- Operation 911- No Suicide
By Carol A. Valentine
Curator, Waco Holocaust
- There were no "suicide" pilots on those September 11
jets. The jets were controlled by advanced robotics and remote-control
technology, not hijackers. Fantastic? Before I explain, read about the
history-making robot/remote-controlled jet plane.
- GLOBAL HAWK: NOW YOU HAVE IT...
- The Northrop Grumman Global Hawk is a robotized
American military jet that has a wingspan of a Boeing 737. The excerpts
below were taken from an article entitled: "Robot plane flies Pacific
unmanned," which appeared in the April 24, 2001 edition of Britain's
International Television News:
- "The aircraft essentially flies itself, right from
takeoff, right through to landing, and even taxiing off the runway,"
according to the Australian Global Hawk manager Rod Smith.
- A robot plane has made aviation history by becoming
the first unmanned aircraft to fly across the Pacific Ocean.
- The American high-altitude Global Hawk spy plane made
flew (sic) across the ocean to Australia, defence officials
- The Global Hawk, a jet-powered aircraft with a
wingspan equivalent to a Boeing 737 [NOTE: two of the aircraft involved
in the 911 crashes were Boeing 757s, two were Boeing 767s] flew from
Edwards Air Force Base in California and landed late on Monday at the
Royal Australian Air Force base at Edinburgh, in South Australia state.
. . .
- It flies along a pre-programmed flight path, but a
pilot monitors the aircraft during its flight via a sensor suite which
provides infra-red and visual images. (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/Dial%20Protected)
- ... AND NOW YOU DON'T -
- Then, on September 20, 2001, The Economist published
comments from a former boss of British Airways, Robert Ayling:
- On autopilot into the future "Robert Ayling, a former
boss of British Airways, suggested in The Financial Times this week that
aircraft could be commandeered from the ground and controlled remotely
in the event of a hijack ... (as quoted by KC
<email@example.com> on alt.current-events.wtc
- So, even though the ITN article was published on April
24, in September, after the 911 crashes, Mr. Ayling is PRETENDING Global
Hawk technology is a thing of the future.
- THEN THE NEW YORK TIMES RAN THIS:
- . . . In addition, the president [President Bush] said
he would give grants to airlines to allow them to develop stronger
cockpit doors and transponders that cannot be switched off from the
cockpit. Government grants would also be available to pay for video
monitors that would be placed in the cockpit to alert pilots to trouble
in the cabin; and new technology, probably far in the future, allowing
air traffic controllers to land distressed planes by remote control.
("Bush to Increase Federal Role in Security at Airports," The New York
Times, Sept. 28, 2001; emphasis added.)
- So, then, right after Operation 911 was pulled off,
two men of world influence were pretending such technology had not yet
been perfected. That was dishonest. And revealing.
- Run a Google Advanced Search on the phrase "Global
Hawk," and you will find additional information. Meanwhile, I have
attached the text of the ITN article at the end of this piece.
- Technically speaking, we could have a "suicidal"
airplane fly into a building without a suicidal pilot. Robotics and
remote control technology has developed to the point that a
high-altitude Global Hawk (or a low-altitude Tomahawk cruise missile)
can be guided into collision with a target without a Kamikaze pilot in
- America And Its Allies Would Never Attack America!
Now, hold it there! This is US military technology. We all surely know
that the US and its allies would not conspire to attack America! Or do
- The Army's School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS )
thinks Israel is capable of doing exactly that. On September 10, 2001,
The Washington Times ran a front page story which quoted SAMS
- "Of the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service, the
SAMS officers say: 'Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to
target US forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.'" ("US
troops would enforce peace under Army study," The Washington Times,
Sept.. 10, 2001, pg. A1, 9.) Just 24 hours after this story appeared,
the Pentagon was hit and the Arabs were being blamed.
- These SAMS officers are obviously interested in
protecting their country, but not all Americans are. Some are traitors
and pay allegiance to Israel. Recall the June 8, 1967, Israeli attack on
the USS Liberty, and American complicity in the attack.
- During the Six Day War, the Liberty, an American
intelligence gathering ship, was sailing in international waters.
