"9/11 Hijackers" R based on "cellphone" claims. Debunked.

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: "9/11 Hijackers" R based on "cellphone" claims. Debunked.

Postby yossarian » Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:54 am

No fucking way in a million years amateur pilots flew those planes into those buildings.


Hi everybody. I just wanted to add, that a study done by Delft Technical University proves that it is well in the realm of possibility for them to have done so. They had someone with similar flight qualifications as Hani Hanjour fly the same route into the Pentagon in a flight simulator. He hit the Pentagon three out of three times...Of course this disregards the different stress levels that couldn't be replicated in the experiment.

Approximately around 5:20

I think that God in creating Man somewhat overestimated his ability.
- Oscar Wilde
User avatar
yossarian
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:06 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: "9/11 Hijackers" R based on "cellphone" claims. Debunked.

Postby thatsmystory » Mon Jan 25, 2010 9:37 am

yossarian wrote:
No fucking way in a million years amateur pilots flew those planes into those buildings.


Hi everybody. I just wanted to add, that a study done by Delft Technical University proves that it is well in the realm of possibility for them to have done so. They had someone with similar flight qualifications as Hani Hanjour fly the same route into the Pentagon in a flight simulator. He hit the Pentagon three out of three times...Of course this disregards the different stress levels that couldn't be replicated in the experiment.


There is the mystery of the target. Why hit that section of the Pentagon in such a manner? In his book False Flag 911, Philip Marshall claims that it would have been difficult for an experienced pilot to keep the plane that low to the ground without hitting the ground. Marshall's theory is that the pilots had much more training than was acknowledged.
thatsmystory
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 7:13 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: "9/11 Hijackers" R based on "cellphone" claims. Debunked.

Postby 17breezes » Mon Jan 25, 2010 11:47 am

thatsmystory wrote:
yossarian wrote:
No fucking way in a million years amateur pilots flew those planes into those buildings.


Hi everybody. I just wanted to add, that a study done by Delft Technical University proves that it is well in the realm of possibility for them to have done so. They had someone with similar flight qualifications as Hani Hanjour fly the same route into the Pentagon in a flight simulator. He hit the Pentagon three out of three times...Of course this disregards the different stress levels that couldn't be replicated in the experiment.


There is the mystery of the target. Why hit that section of the Pentagon in such a manner? In his book False Flag 911, Philip Marshall claims that it would have been difficult for an experienced pilot to keep the plane that low to the ground without hitting the ground. Marshall's theory is that the pilots had much more training than was acknowledged.


The fact that there were at least 2 unknown hijackers on one flight raise the possibility that this was also the case on the other planes. Perhaps these were more experienced pilots.

And of course, blind luck abounds in the universe so it can't be ruled out in this instance of low ground flying.
"Go back to Auschwitz" Humanitarian peace activists, 2010.
User avatar
17breezes
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:06 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: "9/11 Hijackers" R based on "cellphone" claims. Debunked.

Postby DrVolin » Mon Jan 25, 2010 9:08 pm

Piloting is all about getting the plane up and putting it down in one piece. The bits in between are not terribly difficult in good flying conditions.
all these dreams are swept aside
By bloody hands of the hypnotized
Who carry the cross of homicide
And history bears the scars of our civil wars

--Guns and Roses
DrVolin
 
Posts: 1544
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:19 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: "9/11 Hijackers" R based on "cellphone" claims. Debunked.

Postby DoYouEverWonder » Tue Jan 26, 2010 4:58 pm

yossarian wrote:
No fucking way in a million years amateur pilots flew those planes into those buildings.


Hi everybody. I just wanted to add, that a study done by Delft Technical University proves that it is well in the realm of possibility for them to have done so. They had someone with similar flight qualifications as Hani Hanjour fly the same route into the Pentagon in a flight simulator. He hit the Pentagon three out of three times...Of course this disregards the different stress levels that couldn't be replicated in the experiment.

Approximately around 5:20


Anyone can tear apart someone else's video. And I could spend a lengthy post tearing apart the holes in this one. Yet, while they debunk and discredit LC, they use LC to 'prove' the government story. Instead of using real evidence from the public record, or should I say lack of evidence, because that is the big problem with the public record. You can't prove something that didn't happen and there is no evidence in the public record that Flight 77 is what hit the Pentagon. A passenger jet is a very large machine, with two very large titanium engines. There should have been at least a couple of tons of evidence, with numerous serial numbers, that would have proved beyond a doubt what blew up at the Pentagon. But there is nothing, zero, zip, except for a few bad pictures that are hard to see and there is no way to know what the parts are from.

