I ahev recently heard from a reliable source that the planes that crashed into the WTC could not have been flown by a human hand. The rate at which the planes turned, and the angle that they hit, would have to be controlled by a satellite/ remote control. If this is true, it means that Saddam really is behind the 9/11 attacks and we are now fully justified in entering the war. This also means that Saddam has way more money and reach than we thought, along with some seriously demented video games. This whole war must appear as a big game to him. Well, in this game, real people die, real people lose family, real people use real ammo.

If it wasnt Al-Qaida (which it wasnt..) it sure the hell was not Saddam either

*remaind to self: take head out of the bottom someday.*

*remaind to self: take head out of the bottom someday.*

Good idea Fulcrum/Uninen, I suggest you do that sooner rather than later.

To answer the original question, NO. If he "did it" he would be dead. He did have a hand in the training and encouragement of those who did do it, however.

This whole theory of "a human hand could not have done it" is CRAP. People seem to think that jumbo jets have manual control surfaces like a piper cub with cable and pulley setups. Please do a bit of research before you fall for these rediculous claims. It's all power assisted hydraulics.
I just watched a program on Discovery Wings channel a couple weeks ago where a DC-10(or similar) was flown up side down for a demonstration in Nevada!

Fry2,

You know you dont have to be a brick everyday.

But about the plane.. it can do most of the basic 'aerobatics' if it has enough altidude..

and it was flown by human. But was that person from Al-Qaida is a mystery to me, and surely he/they had nothing to do with Saddam.

I dont think there was anything in terms of the flight characteristics that was outside of the ability of a trained pilot, especially one that didnt intend to ever come back again...

However, I agree, it likely WAS not Al Quaida... my money is on a Mossad team, or at least a freelance team hired and coordinated by Mossad.

Here is a theory...

At the time, Iraq was making lots of noise about forcing a vote in OPEC to change the oil standard currency from the US dollar to the Euro. In fact, Iraq itself had already performed this transaction internally with all its oil dealings.

In doing so, Iraq forged many business deals with prominent members of the EU, notably France and Germany, who had the most to gain from such a swap in currencies.

The US, (or conversely the Cabal, as the ultimate owner/operator of the US economy) recognized and understood the threat that this chain of activity posed. Also, being the masters of public psychology that they were, they understood that it would be impossible to pull off any kind of military action (about the only real option to prevent this transaction in Iraq) without public opinion behind it. In order to put public opinion behind any such military action, the US would have to suffer a very serious blow with massive civilian casualties...

And the US government would be complicit in this action.

Sort of like at Pearl Harbor.

Coordinating with Israel would be a natural chain of events, as Israel would be the ultimate beneficiary of any war between the US and any OPEC nation. Allowing Mossad to run the attack would provide plausible deniability in the event that any information ever leaked to the public, and would assuage the morality of the Cabal/government that at least THEY were not the ones actually killing thier own civilians

Im sorry - but if you cannot accept that a group of people hell bent on their own deaths would be able to pull off such an act - then again you see the delusions that caused the whole event to happen. Why can America (or certain people from there) not see that that such self delusion is precisly the reason why this happened ?. Get on with fighting the real demons and leave the immagination at home for a while.

Sorry to be rude like this - but its like believing the attack on Harrods was the work of some secret Cabal rather than a few motivated Irish terrorists - why - causre you could then tie the whole thing into the Dodi/Diana mystery. Some of us lost in those moments and will never forgive or forget - to try to construct something from whole cloth im afraid is an insult to those who died.

I have just one question....

Why would Al Qauida attack the US?

Prior to this attack, we had basically ignored Al Quaida (thanks to Bill Klinton, we had passed up an excellent chance to arrest him)...

Yet an attack only gets our attention and guarantees that we will persue him to the ends of the earth...

Sort of like pulling the sleeping dragons tail...

Meanwhile, all the points that I posted are DOCUMENTED... and the chain of events ties in very well...

Sort of like pulling the sleeping dragons tail...

hehe, DR. You mean like Pearl Harbor?
I wish I could remember the exact quote, I'm sure someone will come up with it

I never said Osama had nothing to do with it or that he had everything to do with it. You may be correct in the justification part but I would think they would have linked it to Iraq first rather than Osama. Afghanistan should have been a secondary goal if this were about OPEC. Afghanistan only gains us a natural gas pipeline, not a major OPEC vote.

Baa, I have company now. Time to drink. I'll continue tomorrow.

