Go Back   Let's Roll Forums > The U.S. Government Conspiracy of 9/11 > The Pentagon - What really happened?
Connect with Facebook

Reply
 
Bookmark and Share Thread Tools
Old 3 May 2011 , 00:17 AM   #1
JackBauer24
Writer
 
JackBauer24's Avatar
 
Join Date: 8 Jan 2006
Posts: 404
Threads: 98
Thanked 226 Times in 87 Posts
JackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud of
9/11 Mastermind Dov Zakheim Captured

I'm pleased to announce that Dov Zakheim the true criminal mastermind behind the 9/11 false-flag terror attack has finally been captured.

Zakheim was grabbed just minutes ago by my own CTU Assault Squad led by me their leader we stormed into his deluxe luxury penthouse condo in Washington D.C. which he bought with his ill-gotten gains from all those billions of dollars he stole from the Pentagon when he was comptroller.

At the moment we are en route to Gitmo where I will personally be waterboarding Rabbi Zakheim until he confesses everything he did to make 9/11 happen. This is Bauer signing off for the time being.


Damn it! He escaped already! Freeze Rabbi!
I have just 24 seconds to capture Dov Zakheim!
He's running for sanctuary at the Israeli embassy!
Freeze Rabbi! You're under arrest for treason!
Don't you move! Time for you to face justice!

JACK BAUER - EXPERIENCE:

MILTARY:
US Army - Combat Applications Group
Delta Force Counter Terrorist Group
Special Forces Operations Training Course

CTU – Director of Field Operations, Los Angeles Domestic Unit
CTU – Former Special Agent in Charge, Los Angeles Domestic Unit
Los Angeles PD - Lieutenant, Special Weapons and Tactics Unit

EDUCATION:
Master of Science, Criminology and Law - University of California

CURRENT STATUS:
Working for CTU as Special Agent on a temporary basis.

ASSIGNMENT:
I am to infiltrate the Pentagon to retrieve all secret 9/11 videos.



The war games were essential there were airborne drones that were absolutely switched into the flight paths of planes that were in fact "hijacked" as part of the exercises. The "hijackers" were patsies with false trails and mysterious backgrounds carefully laid out (like breadcrumbs for clues to be followed after the event) over a period of two years prior to 9/11. That was the Able Danger part.

Mossad sent teams to follow the patsies and babysit them making sure they were where they were supposed to be. Very possible Mossad ops were on each of the planes to make sure the actual fake hijackings went off as planned. See Daniel Lewin on Flight 11 for details as to how this worked. Since he wasn't a kamikaze pilot it's logical he landed somewhere.

Once the plane switches were made in the FAA radar holes then Dov Zakheim's aerial remote-control technology was utilized from airborne AWACS planes that were part of the dozen war games going on that morning. From there it was very easy for the two drones to be sent into the Twin Towers. The airborne controllers were either part of the plot or they were utterly shocked they could no longer control the drone planes.

The actual passenger planes were landed at air bases with the real passengers quickly rounded up and taken to a remote secret location to be killed. Or they and the crews might have been gassed on board. The Mossad guys no doubt had gas masks in their carry-on bags to stay alive.

What really hit the Pentagon? What really crashed in Shanksville? Those are two unanswered questions. There might have been a patriotic faction trying to sabotage the plot but we won't know for sure until they come forward. Since they haven't come out publicly yet it's safe to assume they are still too afraid or they've been killed or they've been paid to keep quiet.

The missing puzzle pieces have now all been identified by internet investigators. But most people don't want to know the awful truth they can't handle it, they can't process the information because it goes against everything they've ever been taught about how their Government works.

They are happier believing the phony version. Only some people are capable of dealing with this information. It takes real courage and intelligence to analyze 9/11. The evidence is very compelling and obvious but for those who just can't handle it nothing will ever convince them.

http://letsrollforums.com/summary-9-...8.html?t=13378

http://letsrollforums.com/exposing-t...68.html?t=9868

http://letsrollforums.com/amazing-fl...4.html?t=16784

http://letsrollforums.com/smart-new-...0.html?t=14020

http://letsrollforums.com/final-miss...2.html?t=12492

http://letsrollforums.com/our-friend...0.html?t=13660

http://letsrollforums.com/dov-zakhei...5.html?t=12375

http://letsrollforums.com/9-11s-mast...6.html?t=12376

http://letsrollforums.com/america-hi...3.html?t=10163

http://letsrollforums.com/reagan-air...9.html?p=95589
__________________
If you didn't think I'd be back,
then you don't know Jack. Be
sure to watch my show or else.

Last edited by JackBauer24; 3 May 2011 at 00:53 AM.
JackBauer24 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JackBauer24 For This Useful Post:
Old 3 May 2011 , 02:42 AM   #2
JackBauer24
Writer
 
JackBauer24's Avatar
 
Join Date: 8 Jan 2006
Posts: 404
Threads: 98
Thanked 226 Times in 87 Posts
JackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud of
Re: 9/11 Mastermind Dov Zakheim Captured

During the 90 minute attack sequence the rogue network running 9/11:

"were most likely ensuring that the modules of "compartmentalized knowledge" were being executed properly and that the domino effect of these was occurring within specified control limits. Once all of the 911 events had occurred, at least up until the Pentagon Strike had occurred, then a final overall "credibility / damage assessment" was conducted between these criminal parties. As each event of 911 occurred, an initial "field credibility / damage assessment" (FCDA) was conducted:

North Tower Hit = Pass or Fail? FCDA = Pass

South Tower Hit = Pass or Fail? FCDA Pass

Pentagon Hit = Pass or Fail? FCDA = Fail = structural failure not complete = initiate secondary scenario = subsequent structural failure completed = amend FCDA = pass = revert to main scenario = discard secondary scenario.

