' addresses him on a secure phone line from the FBI’s 'Strategic Info and Operations Centre’: 'We got the passenger manifests from the airlines. We recognise some names, Dick. They're Al-Quaeda.' RC is ‘stunned’ and then replies 'how the F*** did they get on board then?' If Mr Watson would make public these official passenger lists which no-one else has seen in two and a half years, this would be the first known evidence of Arabs on board.

* Finger of Blame If the Pentagon ‘loses’ a trillion dollars - {*}{*} - then we have to expect creative use of it. What it provided was a theatre, such as to insure its own well-being and continued development: ‘The very brazenness of the act, the naked aggression, would necessitate a tenacious determination to achieve the ends for which these actions were perpetrated. There is no going back now. An infrastructure is being laid out - one that will, finally, provide a dissident-proof totalitarian oligarchy composed of like-minded elites served by an under-class kept under constant surveillance’ {*} The US is now dedicated to Eternal War, that is the nemesis of this new century. Pearl Harbour prefigured this event, to enable war and establish an enemy-image. Evidence has crept out over Pearl Harbour - how FDR knowingly set the situation up, ordering the US fleet into a harbour where they would be ‘sitting ducks’ and provoking Japan with impossible conditions, having fully penetrated the Japanese codes so he knew in advance what was to happen – have the US public ever demanded an enquiry, a process of truth-telling? Instead, history books portrayed it as an attack ‘out of the blue.’ Ditto for ‘Operation Northwoods’ which, though never carried out, was just as blood-curdling in its plan, sacrificing civilian lives to enable war. {*}

Two brilliant books on the subject have appeared: ‘The New Pearl Harbour’ by David Griffin (with forewords by Richard Falk in the US version, and by Michael Meacher in the UK edition, both worth reading): ‘no American until Griffin has had the patience, the fortitude, the courage, and the intelligence to put so many pieces together in a single coherent account,’ to quote Falk; and ‘9/1 the big Lie’ by French intelligence expert Thierry Meyssan. Ahmed’s ‘War on Freedom’ remains an excellent background book, but is a little dated for reconstructing what happened. Earlier studies tended to be mainly LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose), whereas the consensus is nowadays moving towards the notion of a self-inflicted event, one lacking in Muslim guilt.

Refs

1. In ’96 Securacom acquired a contract to handle WTC security, ‘up to the day the buildings fell down’: {*} . After the event, Marvin Bush, the President’s brother, resigned from its Board of Directors and it changed its name.

2. US lawyer Stanley Hilton took his PhD on the very subject of how to turn the U.S. into a presidential dictatorship by manufacturing a bogus Pearl Harbour event, at the University of Chicago in the late 60s. He there mingled with ‘neo-cons’ such as Paul Wolfowitz. His lawsuit on the subject may still be pending.

3. Eric Hufschmid’s video, "Painful Deceptions," well shows the controlled-demolition process.

4. Nafeez Ahmed, The War on Freedom, How and Why America was Attacked September 11, 2001, 2002, p.223; Thierry Meyssian, 9/11 The big Lie, 2002, p107.

5. Dick Eastman has withdrawn his websites, perhaps being over-sensitive about criticism, but still (I believe) deserves credit for this hypothesis, one fully compatible with Meyssian’s.

6. There was something extremely weird about that plane judging by the photos, see {*} for the best overview.

7. NB, a group of Jewish ‘art student’ double-agents were then living at 4220 Sheraden Street, Hollywood, Florida, just down the road from where atta lived at no. 3389: ‘the Israeli network was a nationwide operation based in Florida …[they] lived on the same street in Hollywood, Florida as Mohammed Atta’: Len Bracken, ‘The Shadow government, 9-11 and State Terror’, 2004 Adventures Unlimited press Ill, p124. (Bracken recommended an account by John Sugg in ‘Creative Loafing’, 20.3.2002).

8. Until October 2004, one could go into the database {*} to check out these flight schedules.

9. The Kean Report shows what looks like some compost-heaps near some trees (p.313) and avers that this is the UA93 crash site: who are they kidding? For this picture in colour, see {*} .

10. The 9/11 Commission didn’t want to hear from vital witnesses: ‘Intelligence agencies opposed having relatives [of flight-crash victims] appear, saying testimony from the victims' families would be inappropriate and counterproductive. They said emotional appeals would do little to fulfil the purpose of the investigation …’ {*}

This thesis has come together through debates within the London 911 Sceptics group.

For Gerard Holmgren’s evidence kit: {*}

[TonyGosling]

A new and improved version of this article is now available, sent in by the author and attached.

Nine Keys to 9-11
The following ‘keys’ outline a chronological unfolding of our understanding of major mysteries of the 9/11 event in the years following. This manner of approaching the topic may be helpful and I’ve used it in workshops. We still don’t know who designed the greatest conjuring trick of all time. But, a group of ‘911 Sceptics’ have been meeting in London to mull over any emerging consensus; one of these attended the first hijackology conference at San Francisco in March 2004, at which seven hundred people were present.