Israeli aircraft and torpedo boats attacked it for 75 minutes.
- When four US fighter jets from a nearby aircraft
carrier came to protect the Liberty, US Defense Secretary Robert
McNamara ordered the jets NOT to come to the Liberty's aid, and allowed
the Israeli attack to continue. Thirty-fourAmericans were killed and 171
- Now consider Operation Northwoods: In 1962, US
military leaders designed a plan to conduct terrorist acts against
Americans and blame Cuba, to create popular sentiment for invasion of
that country. Operation Northwoods included: * Plans to shoot down a CIA
plane designed to replicate a passenger flight and announce that Cuban
forces shot it down.
- * Creation of military casualties by blowing up a US
ship in Guantanamo Bay and blaming Cuba: "....casualty lists in the US
newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation,"
- * Development of a terror campaign in the Miami and
Washington, DC. Information on Operation Northwoods can be found in
James Bamford's Body of Secrets, (Doubleday, 2001), and at the following
- http://www.baltimoresun.com/bal-te.md.nsa24apr24.story http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/Dial%20Protectedhttp://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/Dial%20Protected
- In other words, US allies and people within the US
military establishment are not opposed to killing American servicemen
and civilians, given the right goal.
- WHY TAKE CHANCES?
- Put yourself in the shoes of the masterminds of
Operation 911. The attacks had to be tightly coordinated. Four jets took
off within 15 minutes of each other at Boston, Dulles, and Newark
airports, and roughly two hours later, it was over. The masterminds
couldn't afford to take needless chances.
- Years ago I saw a local TV news reporter interview a
New York mugger about the occupational hazards of his trade. "It's a
very, very dangerous trade," the mugger informed the interviewer. "Some
of these people are crazy! They fight back! You can get hurt!"
- If a freelance New York mugger realized the
unpredictable nature of human behavior, surely the pros who pulled this
job off must have known the same truth. Yet we are asked to believe that
the culprits took four jet airliners, with four sets of crew and four
sets of passengers -- armed with (depending on the news reports you
read) "knives," "plastic knives" and box cutters. Given the crazy and
unpredictable nature of humans, why would they try this bold plan when
they were so poorly armed?
- A lady's handbag -- given the weight of the contents
most women insist on packing -- is an awesome weapon. I know, I have
used mine in self defense. Are we to believe that none of the women had
the testosterone to knock those flimsy little weapons out of the
hijackers' hands? And what of the briefcases most men carry? Thrown,
those briefcase can be potent weapons. Your ordinary every-day New York
mugger would never take the chances that our culprits took.
- Flight attendant Michelle Heidenberger was on board
Flight 77. She had been "trained to handle a hijacking. She knew not to
let anyone in the cockpit. She knew to tell the hijacker that she didn't
have a key and would have to call the pilots. None of her training
mattered." ( "On flight 77: 'Our Plane Is Being Hijacked'," The
Washington Post, September 12, 2001, pgs. A 1, 11.)
- That's right, The Washington Post for once is telling
the whole truth. Heidenberger's training didn't matter, the pilots'
training didn't matter, the ladies handbags didn't matter, the mens'
briefcases didn't matter. The masterminds of Operation 911 knew that
whatever happened aboard those flights, the control of the planes was in
their hands. Even if the crew and passengers fought back, my hypothesis
is that they *could not* have regained control of the planes, for the
planes were being controlled by Global Hawk technology.
- FLIGHT 77 - "The Plane Was Flown With Extraordinary
- Once again: Operation 911 demanded that the attacks be
tightly coordinated. Four jets took off within 15 minutes of each other
at Boston, Dulles, and Newark airports, and roughly two hours later, it
was over. If we are to believe the story we are being told, the
masterminds needed, at an absolute minimum, pilots who could actually
fly the planes and who could arrive at the right place at the right
- American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, took off
from Dulles Airport in northern Virginia at 8:10 a.m. and crashed into
the Pentagon at 9:40 a.m. The Washington Post, September 12, says this:
"Aviation sources said that the plane was flown with extraordinary
skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm,
possibly one of the hijackers. Someone even knew how to turn off the
transponder, a move that is considerably less than obvious."