Flight 93 = FCDA Fail = WTC-7 Target Acquisition / Logistical Ops Failure = Alternate Shanksville Plan Inititiate = Pass or Fail? Secondary FCDA =Pass

Comprehensive Credibility / Damage Assessment (CCDA) – Operation Summary = Pass or Fail = Pass = Operation Execution Terminated. Main scenario confidence is high.

"If at any point of the events the operation went wrong, or it failed to meet the criteria set up within the FCDA, then the war games would have been terminated, all ops would have stood down, and the whole thing would have been blamed on some combination of human error, technical problems, software corruption. There are some indications they even had a scenario to blame Al-Queda for hacking into military computer systems, accessing command and control operations, including Continuity Of Government (COG).

If this scenario had been maintained to the end, we would have seen Al-Queda being blamed for causing the war games to malfunction, causing pilots to shoot down commercial aircraft, and causing us to fly military craft / assets into the WTC and Pentagon. This scenario is not that farfetched, indeed, in some ways it is not as far fetched as the final main scenario they ended up going with, which became the "Official Story." This alternate scenario was apparently being initially implemented early on 911, but was discarded when the CCDA was completed as noted previously."

General Myers, General Eberhart, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Mossad agents, ISI agents, Cheney at top of command and control. Every single airborn object that struck buildings, all of the bombs detonated (including any at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania - every part of the primary 911 attacks - could in fact be conducted by one single person with a laptop computer - a satcom uplink - and the process access codes provided.

Now ask yourself - Could Cheney, Myers, Rummy, Eberhart, Wolfowitz, Feith...have the ability to provide such access codes and resources?

The Navy Intell. people were conducting the wargames along with NEADS, FAA, NORAD, etc. Cheney was at the top of the chain of command, with the NAvy Intell. in the middle. It is even possible that the person who conducted the attacks was located right there in the wedge of the Pentagon that was struck and was eliminated.

Another aspect to consider is that a preconfigured computer program using macros and other various functions, again via Satcom uplink, and triggered at the right time, could also have also carried out the 911 attacks by itself. Understand that every remote controlled asset that was airborn, and every bomb, every transponder, every manuever, could be carried out by such a computer program preset to activate itself in the middle of the wargames.

It would over-ride any attempts to stop it..drones that were being operated by ground stations, and via aircraft such as C-130, AWACS, suddenly found their links cut and their remote drones out of their control. The technology exists for this scenerio...that is for certain.

Once such a program was activated...everything becomes automated and is perfectly timed and executed. Bombs and demolition charges go off by satellite transmission, planes take off and fly all around the country before hitting their programmed targets, drones which are flying all around, showing up on ATC / FAA / NORAD screens as radar blips, transponders on drones identifying themselves as certain flights, i.e. flight 93, 175, 77, 11, etc. Transponders turning themselves off and on again, evil prerecorded "hijackers" voices being transmitted.

The ATC/FAA/NORAD controllers confused by the real and artificial radar blips and transponders...and compounded by the fact that they knew there was a wargame in progress...which one is real, which one is not? Is there a real hijacking, or is is part of the drill? Do we order fighter pilots to go after a drone simulating a commercial aircraft, or do we order fighter pilots to intercept a real hijacked plane, and if so, which blip is the real plane, and which are the simulated ones?

The responding fighter pilots asking the same questions. It would seem to these people as the biggest clusterfark ever...but to the perpetrators it appeared as a perfectly organized execution...they were probably stroking themselves vigorously as it played out.

:



09-11-01 - NEADS SECTOR CONTROL:

Technician: "Sir, our Satcom links are dropping...P-11 does not respond.

Duty Officer: Raise them!

Technician: "I can't!"

Duty Officer: "Initiate the over-ride, the over-ride!"

Technician: "It's too late Sir!"

Flight 11 hits (i.e. P11 hits North Tower)

Duty Officer: "Oh sweet Jesus, get Hardhat (General Eberhardt) on the secure line and..."

Technician: "Sir, P-175 is launching and fails to respond."

Duty Officer: "Echo Base to Vigilant Leader...Echo Base to Vigilant...patch me through to Hardhat...we have a situation here, over."

Vigilant Leader: "Is that Lardass?"

Duty Officer: "What?! Do you know who this is?"

Vigilant Leader: "No..who is this is...?"

Duty Officer: "This is Captain Stadanko!"

Technician: "Sir, the over-ride will not engage."

Vigilant Leader: "Lardass, Lardass!!"

Duty Officer: "What is your name and rank Mister!"

Vigilant Leader: "Bye Bye Lardass..."

Technician: "Sir, P-175 inbound, impact to simulated target in T-minus 3 minutes."

Duty Officer: "Its not a simulated target Dammit! Its a real building with real people inside...I mean...yes its a simulated target but we are not supposed to really hit it! Ok..now...patch me into the FAA, Boston Central, all nodes...got it?"

Technician: "Yes Sir. Sir, Pentagon Navy Intell. monitor advises all assets have been compromised...they are tracking the source of the interference... stating electronic hijacking from unauthorized source."

Duty Officer: "Hello Mcready? Yeah...what the hell!?! The over-rides are dead in the water. Patch in to Navy Intell. monitor, they have the scoop, over."

Techician: "Sir, P-175 altering course, new heading zero mark 2-10, being executed now.."

Duty Officer: "Eskins, listen...get some hardware in the air, whatever you can get, we have to destroy them ship to ship.."

Technician: Sir, my god!!"

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...tc2_crash2.jpg

Because of what the Pentagon calls, “bizarre coincidence,” on Sept. 11, 2001 NORAD was three days into Operation Vigilant Guardian. Held twice a year to tweak NORAD’s continent-spanning surveillance and interception web, North American air defenses that morning were aggressively alert and battle staffed, with key officers needed to make immediate decisions stationed in the "battle cabs" of each interlinked US Air Force command post.