President Bush gave evidence to the 9/11 Commission on April 29th 2004 – not under oath, with Cheney beside him, for 2-3 hours, and off the record. The whole world needs a proper enquiry into this event, with Bush being asked questions on oath and on the record. For example:
• How come his brother Marvin was on the governing board of Securacom, the company in charge of security for the WTC complex when it was hit? (1)
• Why did his brother Jeb visit the Florida training school of the ‘hijackers’ a mere 12 hours after the 9/11 event, and together with FBI agents confiscate all of the archives and records of that flight school (Key No. 7)?
• Why, on the morning of 9/11, did his father George Bush met with Osama bin Laden's brother, Shafig bin Laden, at a conference sponsored by the Carlyle Group in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Washington, DC?
• How come none of these facts were mentioned in the 9/11 Commission report?
US lawyer Stanley Hilton, a senior advisor to Republican Senator Bob Dole who has personally known Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz for decades (2), has stated: ‘This [9/11] was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation.’ (10th September 2004 Alex Jones show) http://www.rense.com/general57/aale.htm Was this so, Mr President?

Some crucial Keys have now come into existence – every one omitted by the best-selling ‘9/11 Commission Report’. That Report mainly consists of long stories of how people, mainly Muslims, moved around, and allegedly plotted things, with virtually all of its references uncheckable – FBI memos, CIA memos, etc. It has testimony from ‘interrogations’ – maybe under torture? It tells a gripping yarn, which is not, however, true. It has failed to examine the scientific and factual evidence. As a member of staff at a Science & Technology Studies Dept (UCL), I reckon that these Keys should focus upon verifiable, scientific-technological issues. They are given in chronological order, with the months when they appeared.

Key no. 1 – Silverstein ‘pulls’ WTC7 Sept, 2002
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey signed a deal transferring ownership of the World Trade Centre complex to the Silverstein-led Westfield America, which was finalised and celebrated on the 23rd July 2001 — just seven weeks before almost the entire complex was destroyed. Let’s quote Larry Silverstein’s words here: “This is a dream come true," he had said. "We will be in control of a prized asset, and we will seek to develop its potential, raising it to new heights." www.serendipity.li/wtc6.htm

This complex included WTC-7, the 47-storey building used by the CIA, a block away from the Two Towers. It collapsed at 5.20 pm in a perfect implosion, for no discernible reason, taking 6.5 seconds to fall, into its own footprint. No high-rise steel building had ever collapsed due to fire, before that day. The official FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) report had sparks jumping across from the Twin Towers and then smouldering for five hours, igniting oil stored in the ground floor www.911review.org/Wiki/Building7Collapse.shtml.

Larry Silverstein stated in a September 2002 documentary program a year later, that on that day, ‘… I said to the firemen, we have had such a terrible loss of life, maybe the smart thing to do is to pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.’ That casual remark has to imply, that the building was wired with explosives some days or weeks before, for a deliberate demolition. (www.prisonplanet.com/011904wtc7.html) A building cannot be thus ‘pulled’ unless it has previously been mined, can it? He received $860m compensation to rebuild – no questions asked - about double what the original building was worth.

Liquid pools of molten steel remained below ground – in common, as we shall see, with the rubble of the Twin Towers. Some bits of this story do strain credulity. Seismic vibrations registered at its instant of collapse (at Columbia University, 21 miles due North), one-tenth the magnitude of those registered for the Twin Towers. Videos of the demolition http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/ clearly show a controlled process, with ‘squibs’ going off on a sequence of lower floors, to bring about the collapse. Likewise, a slow-motion video clearly shows controlled demolition moving down through the Two Towers, with sequential detonation (3): http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=consp_911&Number=2 93270721.

The 9/11 Commission Report has a whole chapter on the WTC complex with two diagrams both showing WTC7. However, its detailed account of events of that day gives no hint that it collapsed, in an identical manner to the other buildings. That can only be interpreted, as intent to deceive.

Key no. 2 – Video analysis report November 2002
The Swiss Institute for Perceptual Artificial Intelligence in Lausanne was commissioned by France-2 television to analyse the ‘Bin Laden’ video that appeared in mid-November 2001, of which the Pentagon produced an ‘English translation’ on Dec 13th. It expressed confidence that the voice heard was not that of Bin Laden: http://abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s737945.htm. As the figure in the video did not greatly resemble Bin Laden that was hardly a surprise. Two weeks after 911, the Taliban were requesting some evidence for Bin Laden’s complicity, as a condition of giving him up, which was not forthcoming: this translation was the only evidence the US produced as to why it believed the engineers of 911 were in Afghanistan. Bin Laden gave a statement to Al-Jazeera on 16th September and another more detailed one to the Pakistani newspaper ‘Ummaut’ on 22nd September, both denying any involvement: www.public-action.com/911/oblintrv.html

He had had an operation in a US hospital in Dubai for kidney trouble on 4th of July then reappears in a military hospital in Rawalpindi on September 10th again for kidney dialysis (4). The fake bin-Laden video was put out in mid-November 2001 as the real OBL was dying, and in the last month of his life. Radio transmissions of his voice from Tora Bora had been regularly intercepted, and ended on 14th December, 2001: www.whatreallyhappened.com/osama_dead.html. The funeral of Osama Bin Laden was reported in Pakistani and Egyptian newspapers, as having taken place on 16th December 2001, at an undisclosed location in Pakistan www.welfarestate.com/binladen/funeral/.