Well lets try a start -
Bin Laden is a Saudi - and is unhappy about US military bases there.
There was a previous bomb attack against the WTC - seen as being a bastion of American commercial domination - there is an earlier post thread about ehat happened when they took the convicted terrorist back past the twin towers - you posted in that thread I recall.
Bin Ladins comments to Al Jezzera have always been anti American - and have indicated actions against American bases - Somalia etc
The Iraq contact has always been tenuous - the Hutton Inquiry here should give a big clue - and I know your a researcher.

All I suggest is a little scepticism in the face of some reports - as you usually demonstrate - from first hand knowledge it aint that hard to fly a plane - its landing and taking off that takes some skill. I just cannot buy into this remote control theory - It just reads - yet again - like the rag heads cant do this to us they are too backwards.

Well the same poeple helped the US and UK win WW2 in the desert - just as the Revolutionary army used the local knowledge of Native Americans in your war against us. These are resourceful people - hell both of our countries educated them - 6 i know of at my college.

The bottom line is stop looking for the internal enemy - he may be there he may be not - but where were people looking on 9/11/2001.

This was your wake up call - there is actually a world outside who doesnt want Mcds on every corner or sees Britney as offensive - but this time unlike Vietnam they are capable and able of delivering it to your very doorstep.

OK
Bush and Blair did try to find a link - agree on that point - and failed - this is documented .

This is actually part of the Hutton inquiry - the sexing up of the document in part with links to Al Queda and the so called 48 hours scenario.

The OPEC vote sorry just doesnt do anything for me - the US has long been afraid of a block of europe - after all we as a union would rival any North American trading consortium - and we brits arnt even part of it yet.

So think this way we (well our prime minister) is mad keen to get us into the Euro - and we the people on the whole dont want to join the Euro (67% at the last poll) but we want to get into Iraq to protect the dollar ?.

and we ignore the threads content - that the WTC was perpetrated by who ? - If we join the US to help the OPEC vote and support the Dollar - well Mr Blair is a liar - sorry it just doesnt work if you have any any undersytanding of the UK political system .

I return to my first assertation that the US is too blind to see what created the first attack and until you do will suffer the consequences of such blindness.

In response to Fry2's statement of jumbo jets cant handle. I fully agree and b\never really fully bought it because I actually have done alot of research on planes and happen to know that the size of the plane does not necessarily entail the rate of turning/ handling. By the way, dn't ever mistake me as someone ignorat of planes, especially military jets.

Lets pretend that this ridiculous and absurd notion of remote controlled planes flying. Why would it necessartily be Saddam at the controls, Faith? Theres a thousand other people that would have done it.

Silk, simple study of the facts from that day, documented facts that show nothign short of deliuberate standing down of the airforce and a gross lack of following standard proceedures that had no trouble being followed for similar and minor events, that show That there was knowldge, com;icity, maybe even abetting the Arabs (if they were arabs) in those attacks.

The suspicous and ridiculous evidence that was used to pin it on the arabs would get laughed at by school children.

The flying that was done that day was not impossible by human hands. But.....to fly like that would take presision, very skilled flying in high speed turns and maneuvers. You dont learn that from any normal civilian school.

But military fighters and cargo pilots would learn such things.

Where would a ragtag group of religious superstitious fanatics get high quality military flight training and knowldge of controlling planes like that? Not from a small flight school that focuses mostly on crop dusters.

They would get such training from a powerful govornment with an impressive airforce and great training facilities. Things niether the Saudis nor Afghanis had. But Irsael and the US sure do.

IRA bombings were quite different. For one, they were pretty simple. it doesnt take too many brains to build a #ty little bomb and plant it in a mall. No skill, intelligence, and coordination are needed to pull off the dirty deed. No real money either. Any idiot could make bombs in his garage. What the IRA did was the work of punk cowards who used simple bombs to go blow up random targets from shopping malls to cars.

What was done on 9/11 was INGENIUS. The coordination. The skills needed. the planning, the execution required ALOT of very BIG resources that #bag little terrorists simply do not have. They have the resources to make bombs. they have the resources to create big messes. But not the resources to pull off what they did, not without the aid and blessing of a VERY powerful benefactor.

Current Al Qaeda attacks are basically unsophisticated. Car bombs. Anuyone can do that. Thats all Al Qaeda is capabale of. Oil tanker bombs. Little boats full of plastic explosives to blow holes in ships. Car bombs. Suicide bombs. Thats about the extent of thier capabilities: bombs and lower scale attacks that dont require a whole hell of alot of planning and coordination.

