9-11: Holes in the Radar

US Military please note: this text is not intended to offend the good people in the US Military. The implications of the article are that 9-11 was staged by elements of the US Government/Military but it is very unlikely that it involved the normal people in the military whose only intention is to protect their country.

Since 9-11, many people have wondered how it was possible that the four hijacked planes on 9-11 were able to cause such confusion and chaos without any significant response from  America's air defences (NORAD). Even more amazing is the fact that a hijacked plane was able to both penetrate and attack within the protected air space around Washington DC.

It is already well established that the planners of 9-11 were aware of and possibly taking  advantage of the military exercises and terror drills taking place on and around that day. (See War Games and Terror Drills under additional reading)

What we have discovered is that whoever planned and implemented 9-11 must have had detailed knowledge of  both the NORAD and FAA radar coverage. They cunningly exploited vulnerabilities in the radar that only the US Military and the FAA should have been aware of. The 9-11 commission only skimmed the surface of these issues, using them as a means to draw blame away from the FAA and NORAD.

Another important question is why the hijackers took such long illogical routes to get to their targets. Why, for example, was Flight 93 not crashed into the World Trade Centre, which was in sight of the airport?

Analysis of the flight paths reveals the possibility that the planes were switched for substitute "drone" planes, operated by remote control and loaded with explosives to cause maximum damage. Although this is somewhat speculative, it is important to point out the anomalies in the flight paths that might lead us to consider this scenario. If you are unfamiliar with "plane-swapping" and "remote controlled plane" theories, please refer to Appendix C (Operation Northwoods and Remote Controlled Planes)

Before reading on, you may wish to review the appendices for an explanation of technical terms and some notes on the graphical techniques used throughout this piece.

It is also well worth reading the following article from the Washington Post. They explain in detail about why Flight 77 disappeared from the radar screen, leading the air traffic controller to believe that this flight had crashed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node&contentId=A32597-2001Nov2

Sources showing radar sites and coverage

(Click thumbnails for a larger image)

Surveillance Implications of 9/11 is an FAA analysis of the radar coverage on 9-11 and ways of dealing with future potential threats. The document contains a map of the United States showing internal ATC primary radar coverage (orange) and NORAD radar coverage (maroon)

Flight Explorer Personal Edition. A demo version of this flight tracking software is available to download from the Flight Explorer site. It allows you to view various map overlays including the locations of radar sites, ATC centre and sector boundaries and the locations of airports. Notice the different types of radar site e.g. ALB-T is an Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR) used for Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON). Sites starting with Q are Air Route Surveillance Radar (ARSR). Some of these ARSR sites do not appear on the FAA map above. These are low power secondary only (or beacon only) sites that depend on a plane's transponder signal to show its location.

Sources of Flight Path data

	Chapter one of the 9-11 Commission Report gives some diagrams showing the reconstructed radar data from the hijacked planes.
	Flight Explorer is a publicly available program for tracking commercial flights. The data comes directly from the FAA and shows any commercial flight being tracked by Air Traffic Control as it progresses. The paths of the hijacked flights were automatically archived and the results made available to the mainstream media. (USAToday - animated Flight paths)
	Flytecomm is another flight tracker. They also released archived footage of the hijacked planes but this time in the form of AVI video clips. Read the press release. These video clips show an EST clock in the bottom right hand corner. They feature some radar footage ignored by the other sources. We originally discovered the AVI clips here: http://irvingshapiro.tripod.com/cgi-bin/Flight_93/crashother.avi. http://irvingshapiro.tripod.com/cgi-bin/Flight_93/crashnyc.avi Jack Locutus of letsroll911.org recently confirmed their authenticity by contacting Flytecomm support. They forwarded the same video clips back to him.

The Scenario

This map shows the 9-11 flight paths copied onto part of the FAA radar map (see above). The orange areas are FAA primary radar coverage, the maroon areas are NORAD radar (also used by FAA).

The areas with no primary radar coverage are emphasised in white. The "hijackers" clearly knew where the vulnerabilities in the radar system were. How?

Unless otherwise specified, the times and events in this sequence are taken from the 9-11 Commission Report or directly from the Flight Explorer/ Flytecomm data.

