The Flying Elephant: Evidence for Involvement of a Third (& Fourth) Jet in the WTC Attacks
"Scholars for 9/11 Truth has been appalled to learn that the author of this study has received threats against himself and his family for having written this article [and made watching four videos of the third plane, totalling around 2:10 min, conveniently available in a single article's links. I have seen many still photos of this third plane, though these are the first videos I have seen documenting it.]"
"The source of these threats has suggested that he drop out of our organization and that this study should "go away". He has withdrawn from S9/11T, but this piece of research cannot "go away". It has already been widely read and no doubt copied. Under the circumstances, it would be a huge mistake to allow this organization and its journal to be manipulated by external threats. Since the author has nothing to do with our decision to keep it in place, responsibility shifts to the organization. We hope others will pursue its leads."
OK. I will. I hope it is clear that certainly official Bush administration in origin threats on 9/11 Scholars lives are signs of those people noticing something really important. When the stoic strategies of indifference and ignoring are tossed out the window toward active threats, particularly threats on little kids, you can bet that this is really important.
I have one main thing to add to this article. I made an observation in one of these linked videos, and added some bracketed [comments] that it shows MORE THAN A THIRD PLANE, it shows actually a THIRD AND THEN SECONDS LATER A FOURTH PLANE (which the videographer tracks on both occassions, how did that guy miss this in wroting this?) going by in the distance as the WTC2 is struck at 9:02 a.m., in the video marked with a ***. I don't see how the original author missed that in that video.
The Flying Elephant: Evidence for Involvement of a Third Jet in the WTC Attacks
Scholars for 9/11 Truth*
No mention of a large, commercial-class aircraft loitering in the restricted airspace of lower Manhattan during the strikes on the WTC towers will be found in the 9/11 Commission Report.
It does not appear in any version of the Official Story.
It is largely unknown even in critical studies of 9/11.
Yet substantial evidence exists to support its presence coincident with the
attacks, actually orbiting in close proximity to the towers for several minutes while the North Tower burned and [before and during when] the South Tower was struck. [It even appears after the South Tower was struck.]
Photography, video footage and eyewitness accounts, including FDNY transcripts and mainstream media audio, confirm this fact. Why is this significant?
Let us consider the commercial air traffic on a typical Tuesday morning
over New York City. There are three major airports servicing the city: La Guardia and JFK International to the east, and Newark International across the Hudson to the west. Normal holding patterns for these airports do not intersect the borough of Manhattan at any point.
Lower Manhattan is, and was on the morning of 9/11/01, a low-altitude flight-restricted (no fly) zone for commercial jets, as designated by the FAA, for the obvious reason that heavy, fast-moving aircraft and tall buildings pose mutual hazards.
Air traffic near the WTC towers was doubly restricted, with a minimum ceiling extending two thousand feet above the towers (3,300 feet) within a radius of one nautical mile, excepting only police aviation without special permit. These were the VFR (visual flight rules) parameters in effect on the morning of 9/11. Once WTC1 was hit, the black smoke plume expanding southeast from the tower would pose an additional threat to navigation.
No avoidance warning from Air Traffic Control would be necessary, as no rational commercial pilot (no matter how curious) would risk his aircraft, crew or passengers in a "fly-by" of the burning North Tower. But in this anonymous Camera Planet segment we see a large, twin-jet aircraft (757/767-class) doing just that at approximately 8:58am (assuming the time signature is uncorrected by one hour), five minutes before WTC2 will be struck. Even disregarding the indicated time, as WTC1 is burning and WTC2 is not, the segment is clearly recorded between 8:46am and 9:03am.
Note this white aircraft with dark engines and vertical stabilizer is not the aircraft that will impact WTC2.
This still from the video isolates the aircraft:
According to the 9/11 Commission, two F-15s were scrambled from Otis Air Force Base at 8:46am (some 33 minutes after flight controllers lost contact with AA11), and were inbound to NYC at high speed, presumably to intercept suspicious airliners. Presumably commercial flights in NY airspace would be alerted to this danger. Yet this aircraft cruises slowly near the stricken
North Tower, seemingly unconcerned its behavior makes it a logical target for these fighters. Of course, the absurdly late scramble and non-arrival of the F-15s is a serious problem for the official narrative, which remains obscured by contradictory accounts from the FAA, NORAD, NEADS, the news media and the pilots themselves. (The Commission has these fighters finally arriving for Combat Air Patrol over NYC at 9:25am, after being vectored into a holding pattern off Long Island.)
At least one photograph captures this aircraft (or one with a similar profile) in the interval between the tower strikes, flying another pass almost directly above WTC2 at an altitude of approximately 2,000 feet, judging by its size and position relative to the smoke plume, to which
it appears recklessly close:
At 9:03am, "UA175" approaches from the south at an improbably high speed and impacts the South Tower. CNN aired this [supposed] "amateur video" of the event, which captures (without notice by Aaron Brown or Paula Zahn) what is evidently the same jet seen in the Camera Planet segment, making a similar northwest pass (but farther west, approximately over Battery Park) as the South Tower hit occurs.
***[Actually the article fails to note that TWO SEPARATE additional planes are flying by, one plane in the film between Aaron Brown's words "and now....no words, no reasons"; the fourth plane seconds later making another pass in the same direction, overlapping with Paula Zahn's words "just the impact of what was witnessed here in New York", with the plane appearing above the "EWS" letters (first over the "S", then as the camera follows it and attempts to center it, over the "E" then the "W"--in the "BREAKING NEWS" banner. You will note that the videographer is following this fourth plane and is unable to decide which is more newsworthy the seconds of the WTC2 hit or the third/fourth plane that he keeps panning over to catch! Note once more that this is the "famous video clip" that in the future is always shown with the third/fourth plane entirely removed, by simply ending the clip artifically immediately after the explosion. This thus is intellectually dishonest because the videographer was attempting, by his/her camera pans, to capture two phenomena at once: both the WTC2 hit by something, as well as his pained quick pans to the aras of following the third plane (during the Aaron Brown voiceover) and then a quick lunge to follow the fourth plane (during the voiceover of Paula Zahn).