Based on the visual evidence, the explosion happened inside of the building and blew out. I happened to think they used a guided bunker buster type missile. It would fit with the damage and the fact that the main explosion was delayed until the weapon is inside the building. The same thing at the WTC. That way if the operation fell apart, no one would ever notice that a few US Military jets, didn't carry out their mission. I'd love to see a weapons inventory for Sept. 2001.

The video claims that the wings didn't go through the building. Well, if they didn't go through the building, then they had to be outside of the building, but the lawn directly in front of the blast zone, where the plane supposedly flew over was undamaged and there was very little debris at all outside of the building, no less large chunks of the plane.

BTW: Will the debunkers please stop using that crappy video of the jet crashing through cement. If you watch the entire video, the jet didn't destroy the entire wall and they never show you what happened after the impact.
Image
User avatar
DoYouEverWonder
 
Posts: 962
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 9:24 am
Location: Within you and without you
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: "9/11 Hijackers" R based on "cellphone" claims. Debunked.

Postby MinM » Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:45 am

AlicetheKurious wrote:The firm that provides security at the Amsterdam airport is the product of a partnership between the Israeli company and ICTS Europe. But even if that were not the case, Schiphol Airport was exposed years ago as one of the world's major hubs for the Mossad's illegal activities. Guess what: the Israelis lie.


    The ICTS mystery

    When Reid went on his next fateful trip -- the one where he tried to light his shoe -- he passed through a check from an Israeli-owned security service called ICTS. ICTS employs a large number of Shin Bet veterans and has strong links to Mossad.

    All of which brings us back to Farouk and the Christmas event.

    Most of the conspiracy-oriented websites are now claiming that ICTS ran security at Schiphol -- for example, see here. ICTS has offered this strong denial:

      Following the terrorist attack on DL/NW Flight 253 on 25 December 2009 , there have been incorrect reports linking ICTS Europe to the event.

      We would like to make it clear that ICTS Europe Holdings B.V. is not connected in any way to the mentioned events. ICTS Europe does not provide any security services, nor any other services, whether directly or indirectly, at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport and is not connected in any way to any of the companies that provide security services at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport.

    The ICTS disclaimer offers a startling contrast to this PR announcement from January 14:

      ICTS International N.V. (Nasdaq: ICTS) announced today that it has formed a partnership arrangement with ICTS Europe Holdings BV, an unaffiliated party, to provide security services at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol in The Netherlands. The partnership named ICTS Netherlands Airport Services has been awarded two contracts having an aggregate value of $15,000,000 Euros a year or annually. The contracts are for three years and relate to two sections of the airport to provide security, employees, guards and control in the airport, establishing a central check point and security arrangements for airport employees and other related services.

    ...

    Incidentally, ICTS (through another subsidiary, named Huntleigh) also runs the security at Detroit airport.

    And who runs security at the airport at Lagos International Airport, a.k.a. Murtala Muhammed International Airport, a.k.a. LOS? This is where Farouk flew out to Schiphol -- presumably wearing, even then, his PETN briefs. (Oddly, this airport was modeled after Schiphol.) Farouk went through two checks; KLM (the carrier) provided the second check, but I don't know who conducted the first one. Still another ICTS subsidiary -- MUSC -- provides maritime security services for the Nigerian government. Nigeria restored relations with Israel in 1992, after a 19 year break; some accounts hold that the two governments are now quite close.

Link


    ...ICTS was established in 1982 by former members of the Shin Bet and El Al security. ("El Al security" is a division of the Mossad -- Alice) Menachem Atzmon, who has been chairman of the board of directors since 2004, holds the controlling shares in the firm.

    The ICTS headquarters are in the Netherlands and the company is traded in the New York Stock Exchange. Some senior managers are Israeli, including the joint managing director Ran Langer.

    Another important figure is Doron Zicher, general manager of I-SEC. Zicher has been in charge of operations in the Netherlands for more than two decades and has served as adviser to the Dutch Justice Ministry, which is responsible for setting guidelines for airport security. ...

