portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article coverage united states

9.11 investigation | technology

9-11 odd plane routes/drones tailored to fly through FAA/NORAD radar coverage hole flaws

What we have discovered is that whoever planned and implemented 9-11 must have had detailed knowledge of both the NORAD and FAA radar coverage. They cunningly exploited vulnerabilities in the radar that only the US Military and the FAA should have been aware of.

There's a lot in this article I'll have to absorb for later. This is only a heads up that another interesting point--wholly novel I think so far and an important contribution!

Only high level information sharing between those who run and know the details of the USA radar coverage could have pulled this off. Where the "terrorists" of the USA decided it would be safer to exchange the self-hit state terror planes without any witnesses or radar coverage, well, that was exactly where it was done.
radar gaps were places of plane subsitutions, example UAL93 here
radar gaps were places of plane subsitutions, example UAL93 here
9-11: Holes in the Radar

Frank Levi and Team 8+ (Feb 2005)

www.the-movement.com

They cunningly exploited vulnerabilities in the radar that only the US Military and the FAA should have been aware of.

US Military please note: this text is not intended to offend the good people in the US Military. The implications of the article are that 9-11 was staged by elements of the US Government/Military but it is very unlikely that it involved the normal people in the military whose only intention is to protect their country.

Since 9-11, many people have wondered how it was possible that the four hijacked planes on 9-11 were able to cause such confusion and chaos without any significant response from America's air defences (NORAD)? Even more amazing is the fact that a hijacked plane was able to both penetrate and attack within the protected air space around Washington DC.

It is already well established that the planners of 9-11 were aware of and possibly taking advantage of the military exercises and terror drills taking place on and around that day. (See War Games and Terror Drills under additional reading)

What we have discovered is that whoever planned and implemented 9-11 must have had detailed knowledge of both the NORAD and FAA radar coverage. They cunningly exploited vulnerabilities in the radar that only the US Military and the FAA should have been aware of. The 9-11 commission only skimmed the surface of these issues, using them as a means to draw blame away from the FAA and NORAD.

Another important question is why the hijackers took such long illogical routes to get to their targets. Why, for example, was Flight 93 not crashed into the World Trade Centre, which was in sight of the airport?

. . . [lots cut out, very image heavy]


Conclusions and Summary

These are absolute facts that cannot be ignored:

* Within the area that the hijackings took place, there are two areas with no primary radar coverage that stretch up towards Canada.

* Flight 11 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.

* Flight 77 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.

* Flight 93 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.

* United Flight 175 switched off its transponder next to United Flight 93.

* We have two incidences where a hijacked plane came very close to a non-hijacked plane. (What are the odds?) Flight 11(hijacked) meets Flight 175 (not hijacked). Flight 175 (hijacked) meets Flight 93 (Not Hijacked)



Question 1: How did the "hijackers" know exactly where these huge breaches in air defence were located?

Question 2: Why go to all that trouble when you can take off from nearby airports (Dulles/Newark), hijack the plane and crash it straight away?

Now, to view additional evidence of plane swapping and other anomalies, read a detailed analysis of:

Flight 77

Flight 11

Flight 175 (COMING SOON)

Flight 93 (COMING SOON)

lots more at link:

 http://www.the-movement.com/Radar/Radar.htm

add a comment on this article

can u spell? 06.Feb.2005 16:40

lovebug

Can you spell D-I-C-K C-H-E-N-E-Y?

Plane switcheroo 06.Feb.2005 18:59

long-time speculator

This guy has a well-thought out theory of what really happened on the planes. Keep in mind we now know there were 5 different "simulated" war or terrorism flight exercises that day, everyone was kept in confusion. Also bear in mind that the flight that was supposed to hit the Pentagon was loaded with people (so I've heard) who were involved with the National Intelligence or the Global Hawk (remote control airplane) project, and the right wing pundit wife of Bush's lawyer was one of those who made an impossible cell phone call fingering the terrorists. Could it be those people are still alive and living underground?

oops, forgot the url ... 06.Feb.2005 19:00

speculator

Flight of the Bumble Planes

 http://www.serendipity.li/wot/plissken.htm

nah, Pentagon hit planned for small substitute plane from the start 06.Feb.2005 21:15

researcher

"Also bear in mind that the flight that was supposed to hit the Pentagon was loaded with people (so I've heard) ..."

I would seriously discount that, given (er..., where ya been?):

1. all the detail work that went into guiding some type of remote control plane toward the Pentagon

2. after AA77 was taken down to land somewhere in Southern Ohio (likely).