- According to the article, the air traffic controllers
"had time to warn the White House that the jet was aimed directly at the
president's mansion and was traveling at a gut-wrenching speed--full
- "But just as the plane seemed to be on a suicide
mission into the White House, the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so
tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver. The plane
circled 270 degrees from the right to approach the Pentagon from the
west, whereupon Flight 77 fell below radar level, vanishing from
controller's screens, the sources said." ("On Flight 77: 'Our Plane Is
Being Hijacked'," The Washington Post, September 12, 2001, pgs. 1 &
- MEET ACE SUICIDE PILOT HANI HANJOUR
- Let's look at what we know about the alleged suicide
pilot of American Airlines Flight 77, Hani Hanjour. According to press
reports, Hanjour had used Bowie's Maryland Freeway Airport three times
since mid-August as he attempted to get permission to use one of the
airport's planes. This from The Prince George's Journal [Maryland]
September 18, 2001:
- Marcel Bernard, the chief flight instructor at the
airport, said the man named Hani Hanjour went into the air in a Cessna
172 with instructors from the airport three times beginning the second
week of August and had hoped to rent a plane from the airport.
- According to published reports, law enforcement
sources say Hanjour, in his mid-twenties, is suspected of crashing the
American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon. . . .
- Hanjour had his pilot's license, said Bernard, but
needed what is called a 'check-out' done by the airport to gauge a
pilot's skills before he or she is able to rent a plane at Freeway
Airport which runs parallel to Route 50.
- Instructors at the school told Bernard that after
three times in the air, they still felt he was unable to fly solo and
that Hanjour seemed disappointed ...
- ... Published reports said Hanjour obtained his
pilot's license in April of 1999, but it expired six months later
because he did not complete a required medical exam. He also was trained
for a few months at a private school in Scottsdale, Ariz., in 1996, but
did not finish the course because instructors felt he was not
- Hanjour had 600 hours listed in his log book, Bernard
said, and instructors were surprised he was not able to fly better with
the amount of experience .S Pete Goulatta, a special agent and spokesman
for the FBI, said it is an on-going criminal investigation and he could
not comment. (pg. 1.)
- If you were the mastermind who planned this
breathtaking terrorist attack, would you trust a man who took 600 hours
of flying time and still could not do the job? Who was paying for
Hanjour's lessons, and why?
- Yet this is the man the FBI would have us believe flew
Flight 77 into the Pentagon "with extraordinary skill." BUY HE COULD NOT
EVEN FLY A CESSNA 172 !!
- Yes, maneuvering a Boeing 757 into a 270 degree turn
under tense conditions (remember, the culprits were outmanned and had
crude, non lethal weapons) demanded the skill of a fighter pilot. But
why would those bad, bad, Muslims want to do such a thing?
- By shifting the plane's position so radically, Flight
77 managed to hit the side of the Pentagon *directly opposite* the side
on which the offices of the Secretary of Defense and Joint Chief of
Staff were located. (Coincidentally, Flight 77 hit the offices of Army
operations (US News and World Report, Sept. 14, 2001, pg. 25. Recall, it
was the Army that warned of the possibility that Israel's Mossad might
make a terror attack against the US.) The masterminds of Operation 911
were prepared to sacrifice the rank and file, but carefully avoided
touching a hair on the head of the brass.
- It reminds one of Operation Northwoods, doesn't it?
Remember the rank and file sailors who were to be sacrificed on a US
Naval vessel in Guantanamo Bay, in order to justify war with Cuba? No,
neither Hanjour nor any other Muslim suicide pilot was at the controls
of this plane. It had been fitted with Global Hawk technology and was
being remotely controlled.
- LET'S MEET THE OTHER ACES
- According to The Washington Post of 10-19-01: "Hijack
Suspects Tried Many Flight Schools"
- Mohammed Atta, alleged hijacker of Flight 11, and
Marwanal-Al-Shehhi, alleged hijacker of Flight 175, both of which
crashed into the World Trade Center, attended hundreds of hours of
lessons at Huffman Aviation, a flight school in Venice, Florida. They
also took lessons at Jones Aviation Flying Service Inc., which operates
from the Sarasota Bradenton International Airport. According to the
Post, neither experience "worked out."