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1141434.html


Some context on the true relationship between Schiphol Airport and the Mossad, from the History Commons (paragraph breaks added):

    6:25 pm October 4, 1992: Plane Crash in Holland Shows Chemicals for Sarin Were Being Transported
    Edit event

    El Al Flight LY1862, en route from New York to Tel Aviv, crashes into a block of apartment buildings shortly after take-off from Schiphol Airport, located south-east of Amsterdam. At least 43 people on the ground are killed (The exact number of deaths is unknown, since many of the incinerated victims were undocumented immigrants). Information about the plane’s cargo and the crash is suppressed: El Al withholds information about the plane’s several tons of “military cargo;” 12 hours of videotape made during the rescue and clean-up operation (42 cassettes in all), along with police audiotapes, are erased and shredded; and El Al documents and the plane’s cockpit voice recorder (CVR) mysteriously disappear.

    It is later learned that the plane, a Boeing 747, was carrying several tons of chemicals, including hydrofluoric acid, isopro-panol and dimethyl methylphosphonate (DMMP)—three of the four chemicals used in the production of sarin nerve gas. The shipment of chemicals—approved by the US commerce department—reportedly came from Solkatronic Chemicals Inc. of Morrisville, Pennsylvania and its final destination was the Institute for Biological Research (IIBR) in Ness Ziona near Tel Aviv, Israel, which is reported to be the “Israeli military and intelligence community’s front organization for the development, testing and production of chemical and biological weapons.” A former IIBR biologist later tells the London Sunday Times in October of 1998, “There is hardly a single known or unknown form of chemical or biological weapon… which is not manufactured at the institute.” In fact, it was IIBR that provided the poison and the antidote used in the attempted assassination of a Hamas leader in Jordan in 1998. The IIBR does not appear on any maps and is off-limits even to members of Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset.

    Israel denies that the chemicals were to be used in the production of chemical weapons and instead claims that they were needed to test gas masks. But as an article in Earth Island Journal notes: “[T]his explanation is puzzling since it only takes a few grams to conduct such tests. Once combined, the chemicals aboard Flight 1862 could have produced 270 kilos of sarin—sufficient to kill the entire population of a major world city.” During hearings on the crash in 1999, it is learned that since 1973, El Al planes are never inspected by customs or the Dutch Flight Safety Board and that El Al security at Schiphol is a branch of the Israeli Mossad. Furthermore, it is discovered that every Sunday evening a mysterious El Al cargo flight arrives at Schiphol en route from New York to Tel Aviv. The flights are never displayed on the airport arrival monitors and the flights’ documents are processed in a special, unmarked room. [BBC, 10/2/1998; Earth Island Journal, 1999; Covert Action Quarterly, 10/20/2004] Over a thousand residents living near the crash site later become sick with respiratory, neurological and mobility ailments and a rise in cancer and birth defects is later detected among the population. [ZNet, 10/12/2002]

http://www.historycommons.org/context.j ... yinterview



Now, back to the cell-phone calls. Some of the statements by the supposed passengers during the 'cell-phone calls' are decidedly strange; I'm not just referring to "Mark Bingham's" odd announcement to his mother, "Hi mom, this is Mark Bingham," and his repeated requests for confirmation that she believes him. There's also this quote, supposedly spoken by Thomas Burnett to his wife Deena:

"We are turning toward the World Trade Center, no we are turning away."

That's just silly. How the heck would a passenger on an airplane know whether the plane was turning towards the WTC, let alone away from it? Even from a few hundred feet, that kind of precision would be laughable, let alone from thousands of feet in the air.

I stumbled upon this very interesting ad for a product that you can buy on the internet. The product supposedly can be used, not only to change your voice from male to female and vice versa, but even to provide a false caller id.

Image
http://www.brickhousesecurity.com/spoof ... anger.html

And then I came across this article from the Washington Post, published in 1999:


    When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing

    Bill Arkin

    By William M. Arkin
    Special to washingtonpost.com
    Monday, Feb. 1, 1999


    "Gentlemen! We have called you together to inform you that we are going to overthrow the United States government." So begins a statement being delivered by Gen. Carl W. Steiner, former Commander-in-chief, U.S. Special Operations Command.

    At least the voice sounds amazingly like him.

    But it is not Steiner. It is the result of voice "morphing" technology developed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

    By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile.
    Steiner was so impressed, he asked for a copy of the tape.

    Steiner was hardly the first or last victim to be spoofed by Papcun's team members. To refine their method, they took various high quality recordings of generals and experimented with creating fake statements. One of the most memorable is Colin Powell stating "I am being treated well by my captors."