The same officers were also perfectly placed to issue orders blocking US air defenses. According to the FSC and other sources, some air bases and military pilots pleading for orders to intercept the developing attacks were told to stand down.

We also know that despite the end of the Cold War and close ties with America’s new Russian ally, Operation Vigilant Guardian directed the attention of US air defenders to a simulated Soviet threat coming in over the North Pole.

Richard Ben-Veniste, one of 10 members of the 911 commissions, earlier pledged to pursue this suspiciously timed air defense exercise, “very, very diligently,"

And the former Watergate prosecutor did so, asking Gen. Arnold under oath on May 23, 2003:

“Sir, given the awareness of the terrorists’ use of planes as weapons, how was it that NORAD was still focusing outward in protecting the United States against attacks from the Soviet Union or elsewhere and was not better prepared to defend against the hijackings scenarios of a commercial jet, laden with fuel, used as a weapon to target citizens of the United States?” [911 Commission Testimonies: Remarks of NORAD Personnel May 23, 2003]

Maj. Gen. Arnold admitted that “back to 1998” the Pentagon’s top brass were calling Osama bin Laden “the most dangerous man in the world. And our focus, with the demise of the Soviet Union Warsaw Pact, was that we felt like the greatest threat to the United States would come from a terrorist…or rogue nation.”

As Major Arias told the News Herald in June 2001, “The Cold War is over.” So who gave the orders for focusing US air defenses on the North Pole on Sept. 11?

5. Isn’t it true that America’s air defenses looking out for external threats were not expecting an attack from within the continental USA?
" It was initially pretty confusing," Gen. Myers later told the military press. "You hate to admit it, but we hadn't thought about this."

As John Arquilla, a Special Operations expert at the Naval Postgraduate School put it, “The idea of such an attack was well known. It had been wargamed as a possibility in exercises before Sept. 11, 2001.”

Just 11 months before - between October 24 and 26, 2000 - NORAD had trained “for a passenger plane crashing into the Pentagon". [Mirror Nov13/03; Associated Press Aug22/02; Monterey Herald July18/02]

The FSC investigation also found that NORAD exercise Amalgam Virgo One, which took place in June 2001, featured a picture of Bin Laden on its cover.

Col. Alan Scott told the commission that Operation Amalgam Virgo simulated a cruise missile “launched off a rogue freighter in the Gulf of Mexico.” But the 911 investigators believed that Amalgam ’02 - which was in the planning stages prior to September 11th - 2001, involved a “hijacking scenario.”

In another “bizarre coincidence”, even as the doomed Flight 77 took off from Dulles International on the morning of Sept. 11, the super-secret National Reconnaissance Office operating all U.S. spy satellites was conducting a simulated emergency drill in which a plane from Dulles International crashed into their building.

FAA Boston Center contacts NEADS, saying, “We need someone to scramble some F-16s or something up there, help us out.”

“Is this real world or an exercise?” asked the military liaison officer?

“No, this is not an exercise,” responded the FAA official. “Not a test.”
__________________
If you didn't think I'd be back,
then you don't know Jack. Be
sure to watch my show or else.
JackBauer24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 2011 , 02:51 AM   #3
JackBauer24
Writer
 
JackBauer24's Avatar
 
Join Date: 8 Jan 2006
Posts: 404
Threads: 98
Thanked 226 Times in 87 Posts
JackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud of
Re: 9/11 Mastermind Dov Zakheim Captured

WAR GAMES ON SEPTEMBER 11TH

On the very morning of 9/11/01, five war games and terror drills were being conducted by several U.S. defense agencies, including one "live fly" exercise using REAL planes. Then-Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Myers, admitted to 4 of the war games in congressional testimony.

NORAD ran drills for years of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, "numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft", and at least some of the drills used REAL AIRCRAFT simulating terrorist attacks crashing jets into buildings, including the twin towers.

NORAD and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack exercise which involved government-operated aircraft POSING AS HIJACKED AIRLINERS.

On September 11th, the government also happened to be running a simulation of a plane crashing into a building. And false radar blips were inserted onto air traffic controllers' screens as part of the war game exercises.

Moreover, there are indications that some of the major war games previously scheduled for October 2001 were MOVED UP to September 11th by persons unknown.

Interestingly, Vice President Cheney was apparently in charge of ALL of the war games and coordinated the government's "response" to the attacks. And while the government has consistently stated that it did not know where the aircraft were before they struck, Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta's testimony before the 9/11 Commission shows that Cheney monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon. How could one of the most heavily-defended buildings in the world have been successfully attacked, when the Vice President of the United States, in charge of counter-terrorism on 9/11, watched it approach from many miles away?

Additionally, the "hijacked planes" flew over numerous military bases on 9/11 before crashing. In fact a war game proposal created before 9/11 revolving around Bin Laden and including "live-fly exercises" involving real planes, later confirmed by the official Department of Defense website.

Which scenario is more likely from a strictly logistical perspective:

(1) An outsider sitting in a cave defeating the air defense system of the sole military superpower; or

(2) Someone like Cheney -- who on 9/11 apparently had full control over all defense, war game and counter-terrorism powers -- rigging and gaming the system?

Remember that for the attacks to have succeeded, it was necessary that actions be taken in the middle of the war games and the actual attacks which would thwart the normal military response. For example, Cheney watched flight 77 approach the Pentagon from many miles out, but instructed the military to do nothing (as shown in the testimony of the Secretary of Transportation). Could Bin Laden have done that?

Fighter jets were also sent far off-course over the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of the attacks (testimony of Senator Mark Dayton), so as to neutralize their ability to intercept the hijacked airliners. Could Osama and his sent-from-the-cave band of followers have exercised this degree of control over the military? Obviously not.

