Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Men in Black: bumper sticker profiling

Political activist Jim Goodnow of the Yellow Rose of Texas Peace Bus was stopped by two Homeland Security agents for having... too many bumper stickers on his car?

Incredible as it may sound, that appears to be what happened last Saturday when Mr Goodnow was leaving my home in Washington, DC. As Mr Goodnow was standing beside his heavily stickered car and waiting for me to snap a couple pictures of him and his car from across the street, two men in suits came up to him and began questioning him. At the time I could not guess what they may have wanted but decided to take a few more photos of them from a distance. After they left Jim walked back to me and gave me the full story which, in his own words he prepared for publication on his website and you can read below. (or listen to Jim's podcast)

Howdy Friends.. Jim the Bus Driver here reporting to ya'll from the nation's Capitol.

A rather curious event went down as I was leaving my friends bill and patti's digs in Washington, Dc. It was a pleasant May day on connecticut Ave, washington, dc as I approached the newest vehicle in our peace efforts, the bumper-stickered station wagon "motherload" named by Father Timothy O'Connell who has graciously made it available for the good cause.

Two men blocked my path and wanted to know if I was a certain "Mr Quinn".
I didn't say if I was, or wasn't. Instead.. I wanted to know who they were!.. and was told that they were with "law enforcement". ..and they again asked if I were "Quinn". I didn't say who I was but wanted to know what law enforcement they were associated with?..
"HOMELAND SECURITY" I was told and I thought "Okaay.. here we go. Is it 1934?
Perhaps 1984?"
Nope. It's 2007 in the nation's capitol.

Don't let the suitcoats and ties fool ya folks. In my mind I saw brownshirts and jackboots as they again hammered away at me as perhaps being the elusive "mr quinn". When I queried them as to under what authority I must answer their questioning, they dodged the issue and ask if I had a driver's license. ..and when I replied "yes", they demanded to see it.
"I don't think so" thought I and broke out my cell phone and small address book instead and informed them that I was going to place a call with my attorney.
At that, they backed down and prepared to depart.
"Oh my.. I hope you guys don't take this too personally" I stated as I extended my hand.
#1 man refused to shake my hand informing me that he had a "cold". I think he was lying. I mean like his nose wasn't running.. he never coughed or sneezed. His diction seemed pretty clear, all things considered.
#2 man said zip as he also would not shake my hand.
This kind of snobbery could give a guy a complex, I surmised internally as my extended right hand went limp and unshaken.
"Must remember to contact Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and suggest placing an airborne formula anti-cold tablet dispenser next to the water coolers down at their headquarters! Who knows.. this thing might go pandemic amongst the agents if not confronted immediately!

A feeling of melancholy bemusement swept over me as I watch the men lope away still in their hot pursuit of the elusive Mr. Quinn.
I wondered, could it be that this was just the beginning of.. "bumper sticker profiling!"?

Jim Goodnow of the Yellow Rose of Texas Peace Bus

Labels: , , ,

Monday, May 28, 2007

Italy indicts 26 Americans in C.I.A. abduction case

Italy indicts 26 Americans in C.I.A. abduction case An Italian judge today ordered the first trial involving the American program of kidnapping terror suspects on foreign soil, indicting 26 Americans, most of them C.I.A. agents, and Italy-s former top spy.

The indictments covered the episode in which a radical Egyptian cleric, Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr, who disappeared near his mosque in Milan on Feb. 17, 2003, says he was kidnapped. The cleric, known as Abu Omar, was freed this week from jail in Egypt, where he says he was taken and then tortured.

Despite the indictment, issued by a judge in Milan, it is unlikely that any of the Americans will ever stand trial here.

All the operatives, which included the top two C.I.A. officials in Italy at the time, have left the country. Moreover, Italy has not requested their extradition, and if it did, there seems little chance the Bush administration would agree.

But the indictment nonetheless marked a turning point in Europe, where anger is high at the secret American program of "extraordinary renditions" that whisked away terror suspects in contravention of the law after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

This week, the Swiss government approved an investigation into the flight that allegedly carried Mr. Nasr from Italy to Germany, across Swiss airspace. The plane reportedly left from an American air base in Germany to Egypt.

Late last month, a German court issued an arrest warrant for 13 people suspected of involvement in the kidnapping in Macedonia of a German citizen of Lebanese descent. There are also investigations into extraordinary renditions in Portugal and Spain.

Meantime this week, a European parliamentary committee issued a detailed report into what it said were "at least" 1,245 secret C.I.A. flights in Europe, some of them involving extraordinary renditions. The report, which awaits approval by the Parliament, is particularly sensitive because it suggested forcibly that a number of governments knew of the flights.

"We believe there has been either active collusion by several E.U. governments or turning a blind eye," one member of the European Parliament, Baroness Sarah Ludford of Britain, said this week.

Here in Italy, the possible complicity of the government of then-Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is one of the most difficult issues in the case. Among the Italians indicted today were Nicolo Pollari, who was until earlier this year Italy-s chief of military intelligence, and his former deputy, Marco Mancini.

Mr. Pollari has denied responsibility, saying he cannot defend himself because he would need to use evidence that is classified as state secrets. The suggestion is that officials outranking Mr. Pollari, the nation-s chief spy, gave approval for the kidnapping.

"We are very disappointed by the decision of the judge, being convinced that the lack of proof and the acquisition of documents covered by secrets of state demonstrates Pollari-s innocence," Mr. Pollari-s lawyer, Tittal Madia, said, according to the Corriere della Sera newspaper.

