Flight 11 hijacked before take-off?

reply to post by weedwhacker

Well this was from your source:

Some family members of the passengers and crew will later be suspicious that one of the hijackers was in the plane’s cockpit from takeoff (see 9:16 a.m. September 11, 2001). However, according to Longman, “Investigators, pilots, flight attendants and United officials tended to discount this theory.… Paperwork would have to be filled out in advance if an observer requested to sit in the cockpit. No request was made for Flight 93, United officials later reported.… Flight 93 was hijacked approximately forty-five minutes after it left Newark.

And how the investagtors dismiss acounts just absolutely amazes me. I man reports a gun....nope not possible, dismissed. WTF.....And the Husband of the Flight Attendent who is with the Justice Dept. could give a consistent detailed account, no offense to him, but just another example of our Government at work.
What really has me at a loss, is the reports of how calm everyone was. Even in the background, no crying, yelling just calm silence or as a woman said, like a group in a board room in discussion. God bless them, I for one would be yelling, kicking, punching, clawing, biting regardless of the odds.....your going to die, might as well go out will some a$$kicking excitement.

reply to post by hellfrozeover


This is specifically about American Airlines 11, a B-767, operating BOS-LAX, that was hijacked well after takeoff, and AFTER reaching its initial cruise altitude.

You found a mention of United Airlines 93, a B-757, operating EWR-SFO, that also was hijacked after takeoff, and AFTER reaching its initial cruise altitude.


Now...since that genie has popped, no doubt someone will try to claim that American 11 might also have had a jump seater.

Let's see about that scenario:

The procedure for a pilot from another airline (in other words, not employed by, or affiliated with the airline) to access the jumpseat is more stringent today, and I won't describe it.

PRIOR to 9/11, though, the responsibility still was with the first people the person requesting jumpseat contacted, and that was a ground representative of some sort (either a ticket agent, or a dispatcher/load planner, depending on the company's internal procedure).

THEN, after an ID check, the request was forwarded to the Captain, who had final authority to grant, or deny. Just about ALL major air carriers also had an approved list, usually negotiated in union companies with management. ONLY those on the approved list were even under consideration. OTHERS needed approval from a management pilot with enough horsepower (authority) to OK it.

We, therefore, were familiar with other airline's IDs and uniforms....AND the jumpseating pilot had to have his Airman's Certificate with him, and be able to show it.

Finally, the jumpseat is a 'perk' as a professional courtesy...sometimes it's the ONLY seat left for someone who is commuting somewhere, and is either on a reduced-fare standby ticket, or has no ticket at all. In the vast majority of cases, the jumpseater was offered a seat in the cabin, if one was available, after boarding was finished.

Believe me, it is NO FUN to be stuck up in the cockpit for five-six hours; even a Coach seat is better, and sometimes the F/As were very nice and offered an empty seat in First, if you were polite or they liked you for some reason.

So, the upshot is: ANY pilot, whether a 'real' one, (or even IF one of the hijackers tried to fake it) there would be a paper trail. Not only the jumpseat form that was filled out by the jumpseater (either in triplicate or, at some airlines I rode, in quadruplicate) AND the addition of the person would be in the weight & balance/load planning data too.

Hope that dispels any misconceptions anyone may have about the process.

sorry for the off topicness here..

But I have always wondered how those 1/16 inch bone fragments that wedwhacker alluded to managed to travel 400ft away from the collapse site??

Why didnt they fall vertically downwards, to be found at the base of the collapse

How did they travel400 feet ????

My answer?

The detonations ejected them this distance...no other answer makes sense.

Proof of explosives, which will always travel outwards, unlike a genuine collapse, which falls downwards.

Not some looney tunes truther stance...rational logic...think about it.

reply to post by benoni


When South Tower (WTC 2) came down it rained debris on to 130 Liberty
St (Aka Deutsche Bank or Bankers Trust).

Front facade facing Liberty St was slashed open by steel beams and panels
falling from WTC 2

Pictures of damage

mceer.buffalo.edu...

The now infamous black skyscraper was once an integral part of the Wall Street financial district standing in the shadow of the twin towers of the World Trade Center (WTC). Then came September 11, 2001 and, from that day on, all references to the Deutsche Bank building at 130 Liberty Street have had disturbing implications.As the south tower of the WTC collapsed, the debris from that massive structure crashed into everything in the surrounding area including other smaller buildings. One of the most striking images from that catastrophe was the 40-story Deutsche Bank building being ripped open and laid bare by a huge section of the south tower as it plummeted to the street below.