9/11 was a very BIG operation, something beyond the ken of little bands of hopped up loonie arabs with religious martyrdom aspirations.

As Dragon rider pointed out, Israel had alot to gain from the attacks. And Mossad agents, if they are hardcore Zionists, would suicide themselves for a bigger cause.

If it was purely arab terrorists flying the planes, they had help from a very big patron. The US.

Skadi -

Just a couple of points -

1) The Provisional IRA were and probably are one of the most sophisticated terrorist organisations on the planet.

2) Bombs do cost money as do arms and training - most of this was very forthcomming through channels like NORAID from the US throughout the 70's and 80's. And indeed Lybia and the use of the Bekka valley - somewhere Mr Reagan thought prudent to target during the 80s.

3) The command structure for the IRA has long been a model upon which other less succesful terrorist organisations have tried to copy - Bader Meinhoff and the Red Brigade to lesser success and ETA sucessfully.

4) The selction of IRA targets has always been pretty shrewd - with exception of certain N.Ireland targets that were obvoiusly for internal economic reasons - The Europa Hotel in Belfast a case in point. Targets on the UK mainland have always been selected - it seems - and have achieved maximum economic and social impact.

5) A simple point precludes "suicide" bombings by the IRA . Ireland is a Catholic country and in the Catholic faith suicide is a sin. (the debate on hunger strikes is far more involved but does have historical roots)

6) The IRA have been instrumental in stretching the UK govenments power in the control of terorism since the 1960s - hence the request by GWB for assistance in this area of expertise from both MI5 and MI6.

To label them as a bunch as "punk kids" really is a very poor comparisson.

As a victim of a "punk kid" attack I would say please learn about your enemies before looking down on them. Which indeed was the nature of my rebuttal to the fact that Al Queda are a bunch of "punk arabs" - who have the desire, training and more importantly the money to deliver their message many more miles away than the IRA ever had to travel.

Bibliography :
Inside the IRA - Tim Pat Coogan
Bloody Sunday - Dr Raymond Mclean
10 Men Dead - sorry can't remeber the author

Silk,

Suicide by Muslims is also a sin. What iraqi general said as the war started, that if he were liek the Japanese, hed have committed suicide, but Islam forbids it?

The IRA was alot more advanced than Al Qaeda. But they were still punks. That should tell you something about the capabilities of the Al Qaeda. Who are desert punks.

The amount of technical training and financing, plus access to those very resources, was well beyond the means of even Al Qaeda. They could not alone have pulled off what they did.

For starters, the supposed terrorists had red flags by thier names as far as immigration goes, yet passed into this country unchalleneged. Quite a few times. That smells like someone inside deliberatley lowering those red flags that would have normall set off an alarm. We were not totally ignoring or unaware of Al Qaeda. We were aware of many of thier activities during the 90's, and what a problem they were becoming.

But thier pattern was limited to truck bombings, tanker bombings, ect. Thats about the extent of thier capabilities. Does making bombs require a whole hell of alot of training? No. The anarchist cookbook, the childs manual to playing with fire, provides low scale little bombs for the making. Not hard at all to do for anyone who can read. There are also other more sophisticated manuals on how to make bombs and explosives out there, from old military TMs and FMs to private enterprise.

To learn to fly planes takes alot of resources. One is flight training on commercial jets. The supposed flight schools the supposed terrorists went to were all for little planes, like crop dusters. Flying one of thsoe is different from flying a 767. Totally different training.

The maneuvers and the ability for these supposed terrorists to hijack planes, then navigate them to thier targets and fly them as well as they did, speaks of even more extensive training.

Add to that that 7 of the 19 supposed hijackers have been found alive and well in thier home countries, and what do you have? the true identity of the hijackers remains a mystery.

Add to the ridiculous fake cellphone calls on the planes, and add to the other delays and lack of response.....

No. Im very well aware of my enemy and what goes on int he middle east, as well as thier capabilities. they need more than money, they need access to resources they simply did not have.

Not to mention, terrorists follow a pretty standard pattern in thier attacks. Al Qaeda was limited to ground bombing. Thats thier MO. The IRA also did ground bombings, as well as other shady dealings.

Unless of course, you care to provide me with something showing terrorists training in Russia or other super power with access to such training. Iran doesnt have those capabilities, and it takes alot mroe than dingy little dirty bootcamps to teach people how to bypass security, fly planes, ect.

And the IRA, mind you, Ireland, is far more technologically advanced and much better educated than any middle eastern country.

Now that I have thought about it for a day since posting here, I wonder why this never comes up anywhere for discussion.