The case has snarled Italian politics with several complications. Earlier this week, the government of Prime Minister Romano Prodi asked the Constitutional Court to review whether the prosecutor in Mr. Nasr-s case, Armando Spataro, overstepped his bounds by wiretapping the phones of Italian agents.

Today, Mr. Spataro said in a statement that he was "astonished" by the government-s move, saying he had followed all the laws in gathering evidence.

Meantime, a member of Mr. Prodi-s government, Antonio Di Pietro, minister of infrastructure and a former corruption prosecutor, criticized the government for not having requested the extradition of the 26 C.I.A. agents.

Mr. Prodi-s government has not said whether it will make such requests. But the issue looms as one more source of conflict between Italy and the United States.

While both American and Italian officials say the relationship remains solid, it has been tested in recent months on several fronts. On Saturday, a big demonstration is being planned in Vicenza, in northern Italy, where the Americans have asked to enlarge an existing air base, and Italian officials have recently criticized American actions in Iraq, Lebanon and Somalia.

Earlier this month, an Italian court ordered an American soldier to stand trial for the death in Iraq of Nicola Calipari, an Italian secret service agent killed in 2005 while securing the release of a kidnapped Italian journalist. As with the C.I.A. agents, the serviceman is unlikely to be extradited to Italy. - New York Times

USA: Nevada Gov. investigated over military contracts

The most interesting news for today
- Bush`s reputation ruined
- Italy campaigns against death penalty
- Criminal proceedings against Elektron captain
- Americans ate everything around
- International Ice-Cream Competition in Italy

Saturday, May 26, 2007

Charged with possessing an unregistered laser blaster

Yes really !!!
Its one thing to go a bit overboard when the cops cant tell the difference between a toy
and a real gun, but to arrest someone for being "armed" with a toy gun is not a sign of the times, its a sign of stupidity.
Maybe the judge will go easy on him, since i hear he is related to Princess Leia :)

Force against Star Wars fan

CANBERRA (Reuters) - An Australian movie fan on his way to pose for a Star Wars 30th anniversary photo shoot was arrested by police after his replica laser pistol was mistaken for a more earthly machine gun, media reported on Friday.

The 32-year-old man, dressed in black and carrying a backpack with a replica laser blaster poking out the side, alarmed diners at a food court in central Melbourne.

"It was a replica gun. We weren't sure what we were dealing with," Senior-Constable Daniel Sage told the Herald Sun newspaper. Photographs showed a gun closely resembling the weapon carried by Star Wars rogue Han Solo in the cinema classic.

The man had been on his way to pose for a community newspaper ahead of the 30th Star Wars movie anniversary when he was surrounded by armed police, forced to the ground and handcuffed.

Police said despite being a harmless replica and a close match to a weapon from a galaxy far, far away, the man would be charged with possessing an unregistered firearm.

story here

Friday, May 18, 2007

The Parasite Plane 9/11 flight path oddities

Thursday, 17 August 2006
A review of the highly suspicious activity in the sky on 9-11. When does a series of coincidences stop being a series of coincidence and become damning evidence? When it's 9-11...
New altitude data obtained through Freedom of Information shows the meeting points I previously pointed out are also the EXACT points that the hijacked planes began their descent towards their targets.

Current theories about what happened in the air on 9/11 are based on a mixture of speculation and circumstances. Over the past five years, more information has slowly been released allowing a clearer picture to slowly be developed.
The government's story about suicide hijackers has had to face up to a lot of scepticism for a number of reasons.
Those reasons include:
  • Complex maneuvres supposedly performed by individuals who have been widely reported to be barely capbale of flying a small propellor plane. These jumbo hets were successfully navigated and crashed into their targets at low altitudes and speeds higher than safely possible for such large planes.
  • Evidence that appears to have been planted
  • Hijackers that frequently appeared in more than one place at the same time
  • The bizarre and illogical routes taken by the hijacked planes
Popoular alternative theories include:
  • The planes were guided into their targets using some sort of remote control or homing technology, possibly based on that used in UAVs like Global Hawk, or something simpler involving the autopilot.
  • Theories speculating that the real planes were somehow switched, either mid-flight or on the runway for prepared remote-controlled plane-bombs or "drones". This has taken a great deal of inspiration from "Operation Northwoods", an unused plan for fake terror against America, created by the Pentagon the 1960s.
  • The damage to the buildings was caused by other devices (e.g. UAV drones, bombs or missiles ) and the videos of the second hit were edited to cover this up. This is commonly referred to as the "no planes/tv fakery" theory.
Newly released documents obtained through Freedom of Information have provided more accurate images of the flight paths, altitude data and air traffic communcations for the 9/11 flights. These have been pieced together using graphics packages and the excellent Google Earth to provide a clearer picture of what happened
The following piece contains a speculation based on the remote control/homing theory (one of many possibilities). Anything speculative is in italics, everything else is fact and can be reviewed in the sources at the end of the article.
The following events took place and cannot be dismissed as coincidence or something engineered by the hijackers
1. Flight 11 became hijacked at the same point its radar target merged with another plane (unamed MD80)
2. Flight 11 and 175 met in the sky, flight 11 began its descent towards its target exactly at the point the paths crossed
3. Flight 175 and 93 came very close together in the sky. Flight 175 began its descent at the point their temporarily merged paths seperated
4. Flight 93 and another suspected hijacking from Logan (Delta 1989) passed each other very close in the sky. Flight 93 began its descent towards Shanksville at the point they passed in the sky.
The only logical conclusion is that another aircraft (hidden from air traffic controllers by its close proximity to the other planes) was passing from one plane to the next and was somehow involved in the operation.
The Parasite Plane

According to the official story, on the morning of September 11th 2001, Flight 11 was taking off on a transcontinental flight from Boston’s Logan airport to LAX.
So far the flight had been routine and normal and at 8:11:58 Flight 11 is rising from 28000 to 29000 ft. The air traffic controller issued a “merging target procedure”:

“American 11 your traffic is at uh two o’clock two zero miles southwest bound MD80 three one oh.”