This still from the video isolates the aircraft as "UA175" rips through the South Tower:
At 9:04am, Diane Sawyer of ABC News made remarks on-air about the "circling" jet she and her colleagues "all saw" prior to the second strike. She admits she "just assumed" it was the same one that struck the South Tower.
[It additionally shows that some third/fourth plane was moving back and fourth in the vicinity of the WTCs illegally in this permanently off limits area after both WTC1 and WTC2 were hit. Moreover, Diane Saywer indicates that she witnessed a third plane doing the same long before WTC2 was hit. From Diane Sawyer's voiceover, she indicates that she and her coanchor host both saw a third plane doing a back and forth pass in the 15 minute interium between the WTC1 and WTC2 hits (8:46/7 to 9:02/3 a.m.). That pre WTC2 hit back and forth pass however is without video, only their witness statements, though they do show video of a post WTC2 hit (9:02/3 a.m) where another close by third plane is still there, passing back and forth. It is interesting to note that the video is one of an additional third plane still in the area, going back and forth AFTER both the WTC1 and WTC2 hits (approx. a few minutes after WTC2 hit)]:
Of interest with respect to this "mystery jet" is the phenomenon, acknowledged but unexplained by the Commission, of the "phantom Flight 11". [or "not so phantom Flight 11"]
At 9:21am, after both towers had been hit, and long after "AA11" had struck the North Tower, Boston flight control, relaying information from FAA headquarters, informed NEADS that "AA11" was still in the air and heading south, [over New Jersey] perhaps to Washington, DC. Were they tracking this "third aircraft"?
Notable in this context are reports by FDNY personnel that they received a warning about a third aircraft.
Deputy Chief Peter Hayden, in an interview with Firehouse Magazine in April 2002, explained "We had a report from OEM that there was possibility of a third plane coming in." Even more intriguing, in the Naudets' documentary 9/11,a firefighter is filmed explaining what caused the collapse of the South Tower: "The FBI thinks it was a third plane."
Much research has focused on the details and effects of various military exercises apparently underway on 9/11, especially "live-fly" NORAD drills designed to mimic multiple terrorist aircraft attacks on high-profile US targets. One NORAD drill, "Vigilant Guardian", is admitted by the Commission to have been in progress but is dismissed in a footnote as being unrelated to
the hijacking scenario and as posing no impediment to defensive response, despite the well documented confusion among NORAD personnel as to whether the attacks were "real world or exercise", the presence of artificial radar "injects" on their screens, and the recognition of as many as eleven simultaneous potential hijackings.
Was the "third jet" an actor in such an exercise?
Was it meant to confuse defensive response?
Was it monitoring (or controlling) the attacks?
Was it a back-up in the event of a miss on the towers?
Was it one of these? http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=90
If it is a civil aircraft, records of its take-off and landing must exist. A FOIA request to the FAA should be filed.
If it is military, it is automatically suspect. Any proper investigation of 9/11 must account for this aircraft.
Grateful acknowledgment is made to Brian P. Duncan and Robert E. Moore, Esq. for their research in support of this study.
* Scholars for 9/11 Truth has been appalled to learn that the author of this study has received threats against himself and his family for having written this article. The source of these threats has suggested that he drop out of our organization and that this study should "go away". He has withdrawn from S9/11T, but this piece of research cannot "go away". It has already been widely read and no doubt copied. Under the circumstances, it would be a huge mistake to allow this organization and its journal to be manipulated by external threats. Since the author has nothing to do with our decision to keep it in place, responsibility shifts to the organization. We hope
others will pursue its leads.
The article's several other pictures of the third plane is available here:
The Journal of 9/11 Studies is a peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic-only journal covering the whole of research related to 9/11/2001. All content is freely available online.
Journal of 9/11 Studies Volume 1 - June 2006
WTC 7: A Short Computation
Kenneth L. Kuttler 1
9/11 - Evidence for Controlled Demolition: a Short List of Observations
Frank Legge 4
9/11 - Evidence Suggests Complicity: Inferences from Actions
Frank Legge 16
The Flying Elephant: Evidence for Involvement of a Third Jet in the WTC Attacks
Scholars for 9/11 Truth 26
Momentum Transfer Analysis of the Collapse of the Upper Storeys of WTC1
Gordon Ross 30
An Invitation to Submit
The Editors invite article submissions from all researchers working at the forefront of investigations related to 9/11/2001 and its aftermath.
Prof. Steven E. Jones
Department of Physics and Astronomy
N-269 Eyring Science Center
Brigham Young University
Provo, Utah, USA 84602
Prof. Judy D. Wood
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Clemson, So. Carolina, USA 29634
ADVISORY EDITORIAL BOARD
Alex Floum, Marcus Ford, Derrick Grimmer, Richard McGinn, Kimberly Moore, Robert Moore, Diana Ralph, Kevin Ryan, Robert Stevens, Lon Waters and Paul Zarembka.
Manuscripts to be considered for publication should be sent to one of the Editors. All papers will be subjected to peer-review prior to online publication.
Preferably, manuscripts should be submitted electronically. Referee reports and correspondence should also be sent by e-mail if possible.
contribute to this article
contribute to this article
add comment to discussion
view discussion from this article