Nineteen young Arab men were able to board four American domestic passenger jets and, armed with only Stanley knives or modelling knives, were able to over-power the crew and passengers of each plane. Four of them had received flight training on simulators in America and, despite not being able to speak English, had learned enough to take over the controls of each plane. They knew enough to switch off the transponders and autopilot and managed to steer aircraft they had never flown before, single handedly, into very small targets, with minute precision, many, many miles away.
So what we actually know is that in the first place their names did not appear on any passenger list and that is not an easy thing to arrange. There are no cases, prior to 9/11, of a passenger being able to board a commercial airline without being checked in. On September 11, 2001 there were nineteen examples. There have been no cases since 9/11. And no DNA has been found of any of them at the four crash sites.
Subsequently there is no proof of any kind that they were even on board. Their names have appeared on passenger lists, subsequently posted on the internet since 9/11, but did not at the time. Even the passport found on the street in New York is not proof that Satam al Suqami was up there in that inferno. If anything finding his perfectly preserved passport on the street would suggest he could not have been up there, or it had been lost or stolen and coincidentally dropped in New York on that day. Or he was on the ground and dropped it himself. But there is no tangible proof any of them were on any of the aircraft. Only what we have been told.
Furthermore, seven of them were still alive after 9/11 and living in the middle east or Africa. Pilot Waleed al Shehri was interviewed by the BBC on September 23rd in Casablanca, Morocco and was obviously protesting his innocence. He was easy to believe since he was not dead. He told journalists there that he had nothing to do with the attacks on New York and Washington, and had been in Morocco when they happened. He had contacted both the Saudi and American authorities to report his innocence. He claimed his brother Wail, another named as one of the hijackers of Flight 11, was also still alive.
Abdul Aziz al Omari, an alleged Flight 11 hijacker is still alive too and working as an engineer with Saudi Telecoms. He claims he lost his passport in Denver and obviously would have had to report this to the authorities or he would not have been able to travel back to Saudi Arabia. Another man of the same name is also alive and is a pilot working for Saudi Arabian Airlines. A London newspaper interviewed Saeed al Ghamdi after 9/11 and they too confirmed that announcements of his death had been premature. The same goes for Ahmed al Nami, Salem al Hazmi and Mohamed al Shehri who were all still alive after September 11, 2001.
Despite this the FBI have not revised their list of hijackers. Special Agent Flagg of the FBI briefed reporters and said that they had identified the hijackers immediately as they discovered a list of the names of all of them in luggage Mohammad Atta had left behind in a rental car. Apparently the list was in a case along with a terrorist manual with instructions of how to hijack a passenger aircraft.
How did they find Atta’s rental car? We are told that the authorities received an anonymous tip about a suspicious looking white car parked at Logan Airport. What do you think was suspicious about a white rental car parked at Logan Airport among tens of thousands of other similar looking white cars? Was it upside down? Was it on fire? How could it look suspicious?
There has also been cockpit recordings released of the terrorist, Muslim, hijackers chanting Allah Akbah, which translates as God is Great. But, according to Muslim scholars, the final words a devout follower of Islam should be; ‘There is but one God, Allah. And Mohammed is his prophet. Would they get their important final words so wrong..? Possibly.
And in direct contradiction to this briefing by Special Agent Flagg there is now information of a earlier list of suspects that the FBI put together from their first look through the flight manifests (passenger lists) They then began to investigate the movements, immediately prior to the attacks, of;
All of these men, with the exception of Atta, were Saudi Arabian pilots living in Vero Beach, Florida. Abdul Alomari lived with his family in the same house as Amer Kamfar. Right next door was Adnan Bukhari and his family who had Ameer Bukhari, thought at that time to be his brother, staying with them. Mohamed Atta was the only one who was not qualified as a pilot although was known to have been receiving flight training at Huffman Aviation, among other flight schools.
At 5am on the morning of September 12, 2001 a police S.W.A.T team stormed into Adnan Bukhari’s house only to be surprised to find him eating breakfast and watching news coverage of the previous day’s events. They arrested him anyway after claiming that his identity card, and that of brother Ameer, had been discovered in a rental car left by known hijackers in Portland, Maine.