Key No. 3 – Mobile phone investigation February 2003
Canadian computer-science Professor Dewdney took up an aeroplane at comparable altitudes and speeds to the hijacked planes, to see whether mobile phones would work: they didn’t, he discovered, and for two reasons. The altitude was too great, and, with the phones taking half a minute or so to establish a ‘handshake’ with the nearest radio mast, and at speeds of over 500 mph this just wasn’t feasible. “Cellphones become useless very quickly with increasing altitude. In particular, two of the cellphone types, the Mike and the Nokia, became useless above 2000 feet”. http://anderson.ath.cx:8000/911/hj08.html His finding was concordant with other researches, which indicated that the calls supposedly made failed to show up on the phone bills belonging to the passengers.
A phone call by Barbara Olsen was supposedly made from a Boeing 757 (The AA flight 77) a plane probably not equipped with in-flight satellite telephone, whereas Boeing 767 and 777s were: http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1092 Sixteen hours after the event, CNN ran the story from an interview with Ted Olsen, US Solicitor-General. This report was the first to allege that hijackers, armed with nothing more than box-cutters, had taken over the plane. There was no record of the cost of this call on any bill, but it had to be claimed that she had made a reverse-charge call, even though she would have needed a credit card to operate the call. Olsen stated elsewhere his ‘Its OK to lie’ philosophy: ‘It is easy to imagine an infinite number of situations . . . where government officials might quite legitimately have reasons to give false information out. It's an unfortunate reality that the issuance of incomplete information and even misinformation by government may sometimes be perceived as necessary to protect vital interests.’

Key no. 4 – tiny hole made in Pentagon April 2003
A photo of the Pentagon was released in April 2003, taken about half a minute after impact and showing just a small hole about 20 feet wide at point of entry, at the ground-floor level, before the whole front wall collapsed (A Boeing 757 has a 125 feet wingspan). This established that no plane with jet engines on its wings had entered the Pentagon, but one with a single jet only, at its rear. Possibly there was a small fracture on the first floor, made by the tail fin of whatever entered, between two windows. www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

Hijackologists have been fairly unanimous that whatever impacted into the Pentagon at 9.37 am at first floor level leaving an undisturbed grass lawn in front, could not have been the Boeing 757 that took off from Washington, for about five reasons: no trace of wing wreckage was found (one chunk of engine was for a short time lying in front of the wall - quickly removed by the FBI); whatever went in had enormous penetrating power and went right through several Pentagon walls; the entry and exit holes remaining were too small for the Boeing; no-one can be found who believes that Arab hijackers ignored the far easier-to-hit White House, sailed past it, and then smoothly came in at ground level to hit the Pentagon; DU (depleted uranium) was detected after the impact and cruise missiles are weighted with uranium. http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/dam-inside.html An air-to-ground missile seems to have been used in the surgical attack, fired by an F-16 while the Boeing 757 overflew the explosion and landed at Reagan National only one mile ahead. Hundreds watched the Boeing flying towards the Pentagon, while only a few saw the small, much faster killer jet hugging the ground flying below radar level. The Boeing approached the Pentagon at about eighty feet above ground level, while the killer jet came in at a 52° angle to the wall, so low that it left a trail of downed lamp-posts, in a straight line with the small hole it finally made at its exit point after passing through several thick walls. All planes in the sky had instructions to land, so the Boeing would have been hardly noticed in the tumult of planes coming out of the sky at Reagan National airport. It was a ‘spook’ plane anyhow as the usual flight 77 Washington to LA was not flying that day (Key No. 7).

Debates continue over the path of 5 flattened street-lamps approaching the Pentagon, and how wide a wing-span it indicates. They were on a hill, above the Pentagon’s ground-level, indicating the craft’s ground-hugging capability: a small F-16 drone could have done that, coming in at ground level – impossible for a passenger plane. On Eastman’s hypothesis, it was turbulence of the ground-hugging drone coming in at near-Mach speed that lifted the lamp-posts, none of which were physically struck (5). The drone fired off a missile just before entry (compare the planes entering the Twin Towers) to knock a hole in the two-foot thick, newly-reinforced Pentagon wall, enabling its entry, without which it could merely have bounced off, ending up as debris on the front lawn. After the impact, FBI agents moved swiftly, to confiscate security videos at the nearby Citgo gas station and Sheraton Hotel.

This theory was originally proposed by Thierry Meyssan, and widely dismissed as absurd, until the photos showing the tiny hole in the Pentagon were released, since when it has been developed and refined by Eastman. A government conspirator could not have risked trusting a hijacker pilot, who could well have hit the wrong side of the Pentagon: none of the top brass were injured by the detonations, the casualties being in a sector where civilians were doing the refurbishment. For an illogical view re-advocating that a real Boeing struck the Pentagon, see http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.ht ml. Here one has to hang onto rational logic: why has no-one been able to produce any photo whatsoever of this extraordinary event? A passenger aircraft impacting the Pentagon would have been the strangest sight ever seen in America. The jet engines on the wings would have been the densest and therefore the highest-momentum component of that plane, and as such would have been the most likely part to have penetrated through the various two-foot thick Pentagon walls, yet there was no sign of any such impact, in the pictures. One member of our London 9/11 Sceptics Group has found that, on showing pictures of the pentagon ‘crash’ site to people, no-one ever surmises that it was caused by a plane crash www.pentagonlawn.net. In contrast, pictures of the Lockerbie site clearly shows where a real plane did crash.

The official conspiracy theory has three different levels of impossibility: firstly, that no planes even attempted to intercept the plane which flew towards the Pentagon; second, that the Pentagon’s ground-to-air missile-defence system, constructed precisely for such an event, failed to activate, and third that no photographs of the event exist.