    "They chose to have him say something he would never otherwise have said," chuckled one of Papcun's colleagues.


    A Box of Chocolates is Like War

    Most Americans were introduced to the tricks of the digital age in the movie Forrest Gump, when the character played by Tom Hanks appeared to shake hands with President Kennedy.

    For Hollywood, it is special effects. For covert operators in the U.S. military and intelligence agencies, it is a weapon of the future.

    "Once you can take any kind of information and reduce it into ones and zeros, you can do some pretty interesting things," says Daniel T. Kuehl, chairman of the Information Operations department of the National Defense University in Washington, the military's school for information warfare.

    PSYOPS seeks to exploit human vulnerabilities in enemy governments, militaries and populations.

    Digital morphing — voice, video, and photo — has come of age, available for use in psychological operations. PSYOPS, as the military calls it, seek to exploit human vulnerabilities in enemy governments, militaries and populations to pursue national and battlefield objectives.

    To some, PSYOPS is a backwater military discipline of leaflet dropping and radio propaganda. To a growing group of information war technologists, it is the nexus of fantasy and reality. Being able to manufacture convincing audio or video, they say, might be the difference in a successful military operation or coup.

    Allah on the Holodeck

    Pentagon planners started to discuss digital morphing after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Covert operators kicked around the idea of creating a computer-faked videotape of Saddam Hussein crying or showing other such manly weaknesses, or in some sexually compromising situation. The nascent plan was for the tapes to be flooded into Iraq and the Arab world.

    The tape war never proceeded, killed, participants say, by bureaucratic fights over jurisdiction, skepticism over the technology, and concerns raised by Arab coalition partners.

    What if the U.S. projected a holographic image of Allah floating over Baghdad?

    But the "strategic" PSYOPS scheming didn't die. What if the U.S. projected a holographic image of Allah floating over Baghdad urging the Iraqi people and Army to rise up against Saddam, a senior Air Force officer asked in 1990?

    According to a military physicist given the task of looking into the hologram idea, the feasibility had been established of projecting large, three-dimensional objects that appeared to float in the air.

    But doing so over the skies of Iraq? To project such a hologram over Baghdad on the order of several hundred feet, they calculated, would take a mirror more than a mile square in space, as well as huge projectors and power sources.

    And besides, investigators came back, what does Allah look like?

    The Gulf War hologram story might be dismissed were it not the case that washingtonpost.com has learned that a super secret program was established in 1994 to pursue the very technology for PSYOPS application. The "Holographic Projector" is described in a classified Air Force document as a system to "project information power from space ... for special operations deception missions."

    War is Like a Box of Chocolates

    Voice-morphing? Fake video? Holographic projection? They sound more like Mission Impossible and Star Trek gimmicks than weapons. Yet for each, there are corresponding and growing research efforts as the technologies improve and offensive information warfare expands.

    Whereas early voice morphing required cutting and pasting speech to put letters or words together to make a composite, Papcun's software developed at Los Alamos can far more accurately replicate the way one actually speaks. Eliminated are the robotic intonations.

    The irony is that after Papcun finished his speech cloning research, there were no takers in the military. Luckily for him, Hollywood is interested: The promise of creating a virtual Clark Gable is mightier than the sword. (Well, we all know the Mossad has no access to "Hollywood"! -- Alice)

    Video and photo manipulation has already raised profound questions of authenticity for the journalistic world. With audio joining the mix, it is not only journalists but also privacy advocates and the conspiracy-minded who will no doubt ponder the worrisome mischief that lurks in the not too distant future.

    "We already know that seeing isn't necessarily believing," says Dan Kuehl, "now I guess hearing isn't either."

    William M. Arkin, author of "The U.S. Military Online," is a leading expert on national security and the Internet. He lectures and writes on nuclear weapons, military matters and information warfare. An Army intelligence analyst from 1974-1978, Arkin currently consults for Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, MSNBC and the Natural Resources Defense Council.

    Arkin can be reached for comment at william_arkin@washingtonpost.com.

    © Copyright 1999 The Washington Post Company

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/na ... 020199.htm


Hmmm. Eerily accurate voice morphing, based on a 10-second recording of the target's voice... But where on earth could such a recording be obtained?

From an Amy Goodman interview with James Bamford, author of The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America:

    JAMES BAMFORD: Yeah. There’s two major—or not major, they’re small companies, but they service the two major telecom companies. This company, Narus, which was founded in Israel and has large Israel connections, does the—basically the tapping of the communications on AT&T. And Verizon chose another company, ironically also founded in Israel and largely controlled by and developed by people in Israel called Verint.