This raises other questions because as the FBI clearly didn’t know who the hijackers were at this stage then how would they know where their cars were parked? Anyway, not important. What is important is that Ameer Bukhari, who was not related and not living at the same address after all, had died a year earlier. The agents then evacuated the surrounding streets, claiming the house was rigged with explosives. After passing polygraph tests and providing credible alibis Bukhari was released and allowed to go home. He was lucky, he could have ended up in Guantanamo Bay had it been ready by then.
Abdul Rahman Alomari and Amer Kamfar were also alive and well and not living next door after all, they were in Saudi Arabia. Instead the S.W.A.T team invaded the house of an entirely innocent family. Only Mohammad Atta was unaccounted for and therefore became the first name on the second list. The one we all got to see on the front pages of our newspapers the following morning. However, these two lists of suspects were then, and still are now, at least partially wrong. From the first list only Atta could have been involved and from the second seven of the suspects were still alive on September 12th.
Remember Atta’s name came up on a search of a passenger list along with four other Arabs who were already dead before or still alive afterwards. Which means the hijackers were using false identities in four out of the five examples. The second list was compiled after the FBI claimed they had traced Atta’s hire car and, inside, found a bomb making manual (why would he need one?) and a convenient, complete list of the of the nineteen names of all the actual men who were allegedly involved in the attacks on September 11, 2001. Now add in the crucial details, the things that we actually know.
Mohamed Atta’s name did NOT appear on any flight manifest that made up the initial list of five suspects. So where did his name come from? One of them was already dead, three were still alive and only Atta was unaccounted for. From the second list of nineteen, found in Atta’s car, seven were still alive and none of them were on the original passenger manifests. Even if you want to still believe all you have been told then try this little exercise. Imagine, for just one moment, if Mohamed Atta’s identity had been stolen as we know the other four on the initial FBI list had been, then how reliable to you find this second list of nineteen suspects?
This is exactly what the Daily Telegraph reported in England on 23rd September 2001
Revealed: The Men With Stolen Identities
Their names were flashed around the world as suicide hijackers who carried out the attacks on America. But yesterday four innocent men told how their identities had been stolen.
The men, all from Saudi Arabia – spoke of their shock at being mistakenly named by the FBI as suicide terrorists. None of the four was in the United States on September 11 and all are alive in their home country.
The Telegraph obtained the first interviews with the men since they learnt that they were on the FBI’s list of hijackers who died in the crashes in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.
All four said they were outraged to be identified as terrorists. One has never been to America and another is a Saudi Airlines pilot who was on a training course in Tunisia at the time of the attacks. Saudi Airlines said it was considering legal action against the FBI for seriously damaging its reputation and that of its pilots.
And finally, in respect of the pilot-hijackers there is one last important piece of known evidence. And that is none of them could have flown those planes on 9/11 anyway. Experts have now studied their backgrounds and the training they apparently received, and read their evaluations and they were all found to be under skilled and unqualified. Extensive tests have been performed in flight simulators and you cannot find a pilot anywhere who will agree that any of the people on the FBI list, that made up the 9/11 Commission Report, could have flown those four aircraft on 9/11 in the manner in which we have been told they did.
Hundreds, if not thousands, of pilots have used simulators to try and recreate the flight patterns of both jets that hit the Twin Towers and none of them have managed to hit their target first time. Some pilots with 20,000 hours experience have needed three to four attempts. Go to the Pilots for 911 Truth website for more information. Don’t take my word for this, do your own research.
Instead, these four alleged hijackers, the pilots, were novices who had barely learned how to fly small propeller planes. Their instructors describe them as having only ‘very poor to below average piloting skills, at best.’ And yet at their very first attempt behind the controls of a Boeing 757 (or 767) on September 11, 2001, they were competent enough to fly at altitudes of up to 37,000ft, without any assistance from either a co-pilot or air traffic control, and successfully navigate into their intended targets. Even though it is possible, in theory, it can only be regarded as somewhere between highly unlikely and impossible. And then multiply that by three.
Tony Ferrante, the head of the Federal Aviation Administration’s investigations division, spent several days after the incidents carefully piecing together the movements of the four aircraft targeted in the attacks. He later revealed that his ‘hair stood on end’ when he understood the precision with which all four aircraft had been flown.
Darryl Jenkins, the director of the Aviation Institute at George Washington University, told the New York Times that the pilots who carried out the attacks ‘knew what they were doing down to very smallest detail.’ He said that ‘Each one of them must have been trained in flying big planes.’