Key No. 5 – Game simulation gets too real May 2003
‘Operation Amalgam Virgo’ was the code name of a war-game to be played out by NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) that simulated the simultaneous hijacking of two planes in the United States, and this was supposedly then in the planning – or so the 911 Commission in Washington DC was informed on 23rd May, 2003. A NORAD official described how ‘scriptwriters’ for these drills included the idea of hijacked aircraft being used as weapons: ‘threats of killing hostages or crashing were left to the scriptwriters to invoke creativity and broaden the required response,’ explained Major General Craig McKinley, to the 9/11 Commission. ‘Is this part of the exercise?’ was the first response of General Arnold at NORAD on hearing of the hijackings. http://www.9-11commission.gov/archive/hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_ 2003-05-23.htm It seems that a clutch of Muslim hijackers could have been written into the script to help ‘invoke creativity’ for the war-game players.

War-gaming exercises had been scheduled for that very morning, involving civilian planes crashing into government buildings, as initially revealed by Barbara Honneker. This ‘game’ had no less than four different foci: the White House where Vice-President Cheney was in charge of the game, the Pentagon, NORAD and the ‘eye in the sky’ the top-secret National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) that controls satellite surveillance. The NRO first released the story in April 2002. Some further details emerged on April 12, 2004 from the watchdog group, ‘The Project on Government Oversight’, as their response to the 911 Commission, in the form of an e-mail written by a former NORAD official. This referred to a proposed exercise targeting the Pentagon, including one operation, planned in July 2001 and conducted ‘later’, that involved planes from airports in Utah and Washington state that were ‘hijacked.’ For further insights on how wargaming metamorphosed into the real thing, see http://www.oilempire.us/wargames.html, from the International Citizen’s Enquiry into 911 Part Two held in Toronto (May 2004), with top expert Mike Ruppert evaluating the matter Ruppert’s classic work ‘Crossing the Rubicon’ accuses Cheney of involvement in the war-gaming process that morning, that somehow transitioned over into real-life.

This looks rather like ‘The Brandon Lee Effect’ - actor Brandon Lee, son of Bruce Lee, was shot dead with a gun, supposed to contain only blanks, while acting in a film. Did something similar develop on 911? Both the character of the event and its date appear increasingly as chosen from within the fabric of American government.

Key No. 6 – Flight 175 ‘adjusted’ June 2003
The Spanish University of Mataro’s image-processing department analysed various photographs of the second impact (‘flight 175’) into the South tower Report by la Escola Universitaria Politécnica de Mataró. They concluded (a) that it could not have been the plane that took off from Boston airport at 8.15 that morning, because its dimensions were those of the more bulky Boeing 767-300, not a Boeing 767-200; and (b) that the plane had been especially modified with two extra items strapped to its fuselage. The latter would have taken at least a week to prepare. These conclusions were sent to Boeing as a query, and the Boeing experts, having first said they would be happy to collaborate, then declined to comment ‘for national security reasons.’ http://www.amics21.com/911/index.html

This report was followed by anguished letters in the Spanish press, as to what were the implications of this finding - but the University image-processing dept. remained silent. It was observed moreover, that photographs showed a flash of light emerging from the extra fuselage equipment just before entering the South Tower, as if it were an incendiary device: www.amics21.com/911/flight175/second.html, www.911review.org/Wiki/Wtc2PlanePod.shtml. As to why such bolt-on additions were necessary for the Boeing 767, analysis of past plane crashes show that their crashes just don’t explode in massive fireballs, www.thewebfairy.com/911/holmgren/07.html, kerosine the jet fuel is just not a volatile enough material. The one (very blurred) film fortunately taken of the first plane entering the North Tower (the ‘fireman’s video’) seemed to show: quite a small plane, compared to the windows of the North tower, which clearly fired off something just prior to entry, and that it lacked engines on its wings (Boeing 767s have wing-mounted jet engines).

The Spanish report had a major transformative effect. Hijackologists may have previously been inclined to doubt whether the Pentagon and North tower were hit by the hijacked planes as alleged, but such a scenario seemed so fantastic that few wanted to go down that route. But then a top-level university image-analysis of the plane dimensions on film, ascertained that the big impact seen by all the world was not by the hijacked aeroplane but by something else. This soon led to the implication that none of the three impacts were by the alleged hijacked aeroplanes!

There is one great advantage to this rather surreal twist in the story. No-one had been able to argue convincingly that a passenger aeroplane could be flown by remote control into a target. It is established that fairly small ‘drone’ craft can be so piloted, but no more. If all three planes flown into their targets were not the ones that took off, and if those flown into the Twin Towers were specially tampered with to facilitate ignition, then it becomes more feasible that they should have been fixed up to be remotely guidable (6).

Flight 175 nearly missed, with the plane zooming in at 590 mph (937 km/h according to the FAA) – that is fast, above its cruising speed - and banking onto its side to make a steep turn, at a 4g acceleration which would have killed its passengers. For comparison, road racers on racetracks have to develop their neck muscles to endure the 2g turns, and space pilots endure 4g at launch only with especially prepared seats. No hijackers unprepared could have remained in the pilot seat at that acceleration. All a (notional) hijacker would have had to do towards the end, was maintain the WTC in the centre view of the cockpit, whereas under remote control it is somewhat easier to imagine that an error with co-ordinates could necessitate that very sharp final turn. Normal passenger planes are programmed to have such sharp turns forbidden, the Spanish report ascertained – and there have been heated cyber-debates on this issue - to avoid spilling the Martinis held by passengers etc. The reprogramming to allow this would have taken at least an hour.