And the Secret Service, which is highly trained to whisk the president away from danger and to a secure location in the event of a threat, breached all standard procedures and allowed President Bush to remain at a highly-publicized location for 25 minutes after it was known that the nation was under attack. Yeah that makes a lot of sense. But only if the SS knew in advance that the "terror attacks" weren't real.

And air traffic controllers claim they were still tracking what they thought were hijacked planes long after all 4 of the real planes had crashed. This implies that false radar blips remained on their screens after all 4 planes went down, long after the military claims they purged the phantom war-game-related radar signals. Could Bin Laden have interfered with the full purging of false radar blips inserted as part of the war games? In other words, could Bin Laden have overridden the purging process so that some false blips remained and confused air traffic controllers? The answer is clear. No Osama could not have done that. Only Sinister Prick could do it.

It is more likely that Cheney and/or other high-level U.S. government and military officials pulled the 9/11 trigger than that Bin Laden did it. At the very least, they took affirmative steps to guarantee that the hijackers' attacks succeeded. In other words they Let It Happen On Purpose. And to make sure the attacks succeeded they Helped It Happen On Purpose.

A former air force colonel and director of the Star Wars program stated "If our government had merely done nothing, and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the twin towers would still be standing, and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive. That is treason." -- from 911Proof.com also see http://www.tyrannyalert.com/video.htm


Ample evidence gathered from mainstream news sources and compiled by Thompson in the new timeline entries indicates that the wargames served to confuse and stymie air defense response to the simultaneous crash-bombings. Although Thompson avoids conclusions and merely presents a long series of verifiable facts, confusion appears to have been the exact result intended by at least some of the wargame planners. This was already a central thesis of Mike Rupperts's 2004 book Crossing the Rubicon (click here for a summary), but Thompson's timeline update adds new pieces to the puzzle.

Thompson cites multiple reports (see 8:30 am) indicating that Global Guardian is normally held in October, and that the run-through in 2001 was in fact originally scheduled for late October and then re-scheduled for early September at some point after March 2001. Who made that scheduling decision? That may be the most crucial question of all in determining the criminal culpability for 9/11 among US officials.

In the period after March 2001, military planners discussed various possible exercises that would have involved hijacking simulations, including live-fly (FTX) exercises using real planes with actors playing passengers. It is known that the idea of rehearsing air defense against a hijacked plane aimed at the Pentagon was at least temporarily considered in April 2001 and postponed. Meanwhile, the planners of Amalgam Virgo II were discussing a simulation for simultaneous hijackings of passenger planes out of Utah and Vancouver, with military people and FBI agents acting in the roles of passengers and hijackers. As of spring 2001, Amalgam Virgo II was scheduled for July 2002.

The idea was hardly new. A mass casualty (MASCAL) exercise of the Pentagon's command and emergency services, using the scenario of a plane hitting the building, had already been conducted by hundreds of personnel at the Pentagon in October 2000. Two clinics at the Pentagon rehearsed the same script in May 2001.

All this activity, combined with the many past precedents of kamikaze attack attempts using civilian planes, completely demolish the lie frequently propagated by Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld that "no one could have imagined" simultaneous hijackings or planes used as weapons against buildings. (See "Bush, Rice and the Genoa Warning")

But a more ominous question obviously presents itself: Were any of these hijacking scenarios under discussion that spring finally incorporated into the scripts for the wargames of September 2001?

The story of Global Guardian and the breakfast activities of its director Mies has long been in the public domain, published on military news sites and the Omaha press among other venues. But until recently the vast-but-scattershot investigations of the last four years by the hundreds of 9/11 researchers working cooperatively via the Internet had missed these snippets.

As the timeline relates, Mies was having breakfast on the morning of 9/11 with a group of business leaders, as part of a charity event hosted by Offutt Air Force Base and sponsored by Warren Buffett, the second-richest man in the United States. We have no way of knowing what communications Mies was receiving about the crisis that began at 8:15, but soon after 8:46 am, the entire party would have learned that a plane had crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Mies remained with the civilians until after they all heard that the second WTC Tower had also been hit. (The second crash occurred at 9:03 am.) Based on the new timeline entries, it is apparently only then that Mies went to his command post, and that Global Guardian and related wargames were suspended.

Mies thus joins the growing list of men in key positions at the top of the US military chain of command who managed to absent themselves from any decision-making capacity during the opening hour of the 9/11 crash-bombings. That list includes:

George W. Bush, who asked his staff chief Andrew Card for no clarification on the whispered message that "America is under attack" (9:05), but instead remained seated, listening to children read in a classroom, until around 9:16; and whose large White House entourage remained in the Florida school until 9:34.

Gen. Richard Myers, the acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who says he heard about the first crash, thought it was an accident, went into a Senate meeting, and only became aware of the second crash just a few minutes before the Pentagon was hit at 9:37.

Donald Rumsfeld, who was sought for an hour by the Pentagon command center and first appeared there at around 10:30 am, according to The 9/11 Commission Report.

Gen. Montague Winfield, head of the National Military Command Center at the Pentagon, who on the evening of Sept. 10th arranged to be replaced on his scheduled shift the next morning for the two hours starting at 8:30 am by his rookie deputy, Capt.Charles Leidig (since promoted to admiral).

(See "AWOL Chain of Command")

Is all of this attributable to nonchalance? At what point are we allowed to discern a pattern in the behavior of the men who topped the military chain of command and who were responsible for responding to the unfolding events?

Rumsfeld's case is particularly flagrant, given that he had signed off on a June 1, 2001 Pentagon order that for the first time inserted the Secretary of Defense into the chain of response for issuing military intercept orders for errant planes. His story is that he reacted to news of the first and second WTC crashes by continuing his routine morning briefings, and that after the Pentagon was hit (at 9:37 or 9:41 am, depending on which official timeline one prefers), he decided to assist in rescue efforts instead of taking his place at the command center.

