It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iranian Daily: Former US Air force Pilots Behind WTC, Pentagon Attacks

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:26 AM
link   
This is what an Iranian newspaper wrote about 9/11.

Document ID: GMP20010919000184
Version Number: 01

Region: Near East/South Asia, The Americas
Sub-Region: South Asia, Arab Africa, Near East, North America
Country: Afghanistan, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Pakistan, United States
Topic: CRIME, HUMAN RIGHTS, INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC, INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL, TERRORISM
Source-Date: 09/18/2001

Hizballah Al-Manar TV Summary Sep 18, 2001
GMP20010919000184 Beirut Al-Manar Television WWW-Text in English 18 Sep 01
[Al-Manar Internet TV News Summary 09/18/2001]


Former US Air force Pilots Behind WTC, Pentagon Attacks: Iranian Daily

The Iranian Kayhan evening newspaper revealed that the perpetrators of Tuesday's attacks in New York and Washington were former pilots in the US Air Force, and that hijacking in fact did not take place but was used to cover the real scenario of the incidents.

Kayhan cited from American reports that the pilots' not using the alarm button, usually used in emergency or danger circumstances, is still considered one of the most obscure clues in this case. This indicates, according to the newspaper, that the four pilots carried out the suicide operation in purpose, and that the hijacking story is not correct.

The report disclosed that three of those pilots were former Vietnam veterans, while the brother of the fourth died in that war. The report listed the names of the pilots as follows:

Charles Berlingim, Flight 77's pilot. He ploughed his plane into Pentagon where he worked for several years.

Jason Dahil, Flight 93's pilots. His plane was shot down over Pennsylvania. His brother (Kenneth) killed in Vietnam in 1971 at an age of 20 years.

Joe Agotawski, Flight 11's pilot. He ploughed into the World Trade Center's first tower.

Victor Sarasini, Flight 75's pilot. He ploughed into the second tower. The newspaper referred to the clear contradiction in the information disclosed by the two airline companies, American Airlines and United Airlines, and the one disclosed by the FBI.

Three days after the incident, the FBI issued a list of the passengers' names including the names of the 19 alleged Arabs whose names were not in the companies' list issued a day after the incident.

However, Kayhan stopped at journalistic reports that indicated no trails of a plane being crashed at the Pentagon. Also it focused on the fourth plane that was shot down by US warplanes in Pennsylvania and that the pilot did not plough the plane by himself in defiance to hijackers' request to head to a populated area.

The newspaper based its information on what the French Agency mentioned that pieces of the plane were found four miles away from crash site, which means the plane was blown out in the sky by missiles fired from US warplanes, according to the newspaper.




posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Notice the comments about Flight 93 being shot down.

It seems more and more reports are coming out abot Flight 93 being shot down.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Notice the comments about Flight 93 being shot down.

It seems more and more reports are coming out abot Flight 93 being shot down.


Notice the date of this article. It is also not exactly a reliable source, being an anti US state controlled paper.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
Notice the date of this article. It is also not exactly a reliable source, being an anti US state controlled paper.


Yes i noticed the date. How many people still believe the media's official story from 2001?

It might be a anti US state but depends also on where the information came form and if it can be verified.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
It might be a anti US state but depends also on where the information came form and if it can be verified.


Where did the information come from? Have you verified it?



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
Where did the information come from? Have you verified it?


Well if you read the post it states at the end some information came from the French.

Speaking of verification, have you verified any of the official stories information?



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 05:07 AM
link   
This news guy has a better story than the truth movement. ... total fiction.

The shoot down of 93 was debunked on 9/11 with all the debris from the fuselage impact being south of the crater, and confirmed by the FDR with all systems running to impact. This reporter's research, very shallow; wrong, it is nonexistent.

UBL must be steamed, someone try to take credit from UBL and his terrorist buddies.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 05:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well if you read the post it states at the end some information came from the French.

So you just copied and pasted a 7 year old article with no investigation and no knowledge of its actual sources?


Speaking of verification, have you verified any of the official stories information?