1. 7: 59 Flight 11 takes off from Logan airport
2. 8:14 United Airlines Flight 175 takes off from Logan airport
3. 8:14 Hijacking of Flight 11 apparently begins. It may have been a staged hijacking or part of a terror drill.
4. 8:21 Flight 11 switches off its transponder at the edge of an area that just happens to have no primary radar coverage. Two "drone" flights (remote controlled plane bombs) fly in from this no-radar zone and creep into the radar shadow above Flight 11. These drone flights may have been using Operation Vigilant Guardian as additional cover. Operation Vigilant Guardian was a huge military exercise taking place that week featuring Russian planes flying over the Arctic Circle to attack America. Meanwhile, Flight 11 begins to reduce its altitude.
5. 8:27 Flight 11 appears to turn very close to Schenectady county airport. What really happens is that Flight 11 flies down towards the Mohawk river valley towards Griffiss Air Base (6) and the two drones, still flying in formation, continue down the Hudson river towards New York City.
6. Flight 11 either lands at Griffiss Air Base (home of NEADS, the North Eastern base for NORAD) or flies on to be shot down or destroyed over the great lakes.
7. 8:39-8:43 At this point, Drone Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 come very close together. The remaining drone peels off from formation to rendezvous with Flight 175 over Stewart International airport.
8. 8:46:40 Flight 11(drone) crashes into the North Tower of the World Trade Center.
9. 8:42 Just before the crash, Flight 93 is taking off from Newark, around 42 minutes late.
10. 8:47 Flight 175 switches off its transponder, right at the same time that Flight 93 makes a little unexplained detour to meet it. Both these planes are in the same place at the same time and Flight 175 disappears. Coincidence? No, Flight 175 flies West in Flight 93's radar shadow. Flight 175 goes on to land, possibly at Cleveland or Pittsburgh airport under cover of diversion. 8:51 Flight 175 deviates from its assigned cruising altitude.
11. (Time not available) Air traffic controllers spot an "intruder over Allentown" (Washington Post, Sept 17th 2001). This is a plane flying with an unidentified transponder code and is later assumed to be Flight 175.
12. 9:03 It is, in fact, a drone flight that goes on to crash into the South Tower of the World Trade Center.
13. 9:41 Flight 93, also in the midst of a staged hijacking or terror drill turns off its transponder and drops down low. A drone plane flying in through another hole in the primary radar coverage slips in to take its place on the radar.
14. 10:03 Just before it is shot down, flight 93 is approaching Johnstown Airport. Coincidentally there was a meeting of the Local Emergency Planning Agency (LEPA) in the control tower of Johnstown Airport the day before (See The Johnstown "Terror Team" Cover-up). Was this plane supposed to be part of a terrorist attack drill? The drone, a white unmarked plane, is seen by numerous witnesses circling the crash site. Its presence is never properly explained
15. 8:20 Flight 77 takes off from Dulles Airport (Washington D.C.)
16. 8:39 Flight 77 makes a small detour to the north in an area with no primary radar coverage. At this point it meets the drone, which has flown down from the north through an area with no radar coverage.
17. 8:51 Flight 77 makes its last radio contact. 8:56 It then switches off its transponder and disappears from ATC radar scopes. This is due to the fact that the radar tracking it at the time is a "Secondary only" radar site that depends on responses from the plane's transponder to give a location for the plane. The plane also turns at the weak centre-point between the two primary radars.
18. 9:07 The Flytecomm video shows Flight 77 reappearing again and flying onwards to the west. The presence of this plane was confirmed by Col. Alan Scott at the 2nd hearing of the Commission (9-11 commission hearing, 23rd May 2003). It still appears to be in the air after 10:00.
19. (Time not available) Once again the plane exploits vulnerabilities in the radar coverage to avoid being shot down as it enters restricted D.C. air space. Dulles controllers raise the alarm that an unidentified plane is approaching Washington at about 9:29 (Washington Post, Nov 3, 2001)
20. 9:37 The official time that Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon

Notice the precision timing involved. We frequently see two or more events happening at the same time, like a magician distracting the audience.

• 8:14 Flight 11 is hijacked; Flight 175 takes off.
• 8:39 Flight 11 and Flight 175 nearly meet; Flight 77 deviates from its path.
• 8:46/47 Flight 11 crashes; Flights 175 and 93 meet each other
• 8:51 Flight 77 makes last radio contact; Flight 175 deviates from its assigned altitude

The Witness

http://www.timesreporter.com/archive/printable.php?ID=1490

Did Bolivar man spot Flight 93?