When the debris settled, lattice-work steel panels of the fallen south tower protruded from a 14-story gash in the Deutsche Bank structure like a giant silver fork sticking.

At first there was the fear that 130 Liberty Street would collapse as a result of the serious structural damage it had suffered. The building, however, would not go down, and as firefighters fought to extinguish the many fires in the area, hundreds of thousands of gallons of water poured into the smoldering wreckage along with tons of toxic dust and debris.

Some much for "falling straight down"

Debris cloud carried body parts and fragments (because that all there was)
into building interior and on roof

what usually gets glossed over is the fact that on 911 there were MULTIPLE live-fly mock hijacking exercises taking place over the u.s.

Of course there were "hijackers" int he cockpit before take off in some of the crafts used. Some of these exercises were passive meaning that some passengers had no clue. Other hijacking were controlled. Whether or not these planes are the ones that crashed into the towers are a diffrent topic all together.

There is ample proof out there that states the methods of the exercises on 911 using real aircraft and fake signature 'blips' on radar. This explains why the attacks were not stopped. Most of the people involved knew it was "all part of the exercise" only to find out when they got home that it actually happend.

Another question is did someone or some group hijack the mocked hijack aircraft using remote? How many of these live fly planes were actually flown by live pilots?

The level of debunking going on here really points to this theory as possibly true. Understand that it has been admitted that there are people employed to come to forums just like this one to obsefucate the truth and protect the agencies involved i.e USAF, Norad, ect.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Shadow Herder]

reply to post by Shadow Herder


Sorry, but everything you think you are relaying here as "fact" is just more of the same disinfo that has grown up on the 'conspiracy' websites that litter the Internet.

The majority of this garbage has NO basis in actual fact...but, once the lies get written, people find it easier to believe what they've read, rather than to do some real research to verify the claims.

The above post is a prime example.

[edit on 16 December 2009 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Shadow Herder

 

Sorry, but everything you think you are relaying here as "fact" is just more of the same disinfo that has grown up on the 'conspiracy' websites that litter the Internet.

Sorry you are so misinformed and ignorant. I have made several points that are valid. Your methods I see are quite transperant in these forums after glossing over your previous "contributions".

Provide a source that proves the claims incorect.

There were live-fly and passive hijacking exercises on 911 - FACT

Multiple planes and fake blips were used on 911 -FACT

Norad and other agencies believed the attacks were not really happening till it was too late (thought it was part of the exercise - FACT.

Black boxes and the majority of the planes did not survive but planted passports did - FACT


People are hired to come to forums such as this one to protect certain agencies such as USAF and others - FACT.

Sorry weedwhacker. From what we can see and the history of your posting methods it is quite evident what your agenda is. Burry, obsefucate, and derail threads. If you dont like the topic or forum topic there other forums in which you can glorify your knowledge or lack there of.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


Here, I've only copied one of your "FACTS":

Black boxes and the majority of the planes did not survive but planted passports did - FACT

ONE passport was found, because it was ejected from the wreckage as the chaos of the crash scenario unfolded. There were many, many OTHER small lightweight itmes found too. Just one, if you care to look into it, was an ATM card that belonged to a passenger. It was found unscathed in the WTC rubble, many months after 9/11, during the cleanup.

Some incredibly amazing things will happen, in violent accidents. Anyone with the intellectual honesty to study such events will soon see other examples.

Eight 'black boxes' in total (actually, Cockpit Voice recorders --- four --- and SSFDRs ---- four ----) were involved. The four at the WTC were demolished under the immense hundreds of tons of debris that fell on them, as the Towers collapsed. If you bother to research this, then it will be clear to you why that happened.

Three of the remaining four were able to be read...all but the CVR from American 77 at the Pentagon. Its data was unusable.

I have no "agenda", despite your veiled allegation. I just can't stand to see the lies being spread, repeatedly, by people who have been fooled into believing them.

AS TO your other three "FACTS" from your post, why not do something that most here do, and go find the verifiable sources to back up those claims.

THAT was the point I made a few minutes ago, in post up above.