- A flight instructor at Jones who asked not be
identified said Atta and Al Shehhi arrived in September or October and
asked to be given flight training. Atta, the instructor said, was
particularly difficult. "He would not look at your face," the instructor
said. "When you talked to him, he could not look you in the eye. His
attention span was very short."
- The instructor said neither man was able to pass a
Stage I rating test to track and intercept. After offering some harsh
words, the instructor said, the two moved on .... "We didn't kick them
out, but they didn't live up to our standards." (page A 15.)
- Or try The Washington Post 1-24-01: "They were dumb
- Alleged hijackers Nawaq Alhazmi (Flight 77), Khaid
Al-Midhar (Flight 77) and Hani Hanjour (Flight 77) all spent time in San
Diego. "Two of the men, Alhazmi and Al-Midhar, also briefly attended a
local fight school, but they were dropped because of their limited
English and incompetence at the controls....
- Last spring, two of the men visited Montgomery Field,
a community airport ... and sought flying lessons. They spoke to
instructors at Sorbi's Flying Club, which allowed them to take only two
lessons before advising them to quit.
- "Their English was horrible, and their mechanical
skills were even worse," said an instructor, who asked not to be named.
"It was like they had hardly even ever driven a car ..."
- "They seemed like nice guys," the instructor said,
"but in the plane, they were dumb and dumber." ("San Diegans See Area as
Likely Target," The Washington Post, September 24, 2001, pg. A7.)
- But the masterminds would not need competent pilots --
if they had Global Hawk technology.
- MISSING: AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
- Now, let's look at the contemporaneous media coverage
of Operation 911. Did you notice that during the event and for weeks
after, we heard no excerpts from the conversations between the air
traffic control centers and the pilots of the four aircraft?
- Those conversations are recorded by the air traffic
control centers. Surely those conversations were newsworthy. They should
have been available to the media immediately. Why didn't we hear them? I
believe the answer to this question is simple:
- If we could hear the conversations that took place, we
would hear the airline pilots telling air traffic control that the
controls of their airplanes would not respond. The pilots, of course,
would have no way of knowing that their craft had been fitted with
Global Hawk technology programmed to take over their planes.
- But no, we MUST believe the crashes were the work of
Muslim terrorists. Therefore we were not permitted to hear the news as
it happened. We will have to wait for the FBI/military intelligence
people to cook up doctored and fictional conversations. They will then
serve them to the public through the complicitous mass media and
strategically placed "investigative reporters," and we will be asked to
swallow them. Many of us will. (See The Christian Science Monitor story
discussed below, "Conversations with Flight 11.")
- That the airlines cooperated and did whatever the FBI
told them to do is no secret. The Washington Post of September 12, 2001,
says this: "Details about who was on Flight 77, when it took off and
what happened on board were tightly held by airline, airport and
security officials last night. All said that the FBI had asked them not
to divulge details."
- Think back to Operation Northwoods in which the
Pentagon considered reporting a bogus passenger airplane being shot down
by a non-existent Cuban fighter jet. The Pentagon was obviously
confident that some airline would go along with the deception. Not
surprising, considering many commercial airline pilots and executives
are former military pilots, and the government controls the airline
industry in many ways. These pilots and executives were trained to do as
they are told, and would be out of a job if they broke the rules.
- Why would the take-off time and the passenger list be
held secret? The passengers, crew, and culprits were all dead. The
relatives must have known that when they heard the news of the crashes.
Flight departure and arrival times had been public knowledge. The
masterminds knew the details of their own plans.
- No, it was the PUBLIC that was being denied
information, and the significant information being denied was the
conversations between the air traffic controllers and the pilots. Recall
that during the Vietnam War, the US "secretly" bombed Cambodia. The
bombing was no secret to the Cambodians. It was only a secret from the
American public, who were paying for the war and may have objected to
the slaughter. And that's the only purpose of the Operation 911 secrecy:
To keep the information from the public.
- COMMUNICATION WITH FLIGHT 11
- American Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 767, left Boston
at 7:59 a.m. on its way to Los Angeles. It was allegedly piloted by
Mohamed Atta, one of the pilots who couldn't fly, discussed above.