I recall it completely when it hit the news, and since 911, it has never been mentioned again.

hmmmm

anyone else remember this?

Skadi - I couldnt show you resources in the former Soviet Russia - however a will point to a well documented source of Bin Ladens resources - the book "Holy War inc" which pretty well documents the financial backing to Al Queda.

As to the assertation that arabs couldnt fly planes like that - Im afraid there is a cardre of experienced pilots in the middle east - flying its countries fleets of aircraft - including a registry of some pretty modern aircraft. ndeed these planes land and take off in the US every day as their country flag carriers.

I agree the mystery of just who were the pilots still remains - but that in itself offers the thought that maybe these pilots were ex military or ex commercial pilots with very extensive experience of flying the class of aircraft used.

An interesting fact was brought to my attention by an a very senior airline pilot a couple of years ago. The UK flag carrier British Airways has many more qualified pilots trained than it could ever use - these guys perform check flights every now and then to remain current on type and class - but return to their normal day jobs till a slot for them opens. Perhaps our unknown crews came from these or other airlines reserve ranks ? To add weight to this - after 9/11 an individual was detained in a town near Heathrow - a place called West Drayton - home of the BA testing and simulators (and a number of other airlines) - and accused of aiding the training of the 9/11 highjackers. I never found out the outcome of this individuals trial or release. But it does add weight to the theory that these people might have been pretty well trained.

I will agree that the PA flight story concerns me greatly - my personnal belief is that at least one aircraft was actually shot down that day. However i believe that story will never be told.

Just so you know - I make these points in the interest of exploring posibilities - not as any sort of inference that i/you are right or wrong.

Thanks for the info, I shall check it out.

That was kind of what i was looking for, some sort of reference to Russia, because theres another itching nagging thing in my head I wanted to check out, but needed some sort of info on a Russia/mid east terrorist link.

As to the 9/11 incident, I ams till not totally firm on the exact perps and the reasons, but one thing I am firm about: 9/11 had the hand of the US govornment in it, period. The extent and whose hand specifically, i still am tossing the possibilities around, two major ones still hold on. However, I need to find out other....missing links. Mainly, missing players.

It is possible that the hijackers were indeed Arab pilots, recruited by whomever, to do this job, and the US acted as third party shadowy benefactor. making sure they had as little obstruction and as much third party support for thier misssion.

The flight issue is one of many things I am looking at.b The training and expertise of the people who flew those planes. This points to someone very technologically advanced, with alot of resources.

There are more fingers in the Al Qeada pie than just Bin Laden. The US....maybe even Russia? Who knows?

But one needs look at who stands to benefit, and there are surprisingly, alot of people who would benefit from this, and who did. Alot fo people, except for the Average American and Average Arab.

The last flight you refer to, flight 93 that crashed in Pennsylvania, is very suspect. Ground eyewitness accounts point to a brief shaking of the plane, followed by the plane becoming steady again. This points to a struggle for control, then control gained again.

When you look at the passengers on board...the guys who planned the revolt and attack on the hijackers were more than able to succeed, one being a former football player, one stewardess being a former cop, one guy being a martial arts instrctor, ect. Over taking 4 puny hijackers by an enraged passenger crowd was not unlikely, and had much chance of success.

Add tp the fact that two passengers, one a pilot and one an air traffic controller, could have taken over the plane and given it a better chance of landing intact after the hijackers were disposed of.

Ground eyewitness reports of s second mad flying jet in the area, plus records of a sonic boom from a seismic station in West Virginia, point to it being shot down. Add the huge area over which the wreckage was distributed in a very hilly countryside.........

The real question here is.....lets say thier plan succeded, they did regain control. The pilot radios the fighter jet chasing it, saying they succeded. They succeded, call off the guns, please escort us some place we can land this monster. But it gets shot down anyway.

Why shoot it down if the hijackers no longer have control? Why did they destroy the whole plane?

Questions, questions, questions.

BTW.

If you've seen some of the explosions/damage done by the IRA, and then checked out the Bali Bombing explosion/damage........ The damage that the Bali Bombing did was WAAAAAAY bigger for WAAAAAY less money.

The IRA were using things like plastic explosives or some actual explosives that cost like 14,000 dollars or more. Costs heaps anyways compared..then you look at the size difference in the damage. The Bali Bombing looks like a nuke went off compared to the IRA stuff.

BTW, Personally. I think the CIA or someone from America/Israel did that job in Bali to gain more support for the war on terror. The timing and the feel of it just isn't right.