Simply reading from a conspiracy site, and then accepting what THEY say, without looking further into it, is a sign of refusing to "deny ignorance".

[edit on 16 December 2009 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by Lillydale
What else is what happens in crashes? The black box ALWAYS SURVIVES AND IS RECOVERED. It is what happens in crashes.

I love it when Truthers start talking in complete and utter absolutes. It remains the fastest and best way to tell whether or not someone knows what they are talking about, and in this case it is certain they do not.

To equate a conventional, traditional airliner crash scene with that of the World Trade Tower crash scene and expect the two scenes to render exactly the same environments regarding "black box" dynamics is, in a word, absurd.

The approximately 1,000,000 tons of steel and other building materials that collapsed in Manhattan on 9/11 is light years away from a crash of an airliner in a field or on take off or on landing or even through a break-up in mid air.

To state, regardless of the type of crash/mishap scene, that "The black box ALWAYS SURVIVES AND IS RECOVERED." is ignorance of a number of things.

1) Typical Truther logic in assuming that this was your typical, run-of-the-mill airplane crash into a building - something that happens every day, or at least has happened a few time before, or at LEAST has happened once before. Wrong - high speed suicidal impacts with 1,000 tall skyscrapers has *never happened before*, so applying the lens of history of "What happened before will happen again here" is not only silly, it is ignorant.

2) As I mentioned above, each tower had approximately 500,000 tons of building material (steel, aluminum, concrete, office equipment, steel cables, elevators, etc) making up 1,000,000 tons of destructive force and debris that no black box has EVER....and yes, I will use an absolute....EVER had to experience before. Not finding the FDR and CVR in that hell hole of destruction is not surprising in the least.

3) Using "absolutes" are fine - as long as you can back them up. Truthers love using them, but they have *never* even come close on backing them up.

reply to post by weedwhacker

Eight 'black boxes' in total (actually, Cockpit Voice recorders --- four --- and SSFDRs ---- four ----) were involved. The four at the WTC were demolished under the immense hundreds of tons of debris that fell on them, as the Towers collapsed. If you bother to research this, then it will be clear to you why that happened.

Help me out WW. I would imagine that if tons of debris sat on the black boxes, they would be flattened- Not demolished.

Kind of like when you crush a can. The can is flattened but still exists.

Are you saying the black boxes just vanished under all that debris or were the black boxes flattened and unusable?

Any clarification will help.

Thanks

On the show, they brought on an expert about the 'black boxes' and he was asked the question, "what are the chances of not finding the black boxes in this case." His answer was "almost zero....it's never happened before."

Somehow we're suppossed to believe that none of the 4 black boxes were found. IMO, if you believe this, you simply can't handle the truth.

Also, if the 'hijackers' were in the cockpit before it took off, then we should no longer call them 'hijackers.' It is hard to believe that anyone could hijack a plane on the ground, but it's not hard to believe that they could simply walk in and sit down in the cockpit, if that was the 'drill' all along.

Originally posted by Klaatumagnum
reply to post by weedwhacker

 

Think about it again, feel it again. You really can't believe that your Government is capable or such a thing can you?

Japanese Americans placed in camps during WWII. Project MKUltra introduced '___' to unsuspecting AMERICAN citizens. We gave diseases to African Americans without treatment just to study the effects of the sickness. We created and dropped an atomic weapon on a civilian island. Denied lawsuits against the government who had been improperly disposing of toxic waste and had made employees sick. CIA has often opened up houses of prostitution to advance goals. DDT was repeatedly released to the public and even sprayed on children when labs had proven it was dangerous. Do I believe that the United States Government is capable of such a thing?


.....absofrickenlutely.

reply to post by jam321



Only speculating, but I would say crushed, mangled, twisted, possibly split open, the contents completely demolished.

The SSFDRs were 'Solid State' recorders. ALL of the data encoded onto circuit boards, no moving parts. Once the casing protecting the delicate electronics was breached, flattened, torn open, etc...the wafers and circuitry inside wouldn't stand a chance of survival.

SOME CVRs are the older versions, with actual magnetic tape, in a continuous loop (a lot like old 8-track tape cartridges) and more modern ones are all digital, solid state now.