By RENEE BROWN, T-R Staff Writer

A Bolivar man thinks he saw the ill-fated fourth hijacked airliner Tuesday morning shortly before it crashed south of Pittsburgh.

Tim Hacquard, who lives in the Hunter’s Green allotment off county Rd. 92, said he was watching the television coverage of the terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington D.C. and stepped outside.

“I witnessed a large plane that seemed to be flying low, very loud and not level,” Hacquard said. “I didn’t think there were supposed to be any planes in the air and I couldn’t understand why this plane was flying.

“There is not a plane in sight and then there’s a big old plane over my house. On an average day you don’t see those types of planes near Bolivar.

“If it’s a large plane, you can’t hear it or make it out because it’s too high. If it’s a normal plane, it would have stayed at a local airport.”

According to aviation officials, United Airlines Flight 93 was a Boeing 757 that left Newark, N.J., at 8:01 a.m. en route to San Francisco.

It crashed about 10 a.m. southeast of Pittsburgh, presumably killing all 45 aboard. Flight 93 was the fourth plane to crash Tuesday.

“Now I am wondering if this was the plane,” Hacquard said. He said he has some experience with planes, having served in the Air Force – but not as a pilot - for several years.

“It was way too low for that size plane,” he continued. “I was scratching my head. It wasn’t level and was flying somewhat erratic.

“I was thinking maybe it was a plane that had been directed to land, but then I found out a plane crashed in Pennsylvania and I saw the flight plan on the news. How far south did he come?”

Hacquard admitted he didn’t look at his watch to check the time, but he said he watched the large, commercial jet for 15 to 20 seconds.

“I just couldn’t tell if it was a United plane,” he said. “I was thinking, why would it be over Bolivar, why would it be in Ohio? Someone else had to see that plane.”

An FBI spokesperson in Washington D.C. said Wednesday she could not confirm or deny what Hacquard saw.

“I have no specific information on specific flight patterns,” she said.

However Fred Krum, director of aviation at Akron-Canton Regional Airport, acknowledged that the plane could have been close to the area at that time but he doesn’t think it was Flight 93 that Hacquard saw since “it would have been fairly high at that time.”

Another representative of the airport said Hacquard may have seen a military plane or a commercial plane ordered to land at the nearest airport.

Hacquard said the plane seemed to be flying away from the Akron-Canton airport, heading in a more easterly direction. He now also wonders whether the plane was being tracked by government officials.

What happened to the passengers?

Now the tricky part, if plane swapping took place, what happened to the real planes and the passengers? Unfortunately this is where we currently have to resort to educated speculation.

In Operation Northwoods we saw the original "plane swapping" scenario. In this case, the military planners at the pentagon were confident that they could fabricate passengers by creating non-existent IDs for the people on the plane. They were also noticeably confident that no-one would blow the whistle.

However, you can be sure that the 9-11 passengers are not on a desert island somewhere.

Perhaps a number of planes were shot down that day. This is where you get "layers within layers" of the cover-up. Picture this fictional officer speaking: "Listen guys, we accidentally shot down another plane that was conducting an emergency drill today. What really hit the North Tower was a jet that the hijackers chartered from Schenectady County Airport. You understand that the public don't need to know about this, right?"

There are many other possibilities, perhaps the passengers were killed before the plane landed at some remote location.

Conclusions and Summary

These are absolute facts that cannot be ignored:

• Within the area that the hijackings took place, there are two areas with no primary radar coverage that stretch up towards Canada.
• Flight 11 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.
• Flight 77 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.
• Flight 93 switched off its transponder right next to an area with no primary radar coverage.
• United Flight 175 switched off its transponder next to United Flight 93.
• We have two incidences where a hijacked plane came very close to a non-hijacked plane. (What are the odds?) Flight 11(hijacked) meets Flight 175 (not hijacked). Flight 175 (hijacked) meets Flight 93 (Not Hijacked)

Question 1: How did the "hijackers" know exactly where these huge breaches in air defence were located?

Question 2: Why go to all that trouble when you can take off from nearby airports (Dulles/Newark), hijack the plane and crash it straight away?

Appendix A: Technical Information

What are Primary and Secondary Radar? What is a transponder?

Read a detailed technical explanation

A primary radar site simply detects the location of a plane. Air traffic control systems can calculate the direction and speed by measuring its movement over time.