Flight 11 crashed into the north tower of the WTC at 8:45 a.m.
- Boston airport officials said they did not spot the
plane's course until it had crashed, and said the control tower had no
unusual communications with the pilots or any crew member." (The
Washington Post, September 12, 2001, "At Logan Airport, Nobody Saw
Plane's Sharp Turn South," pg. A 10.)
- Sorry, this report is not credible. Airplanes are
tracked constantly. The skies over the US are for too busy for us to
have a lackadaisical attitude.
- Note the date of The Washington Post story: September
12. Now compare it to the very different story that appeared a day
later, in The Christian Science Monitor:
- An American Airlines pilot stayed at the helm of
hijacked Flight 11 much of the way from Boston to New York, sending
surreptitious radio transmissions to authorities on the ground as he
- Because the pilot's voice was seldom heard in these
covert transmissions, it was not clear to the listening air-traffic
controllers which of the two pilots was flying the Boeing 767. What is
clear is that the pilot was secretly trying to convey to authorities the
flight's desperate situation, according to controllers familiar with the
tense minutes after Flight 11 was hijacked.
- The story goes on to say that the conversations were
overheard by the controllers because the pilot had pushed a
"push-to-talk" button. "When he [the pilot] pushed the button and the
terrorist spoke, we knew. There was this voice that was threatening the
pilot, and it was clearly threatening. During these transmissions, the
pilot's voice and the heavily accented voice of a hijacker were clearly
- There are some logical problems with this account, of
course, not the least of which is that a) we are told the pilot's voice
was seldom heard, b) it was not possible to tell which pilot was at the
controls, and c) during the transmissions the pilot's voice was clearly
- THIS ACCOUNTING IS SPOOK TALK. LET'WS GET TO THE
- All of it was recorded by a Federal Aviation
Administration traffic control center. Those tapes are now presumed to
be in the hands of federal law-enforcement officials, who arrived at the
flight-control facility minutes after Flight 11 crashed into the World
Trade Center. The tapes presumably could provide clues about the
hijackers -- and may become even more important if they plane's 'black
boxes' are damaged or never found. ("Controllers' tale of Flight 11,"
The Christian Science Monitor, September 13, 2001.)
- So, yes, the same "federal law-enforcement" machinery
that cooked up the David Koresh negotiation tapes and arranged to
destroy the evidence at the Mt. Carmel Center in the April 19 inferno
will be handling these records, too.
- FLIGHT 175
- The Washington Post reported a similar story for
United Airlines Flight 175, which crashed into the south tower of the
World Trade Center tower at 9:06 a.m.
- Less than 30 minutes into a journey that was to have
taken six hours, Flight 175 took a sharp turn south into central New
Jersey, near Trenton, an unusual diversion for a plane heading west,
airline employees said. It then headed directly toward Manhattan.
- Somewhere between Philadelphia and Newark--less than
90 minutes from Manhattan--the aircraft made its final radar contact,
according to a statement released by United Airlines. (The Washington
Post, "Everything Seemed Normal When They Left' Boston Airport,"
September 12, 2001, pg. A10.)
- Once again, there was no contemporaneous, detailed,
first hand information from the air traffic controllers about
communication from the air traffic controllers.
- Of course the controls would not respond to manual
directions if they were under the control of Global Hawk.
- FLIGHT 11 AND FLIGHT 175: HIJACKER PASSPORTS
- We have just mentioned the distinct possibility that
the masterminds of Operation 911 will manufacture evidence. Well, here
is a CNN story for your consideration:
- In New York, several blocks from the ruins of the
World Trade Center, a passport authorities said belonged to one of the
hijackers was discovered a few days ago, according to city Police
Commissioner Bernard Kerik. That has prompted the FBI and police to
widen the search area beyond the immediate crash site. ("Leaders urge
'normal' Monday after week of terror ..., September 16, 2001 Posted:
7:07 p.m. EDT (2307 GMT)
- We are asked to believe that one of the hijackers
brought his passport with him on a domestic fight, even though he knew
he would not need it then, or ever again; that upon impact the passport
flew from the hijacker's pocket (or was he holding it in his hands?),
that the passport flew out of the aircraft, that it flew out of the
burning tower, and that it was carried by the air currents and landed
safely, where it could be discovered, several blocks away ... LAWD, WHO
WRITES THIS STUFF?