The official story of 9/11 holds that four passenger planes were diverted and that none of them were intercepted for reconnaissance and response, which constitutes a massive and unprecedented failure of standard operating procedures. The story of how and why that happened has changed repeatedly since 9/11, and no official has ever been held accountable for the failures. On the contrary, many of the key figures involved received promotions, among them Myers, who was confirmed in that position soon after 9/11, and Gen. Ralph Eberhart, the NORAD director who was appointed to head the new Northern Command (since retired).

During the last four years we have seen a plethora of contradicting timelines and testimonies presented by NORAD, the US Air Force (in its official history Air War Over America), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), press reports citing official sources, and, finally, The 9/11 Commission Report. Each of these versions of what happened on 9/11 was upheld in its turn for months or years without revision. The contradictions mean that at least some of the responsible officials must have been promoting falsehoods, but again, no move has been made to hold anyone accountable for that.

Already in the first year after 9/11, when next to nothing was known about the exercises, researchers skeptical of the official story developed the hypothesis that wargames could have been used as the device to subvert standard operating procedures and allow the attacks to proceed unmolested. A wargame pretext can allow false-flag attacks to be rehearsed or prepared without arousing suspicion; and divert resources or block communication lines on Day X.

After the fact, the idea that the wargames were subverted by Arab hijackers with inside information (or a lot of luck!) might serve as a military-fiasco story (read: piece of wishful thinking) that engenders embarrassment and silence among that vast majority of US military people who were not involved in any conscious wrong-doing or facilitation of the 9/11 events.

Hard evidence for the hypothesis first began surfacing in August 2002, when it was revealed that the CIA had scheduled an evacuation drill at the National Reconnaissance Office on the morning of Sept. 11, based on the script of an "errant plane" hitting the NRO headquarters. The drill was cancelled when the real-world events began, and most of the NRO staff, who control the military-intelligence establishment's surveillance satellites, were sent home. One man who helped plan the drill, John Fulton, actually put it on his resume as an example of his prescience.

The Kean Commmission hearings occasionally touched upon past exercises (also compiled, to far more devastating effect, in Thompson's new timeline), but entirely avoided the issue of the wargames on Sept. 11 itself. These were finally mentioned in a single note to The 9/11 Commission Report (Chapter 1, Note 116). This acknowledged only a "cold war"-style exercise, and was based entirely on a brief quote from Eberhart. He claimed that the exercises enhanced air defense response, an incredible statement given the failures to intercept. While quoting Eberhart that "it took about 30 seconds" to make the adjustment from the wargames to the ongoing real-world situation, the note significantly avoids specifying the time when the wargames were suspended.

The known NORAD wargames of 9/11, which were apparently incorporated into the larger framework of Global Guardian, include Northern Guardian, Vigilant Guardian and Vigilant Warrior. The most innocent-seeming of these, Northern Guardian was announced in advance and dispatched air force assets to the Arctic Circle in response to the Russian maneuvers also scheduled for that day. (The NORAD press release of 9/9/01 is still online.)

However, Vigilant Guardian appears to have scripted simulated attacks within the continental United States. NORAD personnel in Rome, New York who received first reports of hijackings within NORAD'S Northeastern sector, including Col. Robert K. Marr and Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins, are reported to have asked if this was "real world or exercise." This implies that the scenarios for the wargames on September 11 were strikingly similar to the actual attacks that unfolded that morning--as was the supposedly unrelated CIA/NRO exercise.

How much strain can a "coincidence hypothesis" sustain before it becomes untenable?

The use of "injects" (phantom blips projected onto radar screens electronically) is a technique employed to test the defending side in air defense exercises (Toronto Star, 12/09/01, see 9:00 am). The US military has over the decades developed many counter-command and counter-control techniques for jamming and confusing enemy radar installations, as well as stealth technologies. Did the wargames also use such techniques against the FAA, as a test of its response to potential hijackings? If such an element was scripted into the wargames, military units likely would have had child's play in causing confusion among unsuspecting air traffic controllers.
__________________
If you didn't think I'd be back,
then you don't know Jack. Be
sure to watch my show or else.
JackBauer24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 2011 , 02:55 AM   #4
JackBauer24
Writer
 
JackBauer24's Avatar
 
Join Date: 8 Jan 2006
Posts: 404
Threads: 98
Thanked 226 Times in 87 Posts
JackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud of
Re: 9/11 Mastermind Dov Zakheim Captured

The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training

Nila Sagadevan | February 21 2006

Nila Sagadevan is an aeronautical engineer and a qualified pilot of heavy aircraft.

There are some who maintain that the mythical 9/11 hijackers, although proven to be too incompetent to fly a little Cessna 172, had acquired the impressive skills that enabled them to fly airliners by training in flight simulators.

What follows is an attempt to bury this myth once and for all, because I’ve heard this ludicrous explanation bandied about, ad nauseam, on the Internet and the TV networks—invariably by people who know nothing substantive about flight simulators, flying, or even airplanes.

A common misconception non-pilots have about simulators is how “easy” it is to operate them. They are indeed relatively easy to operate if the objective is to make a few lazy turns and frolic about in the “open sky”. But if the intent is to execute any kind of a maneuver with even the least bit of precision, the task immediately becomes quite daunting. And if the aim is to navigate to a specific geographic location hundreds of miles away while flying at over 500 MPH, 30,000 feet above the ground the challenges become virtually impossible for an untrained pilot.

And this, precisely, is what the four hijacker pilots who could not fly a Cessna around an airport are alleged to have accomplished in multi-ton, high-speed commercial jets on 9/11.