Commercial flights (and most others) use a device called a transponder that relays back detailed information about the flight  when it detects a radar sweep. The transponder provides the controllers with additional information such as altitude and flight number. If the transponder is switched off, the flight effectively becomes an unidentified blip on the radar, although ATC can place a data tag (or block) on the blip for easier identification.

How do Flight Trackers work?

Microsoft provide a simple explanation:

Several years ago, the FAA made radar feeds available to commercial users. These feeds track the status of all aircraft under positive control from FAA Air Traffic Control (ATC) centers throughout the United States—including both scheduled airline flights and business jets.

Simply put, the radar data received by Air Traffic Control can be seen in a slightly more visually pleasing format on a flight tracker.

Appendix B: Graphical techniques

Macromedia Fireworks was used to convert flight path graphics into transparent gif format. All background colours were changed to transparent leaving only the state boundaries and plane icons as opaque.

These transparent gifs can then be pasted as a new layer onto another map. The transparent layer is stretched, rotated and skewed as necessary to align the state boundaries. This gives a very accurate representation of a flight path on top of an alternative backdrop.

Appendix C: Operation Northwoods and Remote Controlled Planes

Operation Northwoods is a document discovered through the Freedom of Information Act which proved conclusively that high ranking members of the US military have planned in the past to use fake terror attacks to justify war. This particular plan was to justify an invasion of Cuba by carrying out numerous acts of violence and trickery.

A full scanned copy of Operation Northwoods can be seen at:

http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-i.htm

The matter-of-fact way in which this memo is presented is quite shocking.

"We could blow up a ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba"

"We could develop a communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities or even in Washington".

For the purpose of this article we will be focusing on one particular section:

http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-10.htm

This section deals with a mock shoot-down of a passenger plane with the intention of blaming Cuba. The basic points follow:

• A plane at Eglin Air Force base would be painted up to be an exact replica of a registered plane belonging to a "CIA proprietary organisation" in Miami.
• This painted plane would be secretly swapped with the real aircraft and loaded with passengers using fake identities. The real craft would be converted into a remote controlled drone. During the flight, the real aircraft (drone) would rendezvous with the fake aircraft. The plane with the fake passengers on board would fly very low and land in the base.
• Passengers and plane would then return to normal and the drone flight would continue on its way
• As the plane flew over Cuba a fake distress message would be broadcast indicating an attack by a Cuban MIG fighter. This would be interrupted by the remote detonation of explosives on board the plane.

A few other points to note:

• http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-8.htm casualty lists in the US papers would create a wave of righteous indignation
• http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-8.htm "(10) Sabotage ships in harbour; large fires--naphthalene." Naphthalene is used by Hollywood special effects people to create enormous "fuel-tank explosion" effects. Frequently used for plane crashes.
• http://emperors-clothes.com/images/north-11.htm deals with a fake shoot down of USAF plane and the distribution of fake plane parts in that location

Modifying planes to be flown by remote control is not a new idea. Read about Operation Aphrodite which goes right back to WWII.

NASA have also test-crashed remotely controlled passenger planes

Appendix D: The BTS data

www.bts.gov is the website for the "Bureau of Traffic Statistics". There is a searchable database which shows, for example, the departure times of all major passenger planes in USA. You will see listed below the conflicts between the official story and the data on this site.

7: 59 Flight 11 officially takes off from Logan
airport, though BTS database notes that it didn't
depart at all. (no wheels-off time)

2. 8:14 United Airlines Flight 175 officially takes off
from Logan airport, though BTS notes it departed at
8:23 (wheels-off time)

9. 8:42 Just before the crash, Flight 93 is officially
taking off from Newark, around 42 minutes late, though
BTS notes that it actually already departed at 08:28
(wheels-off)

15.8:20 Flight 77 officially takes off from Dulles
Airport (Washington D.C.), though BTS notes that the
flight didn't exist at all on that day.

Further Reading

Some very interesting reading about radar and Air Traffic Control by Tom Lusch.

http://home.columbus.rr.com/lusch/rtudslide01.html

This will give you a better understanding of why Flight 77 disappeared from the radar screen.

War Games and Terror Drills

Here are some sample articles on this subject

The lost "terror drill"? Pt.11 (A) (Nico Haupt)

The lost terror drill- Pt.11 B

Additional notes by Nico Haupt

Michael Kane: "9/11 War Games – No Coincidence"

Wargames Were Cover For the Operational Execution of 9/11

THE GREAT 9/11 COINCIDENCE

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/060704_tripod_fema.html