The Times reported that a ‘number of aviation experts agreed’ with Jenkins and had said that ‘the hijackers must have been experienced pilots.’ John Nance, an airline pilot, author, and aviation expert, noted that ‘the direct hits on the two towers and on the Pentagon suggested to him that the pilots were experienced fliers.’
Nance pointed to the smooth banking of the second plane to strike the towers and said that ‘precisely controlling a large jet near the ground, necessary for the Pentagon attack, also required highly advanced skill.’ Nance concluded, ‘There’s no way any amateur could have, with any degree of reliability, done what was done during the 9/11 attacks.
Robin Lloyd, a Boeing 737 captain with a British airline, told The Telegraph that ‘the hijackers had to be 100 percent switched on people, 100 percent experienced pilots and probably military trained. He said someone like Osama bin Laden ‘just wouldn’t have access to pilots of the calibre needed to pull it off.’
Unlike pilots of the small planes the four hijacker pilots could barely understand, Boeing 757s and 767s require a vast understanding of navigation techniques and an in-depth knowledge of complicated hydraulic systems, autopilot and thrust controls. They also have sophisticated glass cockpits with video screens and digital read outs that require an advanced level of computer skills, and training, to be able to understand and follow.
Niki Lauda, the former Formula One world champion who is also a pilot and owned his own airline, said on German TV that whoever flew the aircraft into the WTC must have been ‘properly trained to fly a plane like that.’ He said, ‘You have to know exactly what the turning radius of a plane like that is, if I am trying to hit the World Trade Centre. That means, these had to be fully trained 767 or 757 pilots. It certainly could not be the case that some half-trained pilot tries it somehow, because then he could not hit it.’
In fact every experienced pilot who is prepared to comment on the flying competence of the 9/11 pilots have all said that the only way they themselves could be certain of hitting those targets was by using autopilot. Which, as we know, were switched off in all four cases.
And yet the main stream media, for this example it is the New York Magazine, is still publishing articles like this one to reinforce the original story and hope future generations use information like this as historic fact when doing their own research. George Orwell warned us about this in 1948.
Mohamed Atta and Marwan Alshehhi, allegedly the terrorists who flew American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 into the World Trade Centre, were mediocre pilots, according to several accounts. They learned to fly between July and December 2000 at a flight school in Venice, Florida. They were enrolled in the school’s Accelerated Pilot Program and trained in a Cessna 172, a small single-engine propeller plane. In mid-December 2000, the two men passed their commercial pilot tests and received their licenses.
The closest Atta and Alshehhi came to flying a jet aircraft before September 11 was the two days they spent at the SimCenter flight school in Opa-Locka, Florida, in late- December 2000, where they had six hours of training in a Boeing 727 simulator. Henry George, the owner of the SimCenter who trained Atta and Alshehhi said the two men were given only a ‘mini, mini introduction’ into jet flight. George found their flying skills to be unremarkable.
Hani Hanjour, who supposedly at the controls of Flight 77 and who had the most difficult task in attacking the Pentagon stood out in flight school only for his particularly weak flying skills. This twenty-nine-year-old Saudi Arabian was described by instructors as a ‘hopeless pilot.’ The flights school’s owner noted in his file that Hanjour was ‘weak and wasting our resources.’ After being asked to leave that facility Hanjour joined another where he was assessed as ‘very poor.’
His knowledge of the academic side of training was weak, his flying skills were marginal, but most significantly his ‘judgment was very poor.’ The instructor noted that Hanjour ‘was neither well educated nor was he very intelligent.’ He also had a poor understanding of the basic principles of aviation and poor technical skills.
Another instructor, in early 2001, found Hanjour’s piloting skills so bad and his understanding of English to be so inadequate that he questioned whether his pilots license was genuine. He feared Hanjour’s skill level to be so poor that he worried he could be a safety hazard at the flight centre. Yet another instructor at the time described him as ‘totally clueless. I will be amazed if he could have flown a plane into the Pentagon because he couldn’t fly at all.’
In mid August, one month before the attacks, he was assessed as ‘a poor student.’ He was then refused a request to hire a small, light aircraft without further training. All of this only one month before he supposedly pulled off one of the greatest flying achievements of all time.
At the controls of United Airlines Flight 93 was the slightly more competent Ziad Jarrah, a twenty-six year-old from the Lebanon. This one learned to fly during the later part of 2000 having spent six months at a flight school in Florida. He trained on a two-seater Cessna 152 propeller plane. The owner of the enter described him as average and that ‘we had to do more to get him ready than any of the others.’