Did the United Airlines Flight 175 plane which took off from Logan airport in Boston at 8.14 am, crash that morning? To answer this, we first go to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, which holds the official records of US civilian flights: it cites the United Airlines flight 175 from Boston airport that morning as a Boeing 767 having a tail-number N612UA (see ‘Key 8’ for how to check this). Then we turn to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) archives, where all data on US civil aeroplanes is kept: http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/. Searching for the plane N612UA, it is given as still having a valid status, i.e. as able to fly:
http://162.58.35.241/acdatabase/NNumSQL.asp?NNumbertxt=612UA Thus, there is no record of it having crashed as far as the FAA is concerned. I wrote to the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority about this and they cited a Boeing publication, according to which the plane had crashed on 911. Boeing is one of the world’s largest military companies and without doubt would have to be deeply complicit in the events of 911, if indeed there was government complicity, as the evidence suggests. Those who organised this event were, it seems, not able to corrupt the FAA records. This is a vital conclusion, and confirms the Spanish report, whereby flight UA 175 did not impact into the Twin towers. We find this plane again flying according the UA employee Mr Friedman, who innocuously records how he flew on it on 4th October, 2003 http://friedmanfamily.org/ua2003/.

Key No. 7 – Eight ‘hijackers’ still alive late 2003?
Earlier reports had cited between four and seven of the FBI-named hijackers as still being alive, but a more recent analysis has increased the number to eight or nine - almost half of them. Skilful identity-theft has taken place, sometimes with a ‘terrorist’ identity made by merging two different individuals, as must have been prepared beforehand.
www.welfarestate.com/911/ In 2004 the 9/11 Commission Report just reproduced the original list of 19 ‘hijackers’ with no hint that for several years, around half of them were claiming to be still alive: who does the Report think they are kidding? This proof of ID fabrication has huge implications concerning who really was or was not on board the ‘hijacked’ planes.

The ‘mohammed atta’ at the Florida flight school was a totally opposite character to the Egyptian Mohammed Atta, the serious-minded and quiet architecture student who lived in Hamburg: the former was described as ‘tall’ while the latter was 5’7”; the former loved partying, strip-clubs, casinos and snorting cocaine while the latter was remote, holding highly austere Muslim principles and showing little interest in women; the former wore jeans and sneakers, owned a red Pontiac and seems to have kept a big wad of 100-dollar notes in a pack around his waist, while the latter had no interest in cars or planes. The owner of the Florida school once tried talking to ‘atta’ in German, and was surprised that he backed away in silence. The Atta who lived in Hamburg had to be given special medicine by his sister when he flew by plane, because he disliked flying so much. www.the-movement.com/Hijackers/mohamed_atta.htm

Lawyer Stanley Hilton tracked down an ex-wife of one of the ‘hijackers,’ and has claimed they were double agents not Muslim fundamentalists. In the months after the event, persons who lived nearby in Florida were habitually visited by the FBI to ensure they didn’t talk to the media. The stripper and lingerie model Amanda Keller, girlfriend of mohammed atta, was intimidated into silence www.madcowprod.com/issue44.html. We have to wonder, would a fun-loving, fast-living, coke-snorting, rich young man (who spoke no German) with a pretty girlfriend really want to construct and enact a complicated suicide plot?

‘mohammed atta’ loved eating pork chops, had various different passports and IDs (according to Keller) and could speak Hebrew. She challenged him when he claimed the latter but by demonstrating his skill in Hebrew, he convinced her (7). His e-mail list included people who worked for defence contractors, eg a Canadian firm Virtual Prototypes that worked on avionics. He was involved in drug-running, as emerged from Keller’s testimony when he took her and a couple of others to Key West where they ‘partied for three days’ and he paid for everything. Key West airport is a major drug transit point. The Huffman flight School was purchased by Rudi Dekkers just months before ‘atta’ and the ‘hijackers’ arrived in August 2000. It has since been clearly linked to both Venezuela drug-running and Florida’s governor Jeb Bush. Moreover Dekkers was observed to be rather wealthy after the 9/11 event. Less than 24 hours after 9/11, Jeb Bush arrived with Feds, aboard a C-130 cargo plane going back to Washington, to confiscate all records of this flight school. How come he knew, mere hours after the attack, where to look? “atta’s” closest associates were not Arabs but Europeans, with connections to the drug trade. He was already a licensed pilot before he arrived in Venice, and, although supposed to have left in December 2000 after completing his flight training, he didn’t. Dozens of locals testify to this, though warned not to talk about it by the Feds. (Source for this data: a summary of Hopsicker’s ‘Welcome to Terrorland’ www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address= 104x1433886). 12 hours after the attack, the FBI arrived at the bar in Fort Lauderdale which atta was accustomed to frequent and announced he had ‘died on the plane,’ It is doubtful whether any of us have seen his picture, so it’s more likely he just shifted into a different identity. The Egyptian Atta phoned his Father on the 12th September, or so the latter has repeatedly testified, though ignorant as to his son’s location during that final call.