- FLIGHT 93
- United Airlines Flight 93, a Boeing 757, was scheduled
to leave Newark Airport at 8:01 a.m. for San Francisco. We are told it
crashed into an abandoned coal mine near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at
10:37 a.m., one hour and 50 minutes after the first World Trade Center
tower was hit.
- Without a doubt, Flight 93 was shot down. The first TV
network reports said exactly that: Flight 93 had been shot down by a
military jet. That information even made it into the print media.
- Local residents said they had seen a second plane in
the area, possibly an F-16 fighter, and burning debris falling from the
sky. [FBI Agent] Crowley said investigators had determined that two
other planes were nearby but didn't know if either was military.
("Stories swirl around Pa. crash; black box found," USA Today, September
- Pieces of the wreckage have been found as far away as
New Baltimore, about eight miles from the crash site. When the eastbound
plane crashed, a 9-knot wind was blowing from the southeast, [FBI Agent]
Crowley said. ("Bereaved may visit Flight 93 site," Pittsburgh
Tribune-Review, Friday, September 14, 2001.)
- On September 11, "[r]esidents and workers at
businesses outside Shanksville, Somerset County, reported discovering
clothing, books, papers, and what appear to be human remains. Some
residents said they collected bags-full of items to be turned over to
investigators. Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating
in Indian Lake, nearly six miles from the crash site." ("Investigators
locate 'black box' from Flight 93; widen search area in Somerset crash,"
[Pittsburgh] Post Gazette, September 13, 2001.) http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/Dial%20Protected
- The Washington Post reported that, just as
Congressional leaders were discussing shooting the plane down, they
learned it had crashed. ("Jetliner Was Diverted Toward Washington Before
Crash in Pa," Sept. 12, 2001, pg. A10.) The North American Aerospace
Defense Command (NORAD) and the FBI denied that the plane had been shot
- The FBI blamed the spread of debris over an 8-mile
area on a 10 mph wind that was blowing at the time. Of the debris, TIME
Magazine of September 11 says: "The largest pieces of the plane still
extant are barely bigger than a telephone book." (Pages in this edition
are not numbered: this quote appears on what should be pg. 40).
- Planes that crash do not disintegrate in this manner.
However, the assertion that the hijackers had a bomb on board, and the
bomb exploded, might provide an explanation for the
- There is a problem with this story, however: Hijackers
who planned to crash the plane into the Capitol would not want, or need,
a bomb. In fact, a bomb might be counterproductive: Suppose it went off
before hitting the plane hit the Capitol? The mission would be ruined.
Bringing a bomb on board would greatly increase chances the hijacker who
carried the bomb would be detected when boarding. And it's hard to
imagine why hijackers would mutilate and dismember passengers with
plastic knives and box cutters when they were planning to blow them up,
anyway. No, the bomb story does not wash. You can read one such story
- MORE MISSING AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
- According to a an ABC news report by Peter Dizikes on
September 13: "Federal Aviation Administration data shows Flight 93
followed its normal flight plan until it neared Cleveland, where the
plane took a hard turn south.
- "That marks the point at which the plane must have
been hijacked, investigators say. Then it took a turn east."
- Note that the investigators used the phrase "must have
been" hijacked. Didn't they know? Weren't the air traffic controllers in
touch with the pilots? But the direction changes with the next
- ABC-TV NEWS has learned that shortly before the plane
changed directions, someone in the cockpit radioed in and asked the FAA
for a new flight plan, with a final destination of Washington.
- Now, THAT conversation must have been interesting! You
can imagine the response of the air traffic controller: "Excuse me?
Flight 93, you're in the middle of a scheduled trip to San Francisco,
but you're just changed your mind and want to spend the day in
Washington? Please explain."
- According to an MSNBC story of September 22, 2001,
Flight 93 was late taking off, and did not make its way down the runway
until 8:41 a.m. ("The Final Moments of Flight 93"