For a person not conversant with the practical complexities of pilotage, a modern flight simulator could present a terribly confusing and disorienting experience. These complex training devices are not even remotely similar to the video games one sees in amusement arcades, or even the software versions available for home computers.

In order to operate a modern flight simulator with any level of skill, one has to not only be a decent pilot to begin with, but also a skilled instrument-rated one to boot — and be thoroughly familiar with the actual aircraft type the simulator represents, since the cockpit layouts vary between aircraft.

The only flight domains where an arcade/PC-type game would even begin to approach the degree of visual realism of a modern professional flight simulator would be during the take-off and landing phases. During these phases, of course, one clearly sees the bright runway lights stretched out ahead, and even peripherally sees images of buildings, etc. moving past. Take-offs—even landings, to a certain degree—are relatively “easy”, because the pilot has visual reference cues that exist “outside” the cockpit.

But once you’ve rotated, climbed out, and reached cruising altitude in a simulator (or real airplane), and find yourself en route to some distant destination (using sophisticated electronic navigation techniques), the situation changes drastically: the pilot loses virtually all external visual reference cues. S/he is left entirely at the mercy of an array of complex flight and navigation instruments to provide situational cues (altitude, heading, speed, attitude, etc.)

In the case of a Boeing 757 or 767, the pilot would be faced with an EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) panel comprised of six large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of assorted “hard” instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system and flight data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation, position and progress, not only in horizontal and vertical dimensions, but also with regard to time and speed as well. When flying “blind”, I.e., with no ground reference cues, it takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret, and then apply, this data intelligently. If one cannot translate this information quickly, precisely and accurately (and it takes an instrument-rated pilot to do so), one would have ZERO SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot wouldn’t have a clue where s/he was in relation to the earth. Flight under such conditions is referred to as “IFR”, or Instrument Flight Rules.

And IFR Rule #1: Never take your eyes off your instruments, because that’s all you have!

The corollary to Rule #1: If you can’t read the instruments in a quick, smooth, disciplined, scan, you’re as good as dead. Accident records from around the world are replete with reports of any number of good pilots — I.e., professional instrument-rated pilots — who ‘bought the farm’ because they screwed up while flying in IFR conditions.

Let me place this in the context of the 9/11 hijacker-pilots. These men were repeatedly deemed incompetent to solo a simple Cessna-172 — an elementary exercise that involves flying this little trainer once around the patch on a sunny day. A student’s first solo flight involves a simple circuit: take-off, followed by four gentle left turns ending with a landing back on the runway. This is as basic as flying can possibly get.

Not one of the hijackers was deemed fit to perform this most elementary exercise by himself.

In fact, here’s what their flight instructors had to say about the aptitude of these budding aviators:

Mohammed Atta: "His attention span was zero."

Khalid Al-Mihdhar: "We didn't kick him out, but he didn't live up to our standards."

Marwan Al-Shehhi: “He was dropped because of his limited English and incompetence at the controls.”

Salem Al-Hazmi: "We advised him to quit after two lessons.”

Hani Hanjour: "His English was horrible, and his mechanical skills were even worse. It was like he had hardly even ever driven a car. I’m still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon. He could not fly at all.”

Now let’s take a look at American Airlines Flight 77. Passenger/hijacker Hani Hanjour rises from his seat midway through the flight, viciously fights his way into the cockpit with his cohorts, overpowers Captain Charles F. Burlingame and First Officer David Charlebois, and somehow manages to toss them out of the cockpit (for starters, very difficult to achieve in a cramped environment without inadvertently impacting the yoke and thereby disengaging the autopilot). One would correctly presume that this would present considerable difficulties to a little guy with a box cutter—Burlingame was a tough, burly, ex-Vietnam F4 fighter jock who had flown over 100 combat missions. Every pilot who knows him says that rather than politely hand over the controls, Burlingame would have instantly rolled the plane on its back so that Hanjour would have broken his neck when he hit the floor. But let’s ignore this almost natural reaction expected of a fighter pilot and proceed with this charade.

Nonetheless, imagine that Hanjour overpowers the flight deck crew, removes them from the cockpit and takes his position in the captain’s seat. Although weather reports state this was not the case, let’s say Hanjour was lucky enough to experience a perfect CAVU day (Ceiling And Visibility Unlimited). If Hanjour looked straight ahead through the windshield, or off to his left at the ground, at best he would see, 35,000 feet -- 7 miles -- below him, a murky brownish-grey-green landscape, virtually devoid of surface detail, while the aircraft he was now piloting was moving along, almost imperceptibly and in eerie silence, at around 500 MPH (about 750 feet every second).

In a real-world scenario (and given the reported weather conditions that day), he would likely have seen clouds below him completely obscuring the ground he was traversing. With this kind of “situational non-awareness”, Hanjour might as well have been flying over Argentina, Russia, or Japan—he wouldn’t have had a clue as to where, precisely, he was.

After a few seconds (at 750 ft/sec), Hanjour would figure out there’s little point in looking outside—there’s nothing there to give him any real visual cues. For a man who had previously wrestled with little Cessnas, following freeways and railroad tracks (and always in the comforting presence of an instructor), this would have been a strange, eerily unsettling environment indeed.

Seeing nothing outside, Mr. Hanjour would be forced to divert his attention to his instrument panel, where he’d be faced with a bewildering array of instruments. He would then have to very quickly interpret his heading, ground track, altitude, and airspeed information on the displays before he could even figure out where in the world he was, much less where the Pentagon was located in relation to his position!

After all, before he can crash into a target, he has to first find the target.

It is very difficult to explain this scenario, of an utter lack of ground reference, to non-pilots; but let it suffice to say that for these incompetent hijacker non-pilots to even consider grappling with such a daunting task would have been utterly overwhelming. They wouldn’t have known where to begin.