FBI Director Rob Mueller claimed in a speech to the Commonwealth Club at San Francisco on 19 April 2003: ‘In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper -in the U.S. or in Afghanistan - that mentioned any aspect of the September 11th plot.’ This does not well accord with the much-publicised paper-trail of Korans, suicide notes, wills, hijacker-instructions etc. in hired cars, bars etc, which were publicised in the wake of the event: it is quite a turnaround (Despite that complete absence of evidence, after a year and a half, Muller saw no reason to doubt that there had indeed been 19 Arab terrorists, as listed by the FBI a mere 72 hours after the event). Translated from Newspeak, his statement means, I suggest: ‘We have finally shredded all the incriminating documents, and are confident that no paper trail remains in FBI archives that could point to the perpetrators.’ Muller became FBI Director on September 5th, 2001.

Key No. 8 – AA Flights 11 & 77 Weren’t Scheduled November 2003
For years, the ‘Flight 11’ was the American Airlines' early morning transcontinental flight out of Logan airport in Boston, to LA. It was regular as clockwork. It made however its last-ever flight on Monday, 10th September, 2001. The next day it was not scheduled to depart, and then for the week following it was scheduled but cancelled – because it was grounded, like other passenger planes, in the aftermath. On 9/11, the earliest scheduled flight from Boston to Los Angeles departed that morning at 11.15 am. What then started flying again, as the morning flight from Boston to LA, had a different code (which needn’t concern us). United Airlines’ Flight 175 left from the same airport, for the same destination, as that of the suddenly-cancelled Flight 11, just twenty minutes later, and we may therefore accept ‘Holmgren’s hypothesis’ that passengers expecting to board Flight 11 were simply re-scheduled into Flight 175.
In a similar manner, Flight AA77, a Boeing 757 from Washington to LA, made its last ever scheduled flight on September 10th (. Because American Airline flights 11 and 77 had always been daily, people could well have turned up just expecting them to fly. Planes must be cancelled seven days in advance for the flight not to be recorded by the BTS (Bureau of Transportation Statistics): so it is not feasible that these flights were merely ‘not recorded’ owing to the confusion of the day.

A passenger plane is identified firstly by its design, then by its ID number painted under its wings, and lastly by its specific flight on a given day. Thus, two flights that morning were:
Type Flight ID From to Supposedly
Boeing 767 UA175 N612UA Boston to LA hit WTC1
Boeing 757 UA 93 N591UA NY to SF crashed in Penn.
The world’s media broadcast the ‘fifth hijack plane’ story, an AA43 which supposedly took off from Logan airport to LA at 8.10 on 911, grounded by efficient FBI agents – and containing suspicious-looking Muslim characters! (Sept 17, 2001 Chicago Tribune) The BTS indicate that no such plane flew from Logan to LA, though there was an AA43 from Newark which flew normally, until grounded like all other planes that morning. The Western press never corrected their untruthful tale, despite a whole planeload of AA43 passengers and crew who could have told them.
‘Within minutes’ of the impacts, a ‘public relations’ company of over 75 members had stormed in to American Airlines head office and was ‘assisting’ them in managing the flow of information to the public. To claim insurance after a crash, a company has to identify the ruins of the plane, however no such evidence was ever placed in the public domain enabling AA to do so http://globalresearch.ca/articles/DAV411A.html. As to why the planes would have been de-scheduled that morning, so that no-one could have booked tickets for them, we can only surmise that this was the easiest way to make a plane ‘disappear’ – for it not to have flown in the first place. (See also www.the-movement.com/Radar/Radar.htm for insights into which planes went where). Finally, in October 2004, the BTS fiddled its own database, to make it look as if the two American Airlines planes had indeed flown that morning: http://members.iinet.net.au/~holmgren/1177.html

Key No. 9 – The fate of Flight 93 June 2004
The United Airlines ‘Flight 93' did indeed take off from Newark airport in New York to San Francisco that morning, and was scheduled, however: ‘United Flight 93, as we have been given to understand it, flew for the first time on 11th September 2001’ www.thoughtcrimenews.com/flight93notscheduled.htm - it wasn’t a regular service. So there is something fishy here. It also seems quite feasible that that Flight 93 landed in Cleveland, Ohio This story appeared in June 2004, citing various sources in support - http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=323

A plane exploded over a field in Pennsylvania at 10.06 am, leaving no marks on the ground of a crash, but only fine debris spread over a wide area, and this was soon alleged to have been ‘Flight 93’ which had taken off from Newark airport, New York that morning. That plane (N591UA) retains to this day a valid registration in the FAA records; it is not registered as destroyed. A plane was blown out of the sky, and a survey of witnesses who heard and/or saw the event concluded: ‘While many of these accounts conflict, virtually all support a missile strike, because of the common theme of noises and a plane struggling to rise and stay in the air. The plunge doesn't seem to be a deliberate thrust of the plane towards the ground, but instead the result of engine failure’ www.911timeline.net. In February of 2004, the retired 72-year old US army colonel Donn de Grand-Pre, interviewed on the Alex Jones show, alleged that on that morning a F-11 fighter-jet belonging to the North Dakota Air National Guard took off from Langley Air Base a few miles from the Pennsylvania crash, and shot two Sidewinder missiles that downed the plane at 10.00 am. That Air National Guard division had moved to Langley a few months earlier. The pilot, an old friend of Donn de Grand-Pre, was decorated a year later for this action and he personally attended the ceremony, North Dakota being his home state. He described this fighter group as ‘probably the best interceptors we have in the country.’ Two pilots were summoned at 9.35 and initially didn’t know where they were going. http://www.prisonplanet.com/022904degrand.html Donn de Grand-Pre was the person who organised the three-day symposium of military and civilian pilots in the immediate aftermath, 16th-19th September - reported only in Portugal, its conclusion concerning ‘the enemy within the gates’ being unpalatable to the American media. www.geocities.com/mknemesis/colonels.html. He has written and self-published three weighty volumes giving full details: ‘Barbarians inside the Gates,’ so his testimony seems credible.