3. remember the C-130 there at the Pentagon, guiding the smaller remote control plane (or simply as a backup or 'eye' for the NORAD people at Offtut or "Bunker #2" located Cheney), making sure that the hit went well, because this was required to go off flawlessly. Hard to justify global war for 6000 years if only the WTCs were destroyed. They had to hit their own military bureaucracy for the symbolic "umph" and anger reflex action. Wag the dog, you know. Besides the neocons, like, you know, fer shure, dude, wanted to avoid being killed themselves as they sat in the Pentagon, so they prefered a surgical strike on themselves--with everybody 'important' on the direct opposite side of the building you know, and that side of the Pentagon emptied out.

4. and remember how precisely the Pentagon had to be "pseudo-damaged"--which would have been impossible with a 757 hit (it had to hit their specially refurbished, and reinforced wall at a right angle only flying in a ground level, on the only clear side of approach, etc. to coincide with the cordite explosives already placed. No way that a 757 was ever going to do that. It's engines would be dragging the ground long before it hit "safely."

5. Yes, I admire that "Snake Plisen" article that started the whole ball rolling so to speak, though at this point it's use I think is very much supplemented with three more years of information. I would suggest the free copy of _The New Pearl Harbor_ on the web to get most of the lowdown about the Penta-hit information.

6. yada yada! Period. "and now back to sports, and the war on (t)error.."

For a detailed analysis of Pentagon attack errors 07.Feb.2005 09:45

repost

"Numerous points based on the physical evidence of the crash site seem to make an overwhelming cumulative case against a 757 having crashed there, provided one ignores the eyewitness evidence. However, most of these points involve some error in evaluating the evidence. Those errors include the following.
A Boeing 757 could not have executed the attack maneuver.

Eyewitnesses saw a small plane.

The Pentagon attack left no aircraft debris.

Aircraft crashes always leave large debris.

The Pentagon attack left only a small impact hole.

The wings of a 757 should have been visible outside the Pentagon.

Engine parts from the Pentagon crash don't match a 757.

Standing columns in the Petagon impact hole preclude the crash of a 757.

The C-ring punch-out hole was made by a warhead.

Flight-path obstacles can't be reconciled with the crash of a 757."


thanks for bringing the smoking gun to my attention. re: Pentagon attack errors 08.Feb.2005 15:13

brad

First, this last post is nothing more than spam.
the article had nothing to do with the pentagon being hit.
just trying to promote your site for google ranking are we?


Lets look at the humor of this "debunk"

"The C-ring punch-out hole was made by a warhead. "
Well then what did do it ?
The "review" page shows this photo, but provides no explanation of what it is.

That isnt research, that is trying to discredit others.

 http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/imgs/exit2.jpg

real research would be trying to figure out what it was.

So is that part of the nose of the craft? i doubt it.
it was able to puch through a brick wall, but nothing was left except this part ?
get real.
So what is this part anyway. There seems to have been very little on the way of even assumptions.

 http://physics911.org/net/modules/myalbum/photos/24.jpg
Notice the rebar bent outward, as if something pushed through.

It surely isnt the size of the nose or fuselage of a 757.
 http://pentagon.batcave.net/hole.html

this is the hole stil smoking.
 http://pentagon.batcave.net/pohrv.JPG
Why did they clean out the rest of the debris, but leave this part for a photo-op?

DoD News Briefing on Pentagon Renovation
September 15, 2001

First Mithcell says this is where the part of the plane came out...

Mitchell: It's more to the right of where we were at. This is the -- this is in a renovated section on the opposite side, if you were facing the opposite side. This is a hole in -- there was a punch-out. They suspect that this was where a part of the aircraft came through this hole, although I didn't see any evidence of the aircraft down there.

Then he says the workers "puched it out"

Q: Which area is that?
Mitchell: This is right inside the E Ring.
Q: Did you see any evidence of the aircraft anywhere?
Mitchell: Yes, I did. You could see just small pieces of it.
Q: Well, how far in? Again, we're trying to figure out how it came into the building.
Q: Can we finish the video first and then we'll go back?
Mitchell: You can see someone from the Montgomery County unit here.
This pile here is all Pentagon metal. *None of that is aircraft whatsoever*. As you can see, *they've punched a hole in here. This was punched by the rescue workers to clean it out*. You can see this is the -- some of the unrenovated areas where the windows have blown out. That's soldiers from the Third U.S. Infantry, the Honor Guard, are in there. And this is the conditions they have to work in. There's the Tyvek suits, the respirators, goggles, and helmets, and they also have boots on them as well.
Q: Where is that exactly? Between which rings?
Mitchell: Between the -- I believe it's the E and D Rings.
And that's the end of the tape.

So Mithcell cant make up his mind?
Maybe he changed his story when he found out that photo was leaked?

"The Pentagon attack left no aircraft debris."
Oh really , you mean the piece that was too small ?

 http://77debris.batcave.net/AA.html

Brad
 http://911index.batcave.net/911.html

This is what was in the hole
This is what was in the hole

add a comment on this article