But, for the sake of discussion let’s stretch things beyond all plausibility and say that Hanjour—whose flight instructor claimed “couldn’t fly at all”—somehow managed to figure out their exact position on the American landscape in relation to their intended target as they traversed the earth at a speed five times faster than they had ever flown by themselves before.

Once he had determined exactly where he was, he would need to figure out where the Pentagon was located in relation to his rapidly-changing position. He would then need to plot a course to his target (one he cannot see with his eyes—remember, our ace is flying solely on instruments).

In order to perform this bit of electronic navigation, he would have to be very familiar with IFR procedures. None of these chaps even knew what a navigational chart looked like, much less how to how to plug information into flight management computers (FMC) and engage LNAV (lateral navigation automated mode). If one is to believe the official story, all of this was supposedly accomplished by raw student pilots while flying blind at 500 MPH over unfamiliar (and practically invisible) terrain, using complex methodologies and employing sophisticated instruments.

To get around this little problem, the official storyline suggests these men manually flew their aircraft to their respective targets (NB: This still wouldn’t relieve them of the burden of navigation). But let’s assume Hanjour disengaged the autopilot and auto-throttle and hand-flew the aircraft to its intended—and invisible—target on instruments alone until such time as he could get a visual fix. This would have necessitated him to fly back across West Virginia and Virginia to Washington DC. (This portion of Flight 77’s flight path cannot be corroborated by any radar evidence that exists, because the aircraft is said to have suddenly disappeared from radar screens over Ohio, but let’s not mull over that little point.)

According to FAA radar controllers, “Flight 77” then suddenly pops up over Washington DC and executes an incredibly precise diving turn at a rate of 360 degrees/minute while descending at 3,500 ft/min, at the end of which “Hanjour” allegedly levels out at ground level. Oh, I almost forgot: He also had the presence of mind to turn off the transponder in the middle of this incredibly difficult maneuver (one of his instructors later commented the hapless fellow couldn’t have spelt the word if his life depended on it).

The maneuver was in fact so precisely executed that the air traffic controllers at Dulles refused to believe the blip on their screen was a commercial airliner. Danielle O’Brian, one of the air traffic controllers at Dulles who reported seeing the aircraft at 9:25 said, “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane.”

And then, all of a sudden we have magic. Voila! Hanjour finds the Pentagon sitting squarely in his sights right before him.

But even that wasn’t good enough for this fanatic Muslim kamikaze pilot. You see, he found that his “missile” was heading towards one of the most densely populated wings of the Pentagon—and one occupied by top military brass, including the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld. Presumably in order to save these men’s lives, he then executes a sweeping 270-degree turn and approaches the building from the opposite direction and aligns himself with the only wing of the Pentagon that was virtually uninhabited due to extensive renovations that were underway (there were some 120 civilians construction workers in that wing who were killed; their work included blast-proofing the outside wall of that wing).

I shan’t get into the aerodynamic impossibility of flying a large commercial jetliner 20 feet above the ground at over 400 MPH. A discussion on ground effect energy, tip vortex compression, downwash sheet reaction, wake turbulence, and jetblast effects are beyond the scope of this article (the 100,000-lb jetblast alone would have blown whole semi-trucks off the roads.)

Let it suffice to say that it is physically impossible to fly a 200,000-lb airliner 20 feet above the ground at 400 MPH.

The author, a pilot and aeronautical engineer, challenges any pilot in the world to do so in any large high-speed aircraft that has a relatively low wing-loading (such as a commercial jet). I.e., to fly the craft at 400 MPH, 20 feet above ground in a flat trajectory over a distance of one mile.

Why the stipulation of 20 feet and a mile? There were several street light poles located up to a mile away from the Pentagon that were snapped-off by the incoming aircraft; this suggests a low, flat trajectory during the final pre-impact approach phase. Further, it is known that the craft impacted the Pentagon’s ground floor. For purposes of reference: If a 757 were placed on the ground on its engine nacelles (I.e., gear retracted as in flight profile), its nose would be almost 20 above the ground! Ergo, for the aircraft to impact the ground floor of the Pentagon, Hanjour would have needed to have flown in with the engines buried 10-feet deep in the Pentagon lawn. Some pilot.

At any rate, why is such ultra-low-level flight aerodynamically impossible? Because the reactive force of the hugely powerful downwash sheet, coupled with the compressibility effects of the tip vortices, simply will not allow the aircraft to get any lower to the ground than approximately one half the distance of its wingspan—until speed is drastically reduced, which, of course, is what happens during normal landings.

In other words, if this were a Boeing 757 as reported, the plane could not have been flown below about 60 feet above ground at 400 MPH. (Such a maneuver is entirely within the performance envelope of aircraft with high wing-loadings, such as ground-attack fighters, the B1-B bomber, and Cruise missiles—and the Global Hawk.)

The very same navigational challenges mentioned above would have faced the pilots who flew the two 767s into the Twin Towers, in that they, too, would have had to have first found their targets. Again, these chaps, too, miraculously found themselves spot on course. And again, their “final approach” maneuvers at over 500 MPH are simply far too incredible to have been executed by pilots who could not solo basic training aircraft.

Conclusion
The writers of the official storyline expect us to believe, that once the flight deck crews had been overpowered, and the hijackers “took control” of the various aircraft, their intended targets suddenly popped up in their windshields as they would have in some arcade game, and all that these fellows would have had to do was simply aim their airplanes at the buildings and fly into them. Most people who have been exposed only to the official storyline have never been on the flight deck of an airliner at altitude and looked at the outside world; if they had, they’d realize the absurdity of this kind of reasoning.