In June of 2001 he had a further two flying sessions before he too was refused a hire plane because of his poor flying skills. Herbert Hortman, the owner of the school, told the 9/11 Flight Commission that he was ‘surprised Jarrah had qualified for his pilot’s licence because they had considered him to be of limited ability.’ Hortman also speculated that a flight-school with a ‘less that reputable nature had issued the license.’ His intended target is thought to have been the White House or Capitol Hill until he was thwarted by the passengers, says the Report. But could his target have been WTC7 or another Larry Silverstein building, the Sears Tower in Chicago that was evacuated at 10.02am after a warning that a plane could be heading their way?
Now, it is possible that all four of these so-called pilots could have had beginners luck. But, if so this has to be the greatest example of beginners luck since beginners luck was first recorded. Or, if not, then the official explanation of the 9/11 attacks should be questioned. And this is on top of what we already know about WTC7, the Twin Towers and the men in suits who walked through the fire to survival. And the Dancing Israelis. And the questionable evidence provided by the U.S. Solicitor General about his wife’s phone calls. Plus the other phantom phone calls and the two aircraft, at the pentagon and in Shanksville, that just weren’t there for the first reporters.
Mohammad Atta (The Ring Leader)
Atta, the scary one with the ‘thousand yard stare,’ had his passport stolen in 1999. He was remembered by his university friends as shy, timid and uncomfortable with women. Usually they would refrain from drinking and swearing in front of him for fear of upsetting the sensitive soul. So how did this gentle, unpolitical boy from a respected Egyptian family suddenly become the hard drinking, stripper loving, terrorist that the media, and the FBI, describe him to be?
Atta, or somebody using his identity easily obtained from his stolen passport, registered with a flight school in Florida in 2001. When he cut short his training he made a point of telling his instructor he was moving to Boston as his reason for leaving. In October 2001 the president of that flight school, Rudi Deckers, gave an interview during which he described Atta as an ‘ass hole.’ This is a transcript of a conversation Dekkers had with ABC producer Quentin McDermott;
MCDERMOTT: ‘Why do you say Atta was an ass hole?’
DEKKERS: ‘Well, when Atta was here and I saw his face on several occasions in the building, then I know that they’re regular students and then I try to talk to them, it’s a kind of PR thing – where are you from? I tried to communicate with him. I found out from my people that he lived in Hamburg and he spoke German so one of the days that I saw him, I speak German myself, I’m a Dutch citizen, and I started in the morning telling him in German, ‘Good morning. How are you? How do you like the coffee? Are you happy here?’, and he looked at me with cold eyes, didn’t react at all and walked away. That was one of my first meetings I had.’
This is similar to the way in which Zacharias Moussaoui (the jailed ’20th hijacker’) became ‘belligerent’ when his Minnesota flight instructor tried to communicate with him in his own first language, French, at the beginning of his own course.
The Minnesota Star Tribune reported on December 21, 2001:
‘Moussaoui first raised his eyebrows when, during a simple introductory exchange, he said he was from France, but then didn’t seem to understand when the instructor spoke French to him. Moussaoui then became belligerent and evasive about his background,’ Congressman Oberstar and other sources said. In addition, ‘he seemed inept at basic flying procedures, while seeking expensive training on an advanced commercial jet simulator.’
It is quite a coincidence that Atta and Moussaoui both had American flight instructors who spoke German and French respectively. A coincidence that any conspirator could not have engineered, or predicted. The real Atta should have been able to respond to his instructor’s German language and the real Moussaoui should have been able to speak to his instructor in French. Instead Atta just walked away and Moussaoui became belligerent. Could it be that neither man responded because they were unable to?
Mohammed Atta’s own father insists he spoke to his son on the telephone on September 12, 2001. He has never been seen or heard from since. Israeli agents were arrested in Hollywood, Florida, where Atta was living at the time after carrying out ‘some sort of operation.’ When later asked where Atta was his father simply replied, ‘ask Mossad.’
So, now we have WTC7, the Twin Towers and the men in suits who walked through the fire to survival. The Dancing Israelis. And the questionable evidence provided by the U.S. Solicitor General about his wife’s phone calls. Pilots who could not fly the aircraft, suspects who were alive after 9/11 and one who was dead before hand.