Either way, the only thing that gives any of the recorders 'survivability' is the design of the case. You can look up the specs, but from what I've read they are required to withstand as much as 3,400 Gs on impact, should be able to survive a fire (but no details as to how long, or how hot would be limiting) and should still be usable after submersion in water.

Most airplane crashes that involve fire don't burn for as long, or as fiercely as was seen inside the WTC Towers. Besides the initial jet fuel to start the fires, there was a LOT of material in those offices that kept the fires burning.

In that situation, and I'm speculating again, I would think that the orange paint on the outside, used to help identify and locate when involved in 'normal' crashes, would certainly have been burned off. This is one reason I tend to discount any claims of seeing the 'orange boxes' that have been made by certain people. This is in addition to the fact of the energies, and sheer SIZE of the crushing debris that comprised the mass of the buildings.

I tell ya, I surely wished that something had survived, been found, and been read out so this nonsense about the Flight 11 and Flight 175 wouldn't be out there, making money for unscrupulous people off of misery of the events of that day. An entire cottage industry of crapolla might never have risen up. BUT, given some of the unsubstantiated claims, and downright lies, I've seen, there probably would have been someone to keep this 'conspiracy' alive, no matter the evidence.

reply to post by shasta9600

.... but it's not hard to believe that they could simply walk in and sit down in the cockpit, if that was the 'drill' all along.

you see, that is the sort of misconception that causes these ideas to come about.

IF you'd read through this thread, you'd have seen just why someone isn't going to just "walk in and sit down" in the cockpit.

That is something that was made up by people who know nothing about the airline business, and how it operates in the real world. they make that up, because they sit around and imagine it. Probably based on Hollywood movies.

reply to post by weedwhacker


Appreciate the info.

I can understand that the data was probably and in all likelihood lost, damaged, or irretrievable.

But I have a hard time believing that the boxes were not found. Mangled, crush, torn open is acceptable, but not that they just disappeared without a trace.

The box is composed of three layers to provide different types of protection to the recording medium. The outermost shell is a case made of hardened steel or titanium designed to survive intense impact and pressure damage. The second layer is an insulation box while the third is a thermal block to protect against severe fire and heat. Together, these three layered cases allow the FDR and CVR to survive in all but the most extreme crash conditions.

www.aerospaceweb.org...

Yes, I read the last line, but I think they are referring more to the data than the boxes themselves.

Once again, thanks.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by shasta9600

 

.... but it's not hard to believe that they could simply walk in and sit down in the cockpit, if that was the 'drill' all along.

you see, that is the sort of misconception that causes these ideas to come about.

IF you'd read through this thread, you'd have seen just why someone isn't going to just "walk in and sit down" in the cockpit.

That is something that was made up by people who know nothing about the airline business, and how it operates in the real world. they make that up, because they sit around and imagine it. Probably based on Hollywood movies.

You seem to be basing your knowledge and belief that this is not possible, based on how you know the airline business to normally operate in the real world? Obviously on that day, their were some exta-ordinary circumstances.....and maybe this was one of them. I don't know, but if you're open to finding out the truth, I'm on your side.

reply to post by jam321


Yeah, good find from aerospaceweb...

Everyone thinks, when they see or hear 'titanium' that it is some super-strong impervious metal. It is not. Titanium is valued more for its light weight, and being more temperature resistant than, say steel or certainly aluminum alloys...but it doesn't measure up in the strength department compared to other metals.

EVERYTHING on an airplane is a compromise, and weight and space are just two limiting factors in design. A Flight recorder design is, therefore, another compromise. It could be built like an office safe, for instance. Huge, with inches-thick walls and so forth. BUT, that is not practical, because of weight concerns, mostly. It would be overkill, and just not needed for the 99.9999% of airplane accidents and incidents one would normally expect.

Here, just to show that the external cases are NOT impervious:



Couldn't find a reference to what airplane crash that came from, it might be there if i look hard enough.

But, it's fair to say that the thing has taken a beating, and that from a somewhat "normal" crash, I suspect. NOTHING like what happened at the WTC.

Oh, just for the thread topic, again....got off a bit, there: The recovery of readable CVRs from AAL 11 and/or UAL 175 would have gone a long way to put down this "hijacked before take-off" nonsense, but alas we don't have them.

reply to post by shasta9600


I doubt it.

Obviously on that day, their were some exta-ordinary circumstances.....and maybe this was one of them.