Translated from ATC speak into English: there is a plane(McDonnell Douglas 80) at a similar altitude (31000ft) that is on a converging path with yours and the two spots on the radar will merge together. He alerts the pilot to make sure he is aware of this plane that will be coming very close to him in the sky.

At 8:13:29, possibly as a result of this merging traffic, the controller issues another order:

“American eleven turn twenty degrees right”

This is acknowledged by the Flight 11 pilot at 8:13:31:

“Twenty right American eleven”

What neither the pilot nor the controller realises is that there is another plane hiding above the MD80 so as to appear as a single spot on the radar. As the two planes merge together in the sky the intruder, like some sort of parasite “jumps” quickly from one plane to the other. Flight 11’s collision avoidance system (TCAS) does not pick up the intruder because its transponder is switched off.
Someone on the “parasite plane” presses a button. A radio controlled valve is opened and poison gas is released into the cockpit of Flight 11 causing the two pilots to collapse unconscious without time to raise the alarm. The plane, flying on autopilot continues in the direction it was going in after the turn, towards Albany New York.

Sixteen seconds later at 8:13:47 the controller issues another command:

“American eleven climb maintain flight level three five zero” (35000 ft)

At this point there is no further response from the pilot of AA11 so if we follow the official story, the invasion of the supposedly locked cockpit and control of the plane was seized during this sixteen second period without so much as a cough from the pilots.

A device has been planted in the cockpit allowing remote programming of the autopilot as well as direct remote control of the plane. On board Flight 11 a staged hijacking is taking place in the cabin. The operatives involved have been advised that the plane will land at JFK airport in New York City. On board our “parasite” plane they disable the transponder on flight eleven and starts making broadcasts in a Middle Eastern accent over the current ATC frequency. They then turn the plane South near Albany and start to direct it towards its target, the North tower of the World Trade Centre.
A large detour has been made away from the target. This has been very carefully timed to allow United Flight 175 to catch up as it has been delayed by 16 minutes.

During our 16 second hijacking period on Flight 11, Flight 175 is cleared for take-off at Logan:

“United one seventy five heavy runway niner cleared for takeoff..”

At 8:27 the controller orders Flight 175 to climb to 35000 ft:

“United one seventy five Boston center roger climb maintain flight level three five zero”

Interestingly, Flight 175 turns down this flight level and requests 31000 ft, coincidentally the same altitude that the hijacked Flight 11 is flying at this point in time.

“Up to three five zero we want to request three one zero if it’s smooth for United one seventy five”

The controller clarifies this request and grants it. Flight 175 then requests 31000ft as the final altitude for the flight.

“Three one zero United one seventy five we’d like to keep that as a final”

What happens next continues the series of interesting coincidences that take place in the sky that morning; Flight 175 comes very close to the hijacked Flight 11 in the sky near Stewart Airport.

ATC: “Roger do you have traffic look at uh your twelve to one o’clock at about uh ten miles south bound see if you can see and American seventy sixty seven out there please”

175: “Okay we’re looking negative contact United one seventy five.”

ATC: “Okay United one seventy five do you have him at your twelve o’clock now and five, ten miles.”

175: “Affirmative we have him uh he looks uh about ah twenty ah yeah about twenty nine, twenty eight thousand.”

ATC: “United one seventy five turn thirty degrees to the right I want to keep you away from this traffic.”

So we can conclude that Flight 11 and Flight 175 came within 5 miles of each other, possibly much closer as those planes would cover 5 miles in around 30 seconds. Now we also see a coincidence within a coincidence, flight 11 begins its descent at exactly the spot where the two flight tracks cross.

Once again our parasite plane jumps from one plane to another as they pass. Just before it does so, it triggers flight 11 to begin its perilous descent towards Manhattan. On the edge of the Newark ASR radar circle, the parasite plane begins the second stage of its mission, the mid-air hijack of United Airlines Flight 175.

United 175’s last transmission is at 8:42. At 8:51:42 the controller (supposedly distracted by Flight 11) notices that flight 175 is no longer on the radar. He asks United 175 to check his transponder and make sure the identifying code 1470 is entered.

“United one seventy five recycle your transponder and squawk code of one four seven zero.”

It turns out later that Flight 175 has changed its transponder code to one that is not recognised by the system and the radar software assumes that radar coverage is lost on that flight. He sees the flight “coasting” – the software estimates where the plane would be assuming it continued in the same direction and speed that it was going in.

Just while United 175 is making its last radio transmission, another plane, United Airlines Flight 93 is taking off from Newark. Once again its flight path merges with that of the now hijacked Flight 175 and the planes come within about 10 miles of each other over Allentown airport. Once again we have another double coincidence, right at this point Flight 175 deviates from its assigned altitude, goes up slightly and then begins a rapid, curving descent towards its target.

Our parasite plane initiates the same autopilot descent in Flight 175 as it did with Flight 11, then it slows down slightly and hops onto its next victim, Flight 93.

Flight 93’s last routine communication is at 9:27. Less than a minute later, we hear sounds that may be the start of a cockpit intrusion broadcast over the radio:

***(mayday)***(hey get out of here)***
***(get out of here)?***(get out of here)

Flight 93 begins to follow the same pattern as the other planes, changes of altitude, a sharp turn and a disabled transponder. As the plane is turning south and then east near Cleveland airport, another plane enters the picture.
Delta Flight 1989, another cross-country flight, had departed from Logan airport shortly after Flight 175. It was being watched carefully for signs that it might be another hijack and was very close in the sky to Flight 93.