Sure, I've verified as much as is possible for a layman to do, at least as much as I have seen substantial criticism of.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by beachnut
The shoot down of 93 was debunked on 9/11 with all the debris from the fuselage impact being south of the crater, and confirmed by the FDR with all systems running to impact.


Its just too bad there is a government document that proves that Flight 93 was intercepted and probably shot down.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
Sure, I've verified as much as is possible for a layman to do, at least as much as I have seen substantial criticism of.


So show what you have verified and what you used to verify it like FOIA request, E-mails and the research sites.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So show what you have verified and what you used to verify it like FOIA request, E-mails and the research sites.


Neither FOIA requests nor emails were needed, although I have sent some emails to people at NIST without reply, but this was for minor clarifications to things like interviews with rescue personnel.

I have repeatedly checked facts that appear in the NIST report, checked the veracity of statements made, I have investigated criticisms of the NIST report and found them to be invalid. I am not about to start making a list of everything they got right in the 11,000 pages.

Your position is obvious, and you have made it abundantly clear that your position is based on a preconception rather than logical deduction. I have repeatedly challenged you to provide facts or evidence, and each time you have resorted to simply repeating yourself as if this was somehow proof.

I am required to be civil on this forum, and have been warned once, so I will not go any further. Suffice it to say that I don't believe you will ever produce the document you claim exists and if you do I suspect it will be at best something you infer meaning from rather than something stated explicitly.

If you want to discuss specific facts I am more than happy to do so, but you will need to support your assertions with more than your personal beliefs and convictions.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
I have investigated criticisms of the NIST report and found them to be invalid. I am not about to start making a list of everything they got right in the 11,000 pages.


What about the fact the NIST did not recover any steel from buidling 7 for testing, which makes their report invailed for not doing a proper investigation. Also NIST is not an official investigating agency for 9/11.


If you want to discuss specific facts I am more than happy to do so, but you will need to support your assertions with more than your personal beliefs and convictions.


Ok specific facts.

1. There are no photos or videos of AA77 hitting the Pentagon.

2. There are no reports matching parts and debris found to any of the 9/11 planes.

3. NIST failed to recover steel from buidling 7 for testing.

4. Several reports disgree with NIST on the cause of the building collapse.

We will start with those few for now.


[edit on 21-9-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I am not saying this is what happened....but it is possible dont you think?
The black opps or what have you have no doubt perfected mind control and if they really wanted to do it this way then its a very real possiblity.
Kinda strange why none of the pilots hit the help button so too speak...on all 4 planes...hmmmm



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 10:54 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



so they put 4 former military pilots on the plane and three of them plowed into building and the fourth they had to shoot down? why? why would they have three complete the task and the fourth be shot down only to cover up the downing of that plane?





As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
We will start with those few for now.


I have already addressed all of these points, why do you feel the need to keep repeating yourself? Repeating points that have already been addressed does not somehow make them valid.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur why would they have three complete the task and the fourth be shot down only to cover up the downing of that plane.


Ever think about propaganda?

It was a slick move to state that passnegers had tried to take over the plane to get the American people amped up to believe the official story.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
Repeating points that have already been addressed does not somehow make them valid.
'

So you can show an actual photo or video of AA77 hitting the Pentagon, or a report matching parts found to the 9/11 planes?



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



in your original post you are showing an old Iranian article that claims that a former american military pilot flew a plane into the pentagon and now you are switching the focus towards that not even happening?

kinda contrary to your original post, no?



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
kinda contrary to your original post, no?


No, just asking exponent to show the evidnece that he states he has.



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So you can show an actual photo or video of AA77 hitting the Pentagon, or a report matching parts found to the 9/11 planes?


There are two videos released of AA77 impacting the Pentagon. These are the only videos which exist showing this.

With regards to a report matching parts, I don't think there is any official report as the plane's identity was never in doubt except within the conspiracy theorist community. I can obviously show evidence to satisfy any reasonable level of scepticism but I suspect you will request something like serial number matching which is more difficult. There is a picture of at least one item with an AA serial number which has supposedly been matched, but it's somewhat irrelevant.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join