The history of American Flight 11 shows nothing extra-ordinary at all, prior to the actual hijacking and takeover.

ALL of it, by all accounts, from the embarking of passengers, to the push-back and engine start, to taxi and take-off....and subsequent climb to cruise altitude.

ATC (air traffic control) tapes, since that's what exist instead of CVR recordings, show normal, routine operations until the hijacking.

No one who worked at Boston airport, and had direct contact with the flight, has ever come forward to announce that anything was other than normal.

The airplane was not exchanged in flight with some "other" fantasy airplane, as some proponents of conspiracies believe, and wish to shout about.

None of these alleged NORAD 'stand-downs' occurred, and any 'games' being conducted were not occurring in the Northeastern United States. These alleged 'facts' that keep being spread on the Internet are just more in a series of loosely claimed 'theories' that, once getting started, spread because there's always someone out there to spread them, the nature of the Web being what it is today.

Unfortunately, even things that are outright lies will be accepted at face value, absent any effort to really study them and validate the claims.

There is an historical adage, or quote...I believe attributed to Abe Lincoln (but might have been Mark Twain). Comes from the 19th century, anyway, and it is still accurate even in today's modern age:

"A lie can be half way around the World before the truth has a chance to get its boots on."

Such is Human nature.

reply to post by weedwhacker


I'm new to the site and haven't read through all the different 9/11 threads. Just so I have a general idea of where you stand overall on this,....do you believe the official story given by our government?

reply to post by shasta9600


There is no such thing as one "official" story.

What does exist is a compilation of facts and scenarios, as observed, cataloged and reported from the moment the first airplane (AAL 11) hit the first Tower.

This "official story" canard (or "OS" in shorthand) has been concocted by the conspiracy enthusiasts and their various cults, depending on which cult they happen to belong to. Oh, there's another sting rhetorical term used by some of them, too...."GL" --- for 'government loyalist'. See? An attempt to paint with a broad brush those who have a brain and can reason. AND that have various life experiences that are pertinent, and useful to dispel the rumours and innuendo that fill the conspiracy sites' web pages.

Now, in opposition to those two monikers, we have the term "Truthers", which is an acceptable term for ATS' purposes, and that sometimes morphs into 'truth movement', or 'TM' for short. Personally, I think of them more as originally "9/11 deniers", in the same vein as a holocaust denier would be considered; a fringe extremist viewpoint. The methodology used is remarkably similar.

I suppose an entire Master's Thesis could be devoted to the psychology of this phenomenon. Perhaps someone already has; if not, I'm saure someone will eventually.

AS TO the claims made by most of these conspiracy sites, usually there is no real basis in fact put forth, they are merely word-of-mouth and innuendo in the initial stages, but by virtue of being repeated often enough they become indistinguishable, to some, from actual facts.

An appalling lack of understanding of many disciplines of science, for one thing, contributes. Also, there are a large number of "Monday Morning Quarterbacks" who seem to crave their fifteen minutes of fame (and more, as it turns out).

This might be a motive for the guy who is presented in this thread's OP, It is sad, though, that no matter how outrageous a claim is, there is always a faction who will jump on it, in any desperate attempt to keep the fantasy of "inside job" alive.

BTW....even those who are out pimping the conspiracies get confused, and muddy the waters...even as they announce that they are seeking "TRUTH", with all the self-righteous indignity that they can muster.

One example off the top of my head is the mixing of what they call the "OS" with the NIST report, concerning the WTC Towers (see, trying to keep topic...)

NIST does not examine the mechanics and physics of the collapses, is my understanding, but rather the sequence of events, the intelligence failures, the mistakes in communication made between various government agencies, a lot of the background about what led up to the terrorist's plot being missed, and their being able to carry out their plans so freely.

IF there is any conspiracy (and this is where I think there actually is) there was an effort by many ni government circles, and agencies, to cover up evidence of those sorts of failures. They were covering their own butts (CYA mentality).

THAT is the sort of behaviour that likely first triggered, in some people's minds, the notion of something 'wrong', like they were 'hiding' something...when in fact, all they did was try to not get blamed, hoping someone else would.

I also would reckon that this noise that the TM and its various factions are making works to the advantage of those who have something to hide, in terms of being totally incompetent and therefore culpable in failing to stop the act of terrorism on our own soil.