A recording of some of some of the air traffic communications has been available on the internet for some time. Note the following directive:

Cleveland: Nineteen eighty-nine, I have traffic for you in your eleven o’clock, fifteen miles southbound forty-one climbing, looks like he’s turning east wide at three-six-zero.

Using Google Earth we can use this statement to get a fairly accurate picture of the relative positions and directions of these two planes. The two planes would once again have passed very close together in the sky. Just as the Delta Flight goes past, Flight 93 begins a smooth autopilot descent towards Shanksville. Because this is the same pattern that the other planes followed on their way to their targets, this raises another difficult question: what exactly where they going to attack here? Was Shanksville the target?

Once again, the autopilot descent of Flight 93 is initiated and the parasite plane hops from Flight 93 onto Delta 1989. Flight 93 has been carefully prepared as “The Flight That Fought Back” and is intended to crash in an unpopulated area. This flight will have almost as much effect in the drive to war as the 3000 casualties at the World Trade Centre.

Delta 1989 reversed course over Toledo and landed at Cleveland airport (commission report).

This is where our mystery aircraft leaves the scene. It now drops below radar coverage and heads towards a secret landing strip.


Written by Frank Levi
Saturday, 17 June 2006
The Flight paths taken by the planes on 911 contain numerous coincidences and anomalies that cannot be explained simply by following the official story.
I intend to show this in a series of short pieces featuring old and new information, following the sequence of events as they happened that day. We'll start with Amercian Airlines Flight 11.
Flight 11 flight path
Flight 11 in relation to Otis and Griffiss

Click to see real size

Whether you are a follower of the official story or a sceptic, it is difficult to avoid speculation when it comes to what actually happened in the air that day. (All the eye witnesses are dead!)
Here are a few possibilities based on current thought:
  1. Real suicide hijackers crashed the planes.
  2. The planes were fitted with technology to allow them to be controlled remotely, either from the ground or from military planes flying nearby.
  3. Some sort of "homing" system was used.
  4. The planes were substituted at some stage in the journey for remote controlled "drone" planes. The real planes were destroyed or landed. This was done in such a way as to produce a continuous track on the ATC radar. This idea originates from the Pentagon and is described in the declassified document "Operation Northwoods".
  5. The original planes were destroyed or landed. No actual planes hit the buildings, the damage and explosions were created with explosives. The videos of planes hitting the building were faked and witnesses were strategically planted.
It is important when looking at any of these scenarios to take into account that there were military "wargames" with extensive air force involvement as well as live terrorist attack drills taking place in the air that day. (Details and references will be provided in a later installment).
But for the time being I will try and avoid speculation and focus on what we know.
If 911 was a military operation involving the US Air Force, a good place to look first is the relationship between flight paths and the location of nearby air force and air force national guard bases.
This image was created by using the Flight 11 path taken from the 911 Commission Report as an overlay on Google Earth:
Flight 11 flight path
Flight 11 in relation to the former Sawyer AFB

Click to see real size

You can see here:
  • The illogical route taken by Flight 11 away from its target
  • How neatly OTIS air national guard base lines up with the straight path Flight 11 took towards Albany (supposedly after being hijacked)
  • How the plane turns south directly over the mouth of the Mohawk river valley that leads down to the former Griffiss Air Base, home of NEADS
  • 3 points are in a straight line almost exactly 100 miles apart: Otis ANGB; the point Flight 11 turns North-West (official hijacking point); and the point the plane begins to turn South.
This could just be a total coincidence but it is worth noting:
A line joining Otis ANGB and the former Sawyer air base in Michigan lies perfectly over the NW part of the Flight 11 flight path.
The implications are that if someone wanted to involve military planes in this operation they could quite easily do it under the cover of the wargames and drills that were happening that day. This is by no means the only coincidence regarding the location of these bases as we will see in future installments.


Written by Frank Levi
Tuesday, 30 May 2006
This is an old article from the original site where I began speculating that the planes may have been swapped in a similar way to that described in Operation Northwoods.
This is now somewhat out of date and has some misunderstandings about flight trackers and radar but has been preserved to show how these theories developed.
Operation 9-11: Rendezvous Points

Frank Levi, August 2003

Updated 13th Aug - New information on rendezvous points

Updated 14th Sept - Possible error about GPS tracking, some planes use this to link to the Flight Tracker but not all, mostly they use radar. If anyone has any more information please contact me.

Many people have speculated that the US government deliberately allowed the 9-11 attacks to happen to give them justification for the "War Against Terrorism". There is no moral difference between "allowing someone to be murdered" and murdering someone. And the former is much more likely to go wrong.

Is it possible that the US government and their allies may have actually carried out the attacks on 9-11 as a false flag operation?

Key questions:

  1. Would members of the US military and intelligence agencies attack their own people?
  2. How many people would have to be complicit in order to carry out such a huge operation?

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:

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:

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:

Was 9-11 a more complex version of Operation Northwoods? If so, what happened to the passengers?

Rendezvous and Land

Many articles about the hijackings have shown diagrams of the flight-paths followed by the four hijacked planes. These flight paths were not taken from recordings of Air Traffic Control radar as you might think, but from Flight-Tracking services, available to the public on the Internet.

If you connect to a Flight-Tracker you can actually watch a plane on its journey using radar information. Air traffic controllers use radar and the information sent from the plane's transponder, which shows altitude as well as the plane's identification. The hijackers turned off the planes' transponders which made it difficult for ATC to track them, but the flight tracking service continued to record the planes' locations.