The plane must have been equipped to explode, like others used that day, because it didn’t crash into the ground. (9) It therefore could not have taken off from a civilian airport. Due to the rescheduling that happens, one cannot tell with civilian flights which plane will be used until a while before take-off. These arguments are well compatible with the thesis that Flight 93 with its passengers landed at Hopkins airport, Cleveland.
…………………………………….

For the anguished question, Who really flew? some databases are relevant:
* the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) records which plane flew on which flight. It gave as we saw flights AA 11 and AA 77 as not scheduled that morning (Key .
* the SSDI Social Security Death Index, the registry of all US Social Security numbers belonging to deceased persons, is a US guide to who has really died: http://ssdi.genealogy.rootsweb.com/. Rather few of the supposedly-dead passengers turn up on this index, e.g. flight AA11 which supposedly crashed into the North tower, had a flight crew of eleven according to published lists, including pilot John Ogonowski and flight attendants Betty Ong and Madeleine Sweeney: the SSDI list cites only one of these eleven persons as having died on that day. The recent 911 Commission made much of supposedly long messages from the doomed plane by Ong and Sweeney, after which ‘There was scarcely a dry eye in the Senate hearing room.’ One would like to have some official record of their demise before being moved by these messages, which had hardly been heard of in the first two years after 9/11. A larger proportion of the AA11 passengers as compared with the flight crew, 15 out of 76, were registered as dead on this Index. Any comment from ‘bereaved’ families would be invaluable. No-one could get a word out of them (10), until finally Nico Haupt ascertained that: ‘After a while, one of the close correspondents of the family members, told me that Flight 11 family members had been scared to speak out and didn't want to receive further e-mails on that matter’ http://www.911skeptics.blogspot.com/.

* the FAA, Federal Aviation Administration database, keeps a record of functioning passenger planes and of pilots & co-pilots. As we have seen, it rates the planes of the flights UA 93 (a Boeing 757, N591UA) and UA 175 (a Boeing 767, N612 UA) as both still airworthy, i.e. able to fly. Both pilots and co-pilots are required to hold a valid Airline Transport Pilot license. Fabricating hijacker identities may be relatively easy, in that the media will not object too much if some ‘foreign’ Muslim claims to be still alive: whereas, having pilots and co-pilots die is far trickier to arrange. Jason Matthew Dahl was registered on the FAA database as pilot of Flight 93 and appears to be still alive, just as the plane appears as still registered. Victor Saracini the captain of flight 175 died on 911 (an Endowed Flight Scholarship is being established by his wife, Ellen, in memory of him), even though the plane, a Boeing 767 (N612 UA) is still registered, i.e. able to fly.

Fragments
* Whatever entered at the Pentagon impact seemed to shower down seconds later, from the sky: "All over the highway were small pieces of aircraft skin, none bigger than a half-dollar," Mark Faram; "looked like white confetti raining down everywhere. The 'confetti' was little bits of airplane, falling down after being flung high into the bright, blue sky," Clyde Ragland; "The sky was darker than normal, but still I didn't think much of it. Then I saw little bits of silver falling from the sky" Will Jarvis “There was an enormous fireball, followed about two seconds later by debris raining down," Donald R. Bouchoux
www.911-strike.com/missing-confetti.htm - not unlike the fate of the plane shot down in the field in Pennsylvania, which ended up as fine debris spread over several miles.

* Ten Seconds, A Hundred Days: At 9.59 am, the South tower fell in ten seconds, as likewise the North fell in nine at 10.28am, as if in free-fall. That was after firemen had ascended to the plane-impact levels, reporting only minor fires. Pools of molten steel were found in the basement, seven floors down: www.freedomfiles.org/war/wtcSEISMIC.htm ‘The World Trade Center smoldering pits of molten steel burned for exactly 100 days, despite the constant spray of water being applied. The fires were finally reported extinguished on December 19th’ www.911timeline.net. The towers metamorphosed into fine, powdery white dust, a-blowing in the wind. Clearly, Superman’s enemy had been at work.

The two instants of collapse induced seismic tremors of 2.1 and 2.3 magnitude on the Richter scale, recorded twenty miles north at Columbia University. Both of these tremors gradually increased over five seconds: this reflects, experts believe, the controlled series of detonations which dissolved these towers into dust, beginning at the top of each tower and progressing downwards (Griffin’s New Pearl Harbour, p.20), during those few seconds of collapse.

* A Fictional Digression In his book, ‘Against All Enemies’, Richard Clarke gives an insider’s view of events that fateful morning: Dale Watson 'counter-terrorism chief at the FBI' addresses him on a secure phone line from the FBI’s 'Strategic Info and Operations Centre’: 'We got the passenger manifests from the airlines. We recognise some names, Dick. They're Al-Quaeda.' RC is ‘stunned’ and then replies 'how the F*** did they get on board then?' If Mr Watson would make public these official passenger lists which no-one else has seen, this would be the first known evidence of Arabs on board.