    So these two companies specialize in what’s known as mass surveillance. Their literature—I read this literature from Verint, for example—is supposed to only go to intelligence agencies and so forth, and it says, “We specialize in mass surveillance,” and that’s what they do. They put these mass surveillance equipment in these facilities. ...

quoted here

The Schiphol Airport once again comes to the fore...
Image
2 Passengers Questioned in Amsterdam After Suspected Terror 'Dry Run'
(Aug. 31) -- Dutch police are questioning two men who were arrested upon arrival on a flight from Chicago after U.S. authorities found suspicious items in their checked luggage, including a cell phone taped to a medicine bottle, knives and a box cutter.

There are conflicting theories about whether the men actually posed any threat. One senior U.S. security source, who spoke to ABC News on condition of anonymity, said the pair were suspected of carrying out a "dry run" for a terrorist attack. However, law enforcement officials told The New York Times the men had not been charged with any crime and that the whole situation could be a misunderstanding.
Image
The pair are being questioned at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport, said Martijn Boelhouwer, spokesman for the Dutch national prosecutor's office, according to The Associated Press. Neither has been charged with any offense in the Netherlands. CNN identified the two as Ahmed Mohamed Nasser al-Soofi and Hezem al-Murisi, who, according to the Times, are of Yemeni descent.

Under Dutch law, they two can be held without charges for six days, the AP noted.

Authorities became suspicious on Sunday, when airport security screeners in Birmingham, Ala., referred al-Soofi for additional security checks because of his "bulky clothing," officials told ABC. He was reportedly found to be carrying $7,000 in cash, which, in itself, isn't illegal. His luggage, meanwhile, contained a cell phone strapped to a Pepto-Bismol bottle, three cell phones taped together, several watches taped together, a box cutter and three large knives, authorities said. It is not illegal to carry any of these items in checked luggage.

With no sign of explosives, al-Soofi and his luggage were cleared for the flight from Birmingham to Chicago. Once in Chicago, ABC said, al-Soofi was joined by al-Murisi, and the two boarded the United Airlines flight to Amsterdam.

Back at Birmingham, officials discovered that al-Soofi had not taken his luggage with him to Chicago. Instead, it had been checked onto a flight to Washington's Dulles International Airport and was scheduled to fly on to Sanaa, Yemen, by way of Dubai, the Times said. Once officials realized al-Soofi wasn't on board the plane to Dulles, they ordered the jetliner back to the gate and removed the luggage, which contained the suspicious items.

"The items were not deemed to be dangerous in and of themselves, and as we share information with our international partners, Dutch authorities were notified of the suspicious items," Amy Kudwa, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security, told the Times. "This matter continues to be under investigation."

Al-Soofi's family has claimed that he was most likely trying to take medicine and gifts back to his family, and had bound together items meant for the same recipient. "This is our culture," Omar Sufi of Detroit, al-Soofi's cousin, told the Times. He added that his cousin was "a nice guy" who worked as a cashier in Alabama and spoke limited English.

Security at Schiphol Airport has been heightened since Christmas Day, when Nigerian student Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab flew from there for Detroit. Upon arrival in Detroit, he allegedly tried to blow up his plane by detonating explosives hidden in his underpants.

rigorousintuition.ca - View topic - Explosives on Detroit-Bound Airplane
Earth-704509
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3288
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: "9/11 Hijackers" R based on "cellphone" claims. Debunked.

Postby elfismiles » Tue Aug 31, 2010 10:12 am

I had totally forgotten this quote's origins and so only just now realized that this famous 911 song by MINISTRY opens with the quote. I assume it isn't the actual "morphed voice" recording and is just their rendition of it.

"Gentlemen! We have called you together to inform you that we are going to overthrow the United States government."



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6S0HznBnrCE
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Postby MinM » Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:47 pm

Will the retraction be hyped as much as the original terror psyop was?

Terrorist Ties Doubted in Amsterdam Arrests | NYTimes.com
Earth-704509
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3288
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: "9/11 Hijackers" R based on "cellphone" claims. Debunked.

Postby norton ash » Tue Aug 31, 2010 2:58 pm

But the Yemeni emeny meme still grows.
Zen horse
User avatar
norton ash
 
Posts: 4067
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 162 guests