If Operation 9-11 was based loosely on Operation Northwoods, what exactly did they do? It would make sense to rendezvous with a drone as close as possible to a military base to avoid the chances of someone seeing an unexplained blip on the radar. If the passenger planes were landed it would need to be at airports or bases close to the target so that the radar trace would appear to finish at the target.

Let's look at some images of the flights as picked up by a company called Flight Explorer. Here we see the overlaid tracks for Flight 11 and Flight 175.

Flight track for AA11 and UAL 175
Flight track for AA11 and UAL 175

Click to see real size

Our rendezvous point for both of these planes would seem to be fairly simple and can be seen even more clearly as an animation. Click on this link to see the animated flight paths.

You will notice immediately that the two planes almost meet each other at a point north of NYC. So what exactly is at this point?

Stewart International Airport which is also the location of Stewart Air National Guard Base and the 105th airlift wing. Home of some very large c-5a carrier planes.

Now look at a diagram of the airport itself:

Those two runways fairly closely match the paths taken by Flight 11 and 175 don't they?

So were the two planes really that close to this airport?

FAA worker says hijacked jeltiners almost collided before striking World Trade Center

"The terrorists, however, nearly had their plans dashed when the two planes almost collided outside the city, the employee said. "The two aircraft got too close to each other down by Stewart" International Airport in New Windsor, N.Y., the employee said."

How could this be done without an Air Traffic Controller noticing something funny?

From the same article:

"One air traffic controller - with the help of an assistant - monitored the flight patterns of the two jets that toppled the World Trade Center, the employee said. He directed American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 - both Boeing 767 jets that had Boston to Los Angeles routes, the employee said.
The same controller handled Egypt Air Flight 990 when it crashed off the coast of Massachusetts in 1999, the employee said."

For those who don't know, Flight 990 was full of Egyptian Military top brass and is suspected by some people of having been crashed using remote control. What a coincidence.


We have a number of possibilities here. You may have noticed that the last blip for Flight 175 is a little out of place. Could the last blip in each flight path have been added on to show the planes apparently finishing at the world trade center?

If this is the case perhaps flight 11 could have landed at La Guardia airport (directly below the second last blip)

A simple possibility is that some sort of hijacking was actually taking place on the plane, the real pilots were still flying the plane and were told to land at La Guardia airport.

"Another controller at the Nashua center confirms these events, adding some of what the hijacker was saying. "One of the pilots keyed their mike so the conversation between the pilot and the person in the cockpit could be heard," a second controller says. "The person in the cockpit was speaking in English. He was saying something like, 'Don't do anything foolish. You're not going to get hurt.' ""

"This controller also says that someone in the cockpit may have said something about guiding the plane toward Kennedy or LaGuardia airport in New York. But the controller, who was not handling the plane himself, is unsure whether the pilot or hijacker was speaking. If the latter, it may have been a ruse to make the pilot believe the plane was being diverted to an airport, not to a murder-suicide mission at the World Trade Center."

(Christian Science Monitor, Sept 13th 2001)

Flight 175 is more interesting to analyse. Check out this link:

The Seattle Times. Understanding the conflict. Graphics & video.

"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 miles from Manhattan — Flight 175 made its final radar contact, according to a statement released by United Airlines. About the same time, American Flight 11 struck the north tower of the World Trade Center, setting off a massive explosion."

Trenton is close to Brown Mills, the location of McGuire Air Force Base. You'll also notice if you look at the white time markings on the diagram above that Flight 175 also seems to be slowing down a great deal as it approaches Trenton. Which is what planes do when they land. Look at the last two blips before the plane supposedly turns towards NY. They are in a direct line towards Brown Mills

Alternatively, it may have landed at La Guardia with Flight 11. Perhaps they both assumed new transponder/radio identities as they approached the airport?

Flight 93 and Flight 77

Flight 93 was supposed to take-off from Newark airport at 8:00 but was delayed by 42 minutes.

In the image below you can see the original flight plan on the right with estimated arrival time set as 02:15 pm at San Francisco. You can see it flies very close to both Cleveland and Pittsburgh airports. Not long before the plane disappears from the radar, whoever was flying the plane filed an electronic change of flight-plan to DCA (Ronald Reagan International Airport) with an estimated arrival time of 10:28.

Why any "suicide hijacker" would ever dream of filing a change of flight plan is totally beyond comprehension. We'll come back to this later.

It looks like whoever was flying Flight 93 was trying to land. Around the time the flight plan was changed Flight 93 was heading towards the municipal airport in Johnstown at a low altitude. Was someone hoping to land here but changed flight plan to DCA because of difficulty contacting ATC (jammed radio?).

One thing is for certain - all the crashes were supposed to happen at around the same time. If Flight 93 had not been delayed by 42 minutes and had followed the same path, it would have arrived in Washington at 9:46. This is around the same time that Flight 77 supposedly crashed into the Pentagon

What happened to Flight 77?

Unlike all the other planes the radar track suddenly stops over Southern Ohio. Completely dead. Any other flight path diagrams you may have seen have the estimated path drawn in.

None of the other planes lost the flight tracking at an early stage in the journey. Why just on this plane? Was it shot down or remotely exploded? Did it land in the very small Portsmouth Airport or fly very low and land in one of the larger airports in the area? Was it really Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon? Perhaps it had another destination which had to be abandoned because of the Flight 93 delay. If this plane had changed its path at this point and flown directly to Chicago (and the Sears Tower) it would have passed directly over Dayton and the Wright Patterson air base.