* Finger of Blame If the Pentagon ‘loses’ a trillion dollars - www.whereisthemoney.org
www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3435.htm - then we have to expect creative use of it. What it provided was a theatre, such as to insure its own well-being and continued development: ‘The very brazenness of the act, the naked aggression, would necessitate a tenacious determination to achieve the ends for which these actions were perpetrated. There is no going back now. An infrastructure is being laid out - one that will, finally, provide a dissident-proof totalitarian oligarchy composed of like-minded elites served by an under-class kept under constant surveillance’ www.attackonamerica.net/themysterysurroundingthedeathofjohnoneill.htm The US is now dedicated to Eternal War, that is the nemesis of this new century. Pearl Harbour prefigured this event, to enable war and establish an enemy-image. Evidence has crept out over Pearl Harbour - how FDR knowingly set the situation up, ordering the US fleet into a harbour where they would be ‘sitting ducks’ and provoking Japan with impossible conditions, having fully penetrated the Japanese codes so he knew in advance what was to happen – have the US public ever demanded an enquiry, a process of truth-telling? Instead, history books portrayed it as an attack ‘out of the blue.’ Ditto for ‘Operation Northwoods’ which, though never carried out, was just as blood-curdling in its plan, sacrificing civilian lives to enable war. www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html

Two brilliant books on the subject have appeared: ‘The New Pearl Harbour’ by David Griffin (with forewords by Richard Falk in the US version, and by Michael Meacher in the UK edition, both worth reading): ‘no American until Griffin has had the patience, the fortitude, the courage, and the intelligence to put so many pieces together in a single coherent account,’ to quote Falk; and ‘9/1 the big Lie’ by French intelligence expert Thierry Meyssan. Ahmed’s ‘War on Freedom’ remains an excellent background book, but is a little dated for reconstructing what happened. Earlier studies tended to be mainly LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose), whereas the consensus is nowadays moving towards the notion of a self-inflicted event, one lacking in Muslim guilt.

Refs
1. In ’96 Securacom acquired a contract to handle WTC security, ‘up to the day the buildings fell down’: www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Burns011603/burns011603.html . After the event, Marvin Bush, the President’s brother, resigned from its Board of Directors and it changed its name.

2. US lawyer Stanley Hilton took his PhD on the very subject of how to turn the U.S. into a presidential dictatorship by manufacturing a bogus Pearl Harbour event, at the University of Chicago in the late 60s. He there mingled with ‘neo-cons’ such as Paul Wolfowitz. His lawsuit on the subject may still be pending.

3. Eric Hufschmid’s video, "Painful Deceptions," well shows the controlled-demolition process.

4. Nafeez Ahmed, The War on Freedom, How and Why America was Attacked September 11, 2001, 2002, p.223; Thierry Meyssian, 9/11 The big Lie, 2002, p107.

5. Dick Eastman has withdrawn his websites, perhaps being over-sensitive about criticism, but still (I believe) deserves credit for this hypothesis, one fully compatible with Meyssian’s.

6. There was something extremely weird about that plane judging by the photos, see www.gallerize.com/2005-01-11_001_MI_SG_UA175.htm for the best overview.

7. NB, a group of Jewish ‘art student’ double-agents were then living at 4220 Sheraden Street, Hollywood, Florida, just down the road from where atta lived at no. 3389: ‘the Israeli network was a nationwide operation based in Florida …[they] lived on the same street in Hollywood, Florida as Mohammed Atta’: Len Bracken, ‘The Shadow government, 9-11 and State Terror’, 2004 Adventures Unlimited press Ill, p124. (Bracken recommended an account by John Sugg in ‘Creative Loafing’, 20.3.2002).

8. Until October 2004, one could go into the database http://www.bts.gov/programs/airline_information/airline_ontime_statist ics/ to check out these flight schedules.

9. The Kean Report shows what looks like some compost-heaps near some trees (p.313) and avers that this is the UA93 crash site: who are they kidding? For this picture in colour, see www.konformist.com/911/93.htm .

10. The 9/11 Commission didn’t want to hear from vital witnesses: ‘Intelligence agencies opposed having relatives [of flight-crash victims] appear, saying testimony from the victims' families would be inappropriate and counterproductive. They said emotional appeals would do little to fulfil the purpose of the investigation …’ www.chicagotribune.com/news/specials/911/showcase/chi-0209120288sep12, 0,4408075.story

This thesis has come together through debates within the London 911 Sceptics group.
For Gerard Holmgren’s evidence kit: http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/03/283050.shtml

Postscript – Recent Studies on how the Towers collapsed
Holes in towers: http://www.serendipity.li/wot/spencer03.htm
2nt tower impact: http://www.serendipity.li/wot/spencer06.htm
Tritium blast: http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id472.html
Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction: Stephen Jones et al., Jan 2008 Vol 19 Journal of 911 studies (www.journalof911studies.com/)
They found iron spherules in dust 1 micron, and volatalised metals eg lead, 1700 deg C. Dust particles from the WTC collapse showed a “Swiss cheese appearance as a result of boiling and evaporation” Molybdenum-rich spherules indicated that over 2000 deg C had been reached. Maximum flame temperatartue of hydrocarbons is around 1000 deg C.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf
White-hot areas that produced glowing liquid flows from window openings on the 80th to 82nd floor of WTC 2: Thermate (Jones argued) with sulphur can gets to 2500 cent. Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse? Stephen Jones, Jnl of 9/11 studies, Sept 2006. Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc, speaking of the way the WTC
buildings came down, said in an interview: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would
put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse the
structure.” Journal of 9/11 Studies 30 September 2006/Volume 3