In reality, a clueless non-pilot would encounter almost insurmountable difficulties in attempting to navigate and fly a 200,000-lb airliner into a building located on the ground, 7 miles below and hundreds of miles away and out of sight, and in an unknown direction, while flying at over 500 MPH — and all this under extremely stressful circumstances.
__________________
If you didn't think I'd be back,
then you don't know Jack. Be
sure to watch my show or else.
JackBauer24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 2011 , 07:00 AM   #5
JackBauer24
Writer
 
JackBauer24's Avatar
 
Join Date: 8 Jan 2006
Posts: 404
Threads: 98
Thanked 226 Times in 87 Posts
JackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud ofJackBauer24 has much to be proud of
Re: 9/11 Mastermind Dov Zakheim Captured

Dov Zakheim was chief executive officer of System Planning Corporation’s International Division, that is, yes it’s all coming back now, till President George W. Bush made him undersecretary of defense and comptroller of the Pentagon. In fact, he rose like a star over the Pentagon’s labyrinth of marble hallways, boardrooms, inner and innermost offices.


And if memory serves, before that, from 1985 to 1987, he was under secretary of defense for planning and resources, and held various senior Pentagon posts in the Reagan madhouse. Before that with the Congressional Budget Office. Then on to Corporate VP of Systems Planning Corporation, a high-tech research, analysis, and manufacturing firm, then Chief Executive Officer and President of SPC International, Inc. In 1998, Zakheim, expert in ballistic missiles, worked with the Rumsfeld Commission. And more, yes, he is a long-time Bush crony, policy advisor to Governor Bush in the 2000 campaign theft. Yes, it all comes back.


In fact, in addition to his System Planning Corporation stewardship, he co-authored the now infamous article, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, forces and Resources for a New Century,” published, yes, by The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) in September 2000, exactly a year before 9/11. In his piece, he gave us that now infamous page 51 on whichhe wrote that “the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing even, like a new Pearl Harbor.” Merde.


I’m aware this is old history but it’s flashing back, saying look at me, don’t forget. SPC produced remote control airborne vehicle technologies, and Zakheim had the Pentagon means to pay for them. Also, System Planning Corporation markets the technology to take over the controls of an airborne vehicle already in flight. For example the Flight Termination System technology could literally hijack the hijackers and land the plane safely wherever it wanted.


The Flight Termination System can be used with the CTS technology that can actually control up to eight vehicles at the same time. Just go to SPC’s site..It’s all there, better than United Flight 93 or Oliver Stone’s sleepy World Trade Center. It all comes back now: the technology developed in the late ‘70s after the first terror hijackings that then got into the wrong hands. And Zakheim’s proximity to what Stephen St. John calls the Command Control Communications Network in DC interwoven with a cousin network of Zionic if not bionic neo-cons.


System Planning Corporation designs, manufactures and distributes highly sophisticated technology that enables an operator to fly by remote control as many as eight different airborne vehicles at the same time from one position either on the ground or airborne. For those looking for an extraordinarily interesting hobby, please see photos and specs of this hardware at www.sysplan.com/Radar/CTS (Just be sure your mom doesn't catch you causing havoc with the airlines.)

Also, System Planning Corporation markets the technology to take over the controls of an airborne vehicle already in flight. For example, the Flight Termination System technology could hijack hijackers and bring the plane down safely. The Flight Termination System can be used in conjunction with the CTS technology that can control up to 8 airborne vehicles simultaneously. see www.sysplan.com/Radar/FTS Unfortunately, these systems as of yet are not able to prevent lyrics such as "When you get caught between the moon and New York City"!

The possibility of nefarious use of these brilliant technologies developed and deployed by Systems Planning Corporation certainly deserves careful consideration in any full and impartial investigation of what actually took place on 9/11.

In the context of 9/11 it also needs to be pointed out that Rabbi Dov Zakheim was Chief Executive Officer of System Planning Corporation's International Division until President George W. Bush appointed him Undersecretary of Defense and Comptroller of the Pentagon.


Not long before Rabbi Zakheim rose to power over the Pentagon's labyrinthine, bottomless accounts, he co-authored an article entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century" which was published by The Project for a New American Century in September 2000, exactly a year before 9/11;


in this article, on page 51, it is stated that "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor"!

Voila! 9/11!

Well, there you have it! Motive, means and opportunity all rolled into one and existing between Rabbi Dov Zakheim's ears. The motive was that a false flag intelligence operation would trigger a response by the USA that would be good for the Zionist state.


The means consisted of the aforementioned remote control of airborne vehicle technologies as well as the nurturing, creative accounting at the Pentagon to pay for such an operation.


The opportunity was Zakheim's closeness to the Command/Control/Communications in our nation's capital and its interwoven cousin network of psychopathic Zionist Neo-Cons all hell-bent on provoking a war that would benefit Israel.
__________________
If you didn't think I'd be back,
then you don't know Jack. Be
sure to watch my show or else.
JackBauer24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 May 2011 , 20:28 PM   #6
Sinister Dick Cheney
Free Mind
 
Sinister Dick Cheney's Avatar
 
Join Date: 20 Apr 2005
Location: Secret Bunker
Posts: 3,252
Threads: 552
Thanked 783 Times in 365 Posts
Sinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond reputeSinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond reputeSinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond reputeSinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond reputeSinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond reputeSinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond reputeSinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond reputeSinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond reputeSinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond reputeSinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond reputeSinister Dick Cheney has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 9/11 Mastermind Dov Zakheim Captured

Bauer you idiot, Crapheim wasn't the mastermind of 9/11, I was the mastermind! Why are you giving him credit for something I organized?! I demand full credit for 9/11 it was my idea my plan!
Sinister Dick Cheney is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Let's Roll Forums > The U.S. Government Conspiracy of 9/11 > The Pentagon - What really happened?



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Ad Management by RedTyger