So what actually happened?

There are a number of possibilities:

  • The real planes rendezvoused with the military planes and the empty military planes were crashed into the buildings. If so, were the passengers just aliases with actors playing bereaved relatives? Were people offered money to disappear as part of the plan? Were they killed or imprisoned? It's difficult to believe that around two hundred fake passengers could be alive and complicit without someone blowing the whistle. They are more likely to be either innocent and dead or complicit and dead.
  • The real planes were modified to allow remote control, rendezvoused with military planes which would jam the radio and transponder signals whilst guiding the planes to their targets. A staged hijacking may have been happening, or the pilots may have been given bogus orders to fly to the rendezvous point because of an emergency.
  • Another possibility is that a staged hijacking was taking place on the planes but the planes were flown back to the airport (except flight 93). Meanwhile, the remote controlled drones would do their work.

Lets not forget the c-130 plane seen flying directly above flight 77 "as if to prevent two planes from appearing on radar while at the same time guiding the jet toward the Pentagon"

Was there an opportunity to modify or even substitute any of the planes? Read this witness report from Sept 10th:

"On Monday, September 10 at about 1 pm, my husband and I flew into Newark, returning from a meeting of the CSWE Commission on Conferences and Faculty Development. We flew past the World Trade Center Towers on our way into Newark, and the plane's landing gear lowered. Suddenly, the landing gear and the plane lifted again, and we were told that we had been diverted to LaGuardia Airport, as there was a fire in Newark Airport. We flew past the Twin Towers again on our way to land at LaGuardia.

There was some confusion when we landed at LaGuardia, and over a period of three hours, we were led off the plane, back on the plane, and then off the plane again. This seemed strange at the time. In light of the events of September 11, we now wonder if the fire in Newark was in any way connected to the terrorist attack which would occur the next day."

Please send feedback, corrections, ridicule etc. to This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it

More to come soon...

Saturday, May 05, 2007

How Not to be Seen

The Invisible ManThe Invisible ManHumans have long been fascinated by the concept of invisibility. From H.G. Wells' Invisible Man to Harry Potter's cloak of invisibility, purveyors of fiction have pondered what one would do if one could move about unseen. Invisibility is often portrayed as a perfect transparency– ala the Invisible Man– however this method is in conflict with the laws of nature as we understand them. Moreover, a transparent person would be plagued with a host of difficulties that seem quite insurmountable. Any consumed food or drink would be embarrassingly visible as it meanders through the digestive system, and these visible nutrients would immediately begin to integrate into the body. That's to say nothing of wardrobe problems and social difficulties.

The competing approach to invisibility involves some sort of cloaking device to route photons around an object. This method is somewhat more feasible, but of course it comes with its own unique set of complications. For instance, if all the outside light is diverted around something, no light is able to reach an observer inside, leaving them unable to see out.

These difficulties and others have long left all serious speculation about invisibility lodged safely in the distant future. But this is no longer so. In October of 2006, Professor Sir John Pendry of the Imperial College London announced the successful creation of a rudimentary cloaking device which nudges the idea a bit closer to reality. Perhaps most surprising of all, the whole concept rests on a fairly simple physical principle of light– one that requires no electricity to operate, and that every high-schooler learns in basic physics.

In essence, Sir John's invisibility cloak relies on refraction, the same property of light seen when a prism casts a rainbow. Refraction can also be seen by poking a pencil into a glass of water. The underwater portion will appear to be offset from the rest because of the bending of light as it moves from one medium to another– from water to air. A few years ago Sir John and his physicist friends reflected upon the idea of using refraction to bend light completely around an object. If this were possible, the light would emerge on the other side, unchanged, as if the object were not there at all.

Refraction through waterOf course this simple idea isn't quite so simple in application. The researchers' first obstacle was the precision light-bending this method requires. There simply weren't any materials with quite the right properties to bend light in the necessary semi-circle, nor were any naturally occurring materials good candidates for the position. So the scientists looked to metamaterials– substances whose electromagnetic properties are dependent upon tightly designed internal structures rather than on their chemical composition.

Guided by a theoretical design published in an earlier paper, and working in concert with researchers at Duke University, Sir John and his team created a five-inch round cloak using a metamaterial structured in two-dimensional concentric rings, specifically designed for this purpose. This unique configuration is thought to be one of the most complex metamaterial structures ever made. Their first goal was to make a material that was "invisible" to microwave radiation since microwaves are a longer wavelength than visible light– millimeters rather than nanometers– and therefore easier to manipulate.

In the laboratory the researchers placed their cloak inside a test chamber, turned on the microwave emitter, and monitored the detector on the other side. Their spiffy new metamaterials worked flawlessly. The inside of the small cloak was completely unaffected by the microwaves aimed at it, while the outside registered readings as if the cloak weren't there at all.

Of course, the need for the right materials isn't the only difficulty in making a true invisibility cloak. If they wish to develop their prototype into something less limited, Sir John's team must address a number of issues. First is the wavelength problem. The cloak as it currently exists can only work for a very narrow range of wavelengths. In the context of visible light, it's as if the cloak was only invisible to red light, while still perfectly visible in blue. Broadening the range means making the cloak significantly thicker, which could severely limit applications. Additionally, creating metamaterials which can do the same for visible wavelengths is considerably more tricky, since the metamaterial's precision structures must be as small as the wavelength they are meant to affect, and visible light waves are on the scale of millionths of a millimeter.

