Originally posted by space cadet
. . . most of those who want to believe it is an inside job are not even living or from America, and have no firsthand knowledge of the events of that day, or the events leading to the war in Iraq.

I am an American, and I watched live television as the events of 911 unfolded, I had family in both Washington and New York.

Originally posted by eyewitness86
reply to post by beachnut

---

What proof do you have that any of that makes any sense at all? Everything you said is wrong and inaccurate and not in evidence. Stop the tired old ' Jew hater ' nonsense..why are you trying to link anti-Semitism with the MANY MANY FACTS that point to Israeli involvement? If you IGNORE all the evidence and just scream silly nonsense about Jews instead of telling us WHY your opnions about remote control ability have ANY validity.

Are you an expert on remote systems, particularly those developed by the DOV ZAKHEIM company? Think DANIEL LEWIN was shot in the head like the FBI says, or was he stabbed like Amy Sweeny says? Do you ever research or just look for a chance to shout some silly slogan about the poor Jews..it is ZIONISTS and NEOCONS, not Jews. Religion has zero to do with this: only a political animal murders for money, not a religious one.

Money and control, that is the gaame. Who is the main players? The Arabs? please. read and study and then come back after you drop the persecution complex and learn about what happened that day. You are toooo shallow to compete here....come back later.

QRS-11 gyrochip

Between 2000 and 2003, Boeing exported commercial jets with a QRS-11 gyrochip in the instrument flight boxes, even though the chip was classified by the State Department as an export-restricted defense item because it can be used to stabilize and steer guided missile

Are Boeing fitting their aircraft with illegal devices that could enable terrorists to remotely hijack airliners and crash them into high profile targets? In light of what happened on 9/11, Boeing's blanket denial that this practice has taken place is both highly suspicious and a threat to national security . . .

According to the Seattle Times, "The QRS-11 chip, made by a unit of BEI Technologies in Concord, Calif., is just over 1-½ inches in diameter and weighs about 2 ounces. It sells for between $1,000 and $2,000. Described as "a gyro on a chip," it is used to help control the flight of missiles and aircraft." . . .

Recent newspaper reports discussing these devices and the policy to have them in all airliners within three years assure us that they would prevent another 9/11 style outrage - but because anysuch system is vulnerable to hacking allied with the fact that pilots have no way of overriding the autopilot, not even with secure access codes, this only increases the chances of another 9/11 style attack.

A comprehensive investigation on behalf of those who have the authority and resources to perform it needs to be mandated immediately into whether devices that completely remove control of a plane from the pilot and that have illegally been installed in many existing aircraft are a fundamental danger to national security.

Originally posted by AMTMAN

Do you actually read the links you post?

< seattletimes.nwsource.com... >

Are you trying to prove something by posting this?

Originally posted by AMTMAN
reply to post by ipsedixit

---

Please tell how that chip "allows for remote control of the airliner that is impossible for a pilot to override".

NORAD, Masters Of Remote Control
Since 1959, NORAD personnel have been installing remote control units in a variety of aircraft and remotely controlling those aircraft in sophisticated aeronautical maneuvers, including combat practice. See "Thwarting skyjackings from the ground," written by Alan Staats for Facsnet, and posted on October 2, 2001. (Facsnet is an education service provided for its reporters by Associated Press.)

www.facsnet.org...
or
www.Public-Action.com...
(Look at paragraph entitled "History on remote control.")

"Controlling the aircraft from the ground is nothing new. The military has been flying obsolete high performance fighter aircraft as target drones since the 1950s. In fact, NORAD (the North American Air Defense Command) had at its disposal a number of U.S. Air Force General Dynamics F-106 Delta Dart fighter aircraft configured to be remotely flown into combat as early as 1959 under the auspices of a program known as SAGE. These aircraft could be started, taxied, taken off, flown into combat, fight, and return to a landing entirely by remote control, with the only human intervention needed being to fuel and re-arm them."

Re-read that final sentence in the above quote:

"These [NORAD] aircraft could be started, taxied, taken off, flown into combat, fight, and return to a landing entirely by remote control … "

Given over 40 years of institutional experience, flying remotely controlled "suicide" jets into the World Trade Center towers would have been a piece of cake for NORAD. This information puts NORAD's failure to protect our skies on September 11, 2001 in a new light.

Negative terrorism hype aside, flying is still a very safe mode of transport. The only real danger is being beaten to dearth by a group of radical environmentalists for polluting the atmosphere.

Boeing, though, is taking no chances and thinks its latest autopilot is the perfect answer to anti-terrorism. Classed as a 9/11-proof system, it will stop terrorists from flying the plane into land or sea targets and can be remotely landed by ground-staff. Once activated, it cannot be deactivated.

The captain can activate the system manually or - and this is the bit I have some concern with - it can activate itself when sensors fitted to the cockpit door record excessive force – like terrorists trying to break in.

Hmm, what happens if turbulence causes someone to fall against the door, a drunk passenger needs to tell the captain something really, really important, or a rogue drinks trolley hits it? Boeing could have these in all planes with three years, according to insiders.-Martin Lynch