Light BendingThe other weakness in the current design is that the invisibility only works in one plane. The object enclosed by it cannot be seen from the side, but it can be seen clearly from above or below. To remedy this, Sir John and some of his co-authors at Duke are working to push the cloak into the third dimension. Should they succeed with both of these challenges a new difficulty emerges– if the object within the cloak is invisible to the outside world, then no light is able penetrate the cloak, and therefore any occupants would be blind. This is not necessarily a problem if one wishes to hide a stationary object, but it creates difficulty when one wants to conceal people or cameras. Allowing a cloak to work effectively while on the move presents yet another challenge.

Naturally the military has expressed interest in the budding technology, as well as providing funding for its development. Of particular interest is the fact that radar wavelengths are very close to that of microwaves, meaning that a radar-invisible cloak will be possible much sooner than one which is invisible to the eye. This would provide the armed forces with a radar-defeating technology far beyond even that of current stealth aircraft.

Even though all of the wrinkles have yet to be ironed out, the basic breakthrough proves that the concept has merit. An invisibility cloak exists. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) hopes that Sir John's cloaking device can help make some of their problems disappear within the next few years, and civilian applications could soon follow. In any case, it is now certain that an invisibility cloak will someday be possible. Whether or not it is practical remains to be seen.

Further reading:
Imperial College London press release
MSNBC report on theories of invisibility
Instructional video: How Not to be Seen

Friday, May 04, 2007

'Black Ops' Implicated in Jill Carroll Kidnapping

by Fintan Dunne,
12 January, 2006 14:00GMT

Jill carroll news reporter Christina science monitor kidnappedThere are clear signs that the kidnapping of the still-missing American journalist, Jill Carroll was a political act closely tied to U.S. interests relating to the Sunni opposition in Iraq.

The 28-year-old freelancer for The Christian Science Monitor was ambushed by gunmen in Baghdad last Saturday morning. Her Iraqi interpreter, who carried press ID was killed during the incident. No group has claimed responsibility.

On the face of it just another of Iraq's many kidnappings. But when we examine the timing, location and events subsequent to the abduction, they point to collusion involving the U.S. --or worse still, an American-inspired 'Black Ops' gambit.

The very day Jill Carroll was taken, President Jalal Talabani said that Iraq's political groups could form a coalition government within weeks. Forming a government including Sunnis is a key American goal because it could rob the resistance of political support. But the Association of Muslim Scholars(AMS), which is the intellectual backbone of the Iraqi resistance, is a significant impediment to the formation of such a government.

The following day, Sunday morning, before dawn and ahead of a meeting between Talibani and Adnan al-Dulaimi, the leader of the largely Sunni Iraqi Accordance Front, U.S. troops raided the Umm al-Qora mosque complex, headquarters of the AMS. They used explosive charges used to blow out door locks, smashed windows, arrested half a dozen people and ransacked offices.

al dulaimi President talabani AMS U.S. troops al Qora mosque Iraq warLater that Sunday, following that high-level meting with President Talibani, al-Dulaimi said significant progress had been made in their efforts to form a government of national unity. "Talabani and I have an identical point of view regarding the formation of a national unity government based on consensus,'' al-Dulaimi said.

To one AMS suporter, the motivation for the raid was clear.

"This crime came as punishment for the association's position on the occupation and its position on the latest elections," said Sheik Younis al-Ekaidi.

But the U.S. military told Agence France Presse that the raid was linked to the hunt for Jill Carroll.

Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, a U.S. military spokesman, said the raid was ordered "as a direct result of a tip by an Iraqi civilian that activities related to the kidnapping were being carried out inside the mosque."

However, giving the lie to this U.S. claim, as Aljazeera reported, on the same Sunday morning U.S. and Iraqi forces raided villages in Abu Ghraib area west of Baghdad. The villages are the home of the Zowba tribe to which Shaikh Harith al-Dhari, who heads the Association of Muslim Scholars belongs.

Al Dhari Harith Association of Muslim Scholars AMS Iraqi resistance politicsThe AMS have always been a significant player in Iraqi resistance politics, and a thorn in the side of U.S ambitions in Iraq. was the only Western media outlet to report that in January, 2004 then US ambassador to Iraq, John Negroponte met with AMS leader Dr. Al-Dhari, to discuss Iraqi security and the upcoming elections to which the AMS was opposed. The account of their meeting was carried in an interview with Al-Dhari by Mohamed Al-Anwar, published in the Jan 20-26 edition of Cairo's Al-Ahram.

Al-Dhari said the meeting had been arranged through French diplomats at Negroponte's request. He confirmed that his group offered to reverse its position on the election, once given a timetable for an American forces withdrawal.

That meeting is a sign of the pivotal role of the AMS, and opens up another possibile motivation for last Sunday's U.S. raids. That they were part of a 'carrot and stick' strategy to pressure al-Dhari and the AMS, while simultaneously hacking a deal with al-Dulaimi's wing of Sunni political expression.

And that the claimed search for Jill Carroll was the convenient pretext on which to raid the mosque.

Which raises the question of who exactly abducted the reporter, with such exquisite political timing.

Water & Air Filters- Discount
Survival Products- Free Shipping
News, Videos, Forums, Chat; a network of truthseekers...
Deals on Top 9/11 Books, DVDs
Synthetic Terror, 9/11 Mysteries, etc. 911 Truth!
Look Back DVD
Escape with a Movie Tonight
Free Vet,s Patch w/order
New Bags are now being added
Eliminate Your Mortgage
Eliminate Your 30-Yr Mortgage In 10-Yrs Or Less! Download it NOW!


The kidnapping of Jill Carroll took place within yards of the office of Adnan al-Dulaimi, whom Carroll had been scheduled to interview at 10 a.m. Saturday, according to her driver.

Mr. al-Dulaimi, however, never showed up for the interview. After 25 minutes, Carroll and her interpreter left. They were waylaid as they drove away from his offices.

"It was very obvious this was by design," said the driver. "The whole operation took no more than a quarter of a minute. It was very highly organized. It was a setup, a perfect ambush."

One kidnapper pulled the driver from the car, jumped in, and drove away with others crammed into the rear of the vehicle around Carroll and her interpreter. "They didn't give me any time to even put the car in neutral," the driver said.

Alan John ghazi Iraq press ID badge Allan Enwiyah kidnap carroll shot twiceThe body of the interpreter, Allan Enwiyah, 32, was later found in the same neighborhood. He had been shot twice in the head. He was discovered by one of the guards stationed outside Dulaimi's office, who told AFP he heard nearby gunshots and rushed to find the body.

Media reports say Jill Carroll's car was stopped about 300 yards from al-Dulaimi's office. But the Washington Post is likely more correct to put the distance at a few hundred feet. The driver said he hadn't gone far enough to shift the car beyond third gear, and that he initially thought the men were guards clearing the route for a convoy going to or from the office of al-Dulaimi.

So what if the kidnappers were indeed connected to al-Dulaimi?

AFP reports that al-Dulaimi himself told the agency he had no appointment to meet a Western journalist. But who better to arrange the false meeting which lured the journalist to the site of the kidnapping than some al-Dulaimi staffer? And once in the web, she would never leave the environs of al-Dulaimi's offices.

Of course, one could argue that all this may have been an idea concocted by al-Dulaimi or his associates. And that the alleged tipoff to U.S. foces which led to the raid on the AMS headquarters was another ploy by the same elements.

But, U.S. commanders are unlikely to be so dumb as to fall for a transparent smear, and then mount a high-profile raid on the politically-sensitive AMS mosque --all without realizing they were being made dance to someone else's political tune.

Plus there is the matter of the simultaneous U.S. raid on the AMS leader's home village.

It looks like either the U.S. was willingly used, or because it suited their agenda anyway, that more likely some Black Ops element of U.S. forces were in on the upcoming abduction from the start.

Either way, it doesn't look good for Jill Carroll, who has been kidnapped in the same part of Baghdad where Margaret Hassan, an aid official, was abducted in 2004. Hassan has never been released and is believed killed by her abductors. A great friend to ordinary Iraqis, Hassan's abduction has been tainted by similar suspicions about U.S. Black Ops involvement.

It's not a good omen.


Jill Carroll herself authored two articles for the Christian Science Monitor in April of last year, which are tragically ironic in retrospect.

One entitled "Iraq's rising industry: domestic kidnapping" was about the discovery of the bodies of 50 alleged kidnapping victims in the Tigris River.

She quoted one victim of a kidnapping by extremist Sunnis, who told her: "I could never imagine some day I will face such a tragedy."

They are words she might well use herself today -if she is still alive.

She also wrote an article about Californian Marla Ruzicka, the head of an NGO who died with her Iraqi driver when their car was caught between a suicide car bomber and a US military convoy. In the article she revealed personal feelings which belie the image of a hard-nosed journalist oblivious to danger:

Water & Air Filters- Discount
Survival Products- Free Shipping
News, Videos, Forums, Chat; a network of truthseekers...
Deals on Top 9/11 Books, DVDs
Synthetic Terror, 9/11 Mysteries, etc. 911 Truth!
Look Back DVD
Escape with a Movie Tonight
Free Vet,s Patch w/order
New Bags are now being added
Eliminate Your Mortgage
Eliminate Your 30-Yr Mortgage In 10-Yrs Or Less! Download it NOW!

reporter Jill Carroll kiadnap iraq Baghdad journalists"One of my favorite memories of her was when I was sitting in the middle of the Palestine Hotel lobby in Baghdad, surrounded by a confusing swirl of soldiers, officials, and reporters. Fear swept over me. What was I doing here? I had come as a freelancer, with no experience covering a war. Just as I was quietly freaking out, Marla appeared in the dusty, harried scene. She was the picture of calm in a perfect French braid and long blue dress. She was like a breeze blowing through, so tranquil, so clean.

Later in the fall of 2003 when I moved here and was despairing of my sputtering freelance work she would always say, "Jill, good for you. You're working so hard. I'm so proud of you."...

My friend Scott... said no one had heard from Marla since about 2 o'clock that afternoon. The other journalists and I all feared a kidnapping. Then we got a call from the US military saying a woman fitting her description had been in an accident, ....they said the woman was dead on arrival.

The only thing we can say now is at least she died doing what she wanted, doing what she really, really believed in."
"All I ever wanted to be was a foreign correspondent," Carroll wrote last year in the American Journalism Review. She too was doing what she wanted.

I never knew her. But as a journalist I can only echo Marla's words to her:

"Jill, good for you. You're working so hard. I'm so proud of you."

References: article/2006/01/09/AR2006010902078_pf.html,1280,-5532085,00.html


Inspectors Find More Torture at Iraqi Jails abuse prison

Truth Lies Pearl - 9-11Review

NSA contractors CSC computers Porn

New Logic for the war in Iraq.

Political Art - Gunpoint Democracy Iraq War

Who's counting the dead in Iraq? war death toll civilians

Bogus War On Terrorism - 9-11Review

Behind The Israeli Mole - 9-11Review

Bush Sends Congress $2.9 Trillion Spending Plan - Iraq war

Bush Proposes to Expand Domestic Spying Powers
Bush Proposes to Expand Domestic Spying Powers

Marvin Bush: mysterious death - connections to 9/11?

Marvin Bush: mysterious death - connections to 9/11?