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.

 

New evidence regarding scrambled jets - contradicts official story

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Whitehorse filmmaker, retired Anchorage controller offer stunning evidence on Sept. 11 Alaska flight

I had a long conversation today with Max Fraser, an independent documentary filmmaker in Whitehorse, that has left me stunned.

He has performed an impressive feat of investigatory work in the research for his documentary, "Never Happen Here: The Whitehorse 9/11 Story." ...

...As part of his research, Fraser has uncovered strong evidence that contradicts official claims and statements about what happened after a Korean Airlines 747 bound for Anchorage inexplicably sent out a text message saying it was hijacked.

No one has ever explained why the text message "HJK" was sent by the pilot. Fraser does not dispute that message. It remains unexplained. He said he was stonewalled by Korean Airlines, which refused to comment on the matter.

The text message was cited, in testimony to the Alaska Legislature in 2002 by Gen. Norton Schwartz, now the head of the U.S. Air Force, as the first sign that the plane may have been hijacked.

Schwartz went on to say that the second sign was that the plane was sending out the 7500 squawk code, which is a distress call that the plane has been hijacked.

...

The film and the controller say that the Federal Aviation Administration actually gave the order for the Korean jet to transmit the electronic signal that it was being hijacked. This was a foolhardy thing to do when armed F-15s are following the jet, thinking that it might be controlled by hijackers.

Fraser obtained FAA documents that show the agency ordered the jet to send the distress call. He also has transcripts of statements by Whitehorse RCMP officials who said the pilot told them he was ordered by the FAA to make the distress call.

This is an alarming piece of evidence because it put the lives of innocent people at risk. The nation was in a panic mode that day. A lot of things happened that probably would not have happened under normal circumstances.

Rick Wilder, a retired pilot and air traffic controller who was working in Anchorage that day, said the "worst thing I've ever had to do" was to issue the order to the Korean jet to issue the 7500 squawk code. He said it made no sense that day and it makes no sense now.


...

"The 7500 squawk was the hijack code," Wilder said. "A supervisor came down and said we need to have the Korean Air squawk 7500."

"I didn't really think it was the right thing to do," he said. "So they actually left and regroup and talked about it. I had my opinions of why it wasn't, but then later I was ordered to do it."
...

...Here is a video of Townsend's interview with the controller that was shown after the documentary. He does not appear in the documentary. Wilder did contact Fraser after he first saw the film and let him know about it being the worst action that he had to take in his working life.

Let's compare that to the planes that actuallty "were" hijacked/crashed.
None of them sent the 7500 squawk, even though it'd be protocol and only take a few seconds... All of those crews failed at the simplest of their duties in a hijacking scenario, yet the hijackers were able to pull off multiple hail mary passes and a miracle simultaneously?


Why did all four hijacked planes on 9/11 take long detours? How did the hijackers know about “radar holes”? How could they conduct key hijacking events simultaneously all within 10 minutes? Who controlled the planes?



edit on 10-9-2011 by 1825114 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
It is becoming more clear that pretty much everything in the "official report" on the 9/11 attacks were LIES, except the number of innocent people killed.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by 1825114
 



Let's compare that to the planes that actuallty "were" hijacked/crashed.
None of them sent the 7500 squawk, even though it'd be protocol and only take a few seconds... All of those crews failed at the simplest of their duties in a hijacking scenario, yet the hijackers were able to pull off multiple hail mary passes and a miracle simultaneously?


Lets hear your explanation of how pilots were supposed to send the "hijack" code ....?

Explain in detail how the transponder works ?

My contention is you have no idea and are simply parroting some idiotic nonsense......

Come on show us you are not a "mommy's basement commando" .......



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   
i think its safe to assume that sending a hijack signal consists of turning a dial and pressing a button or maybe just pressing a big red button in the cockpit. it would be pretty dumb to make it complicated seeing as how if it was accidentally pressed the people on the ground could just ask if it was a mistake or not



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by MastaShake
i think its safe to assume that sending a hijack signal consists of turning a dial and pressing a button or maybe just pressing a big red button in the cockpit. it would be pretty dumb to make it complicated seeing as how if it was accidentally pressed the people on the ground could just ask if it was a mistake or not

You can ask, but if they've actually been hijacked, they're going to say, "No, we haven't been hijacked, everything is fine up here, how are you?"

The flight crews on 9/11 did not change their transponders because they were dead before they knew what was going on. Most people need time to assimilate information before taking extraordinary action, especially in rapidly developing and uncertain situations. As for big red buttons, here is where you would change the transponder code on a 767. I'll let you find the specific button, if indeed it is a button.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman

My contention is you have no idea and are simply parroting some idiotic nonsense......

Come on show us you are not a "mommy's basement commando" .......

thanks for all your input. gotta love the intelligent discourse on this website
edit on 10-9-2011 by 1825114 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2011 @ 02:00 AM
link   
maybe this should've been in the breaking news forum? any mods reading this want to move it?



posted on Sep, 11 2011 @ 02:13 AM
link   
so....

why was this flight told to squawk and text hijack?



posted on Sep, 11 2011 @ 02:13 AM
link   
so....

why was this flight told to squawk and text hijack?



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Alaska flight ordered to give false hijacking alert, documentary evidence shows

There should be a national discussion and a formal investigation about the FAA order. Was this a case of miscommunication during a moment of national crisis? If so, why not admit it?



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by vermonster
so....

why was this flight told to squawk and text hijack?



The Controller give a good explanation of why he thought they were told to order them to squawk the emergency code. Watch the video.



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   
I'm curious - in watching the second video, it claims that the "hijackers" pretty much turned off their transponders in "radar gaps" for military or civilian radar coverage. If that's true, then how come Flight #93 turned off their radar *over* Akron OH (which does have a commercial airport for those who don't know) and well within Wright-Patterson AFB, and Cleveland radar coverage (if not Pittsburgh as well)? (Compare video map to map of US)

It goes on to suggest that flight #11 turned their transponder off "7 minutes" outside of Boston "just at the border of a radar gap" Really? ATC Boston can only see 7 minutes out in certain directions? Sound logical to anyone else? Further, the vid can only account for the radar gap access for 3 of the 4 planes. If this was such a "constructed" event as implied, why *not* all 4?

I'm also curious how this presentation knows *exactly* what the military capabilities are for radar coverage are as they claim, especially as they feel that Wright-Patt can't "see" more than 20-25 miles on radar...

The video uses this as a basis to then suggest that the planes were remotely controlled using sophisticated Ratheon equipment and that no hijackers were needed at all.

The poster did "Truthers" a disservice by combining an initial video where the ATC guy gives a pretty good reason why he thought the "squawk 7500" order was given - despite his own misgivings on the order. Then the poster gives us a video full of conjecture and what appears to be inaccuracies.

This is EXACTLY the type of patched together crap that gives "Truthers" a bad name and total lack of respect.
edit on 17-9-2011 by userid1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by 1825114
 



Let's compare that to the planes that actuallty "were" hijacked/crashed.
None of them sent the 7500 squawk, even though it'd be protocol and only take a few seconds... All of those crews failed at the simplest of their duties in a hijacking scenario, yet the hijackers were able to pull off multiple hail mary passes and a miracle simultaneously?




My contention is you have no idea and are simply parroting some idiotic nonsense......

Come on show us you are not a "mommy's basement commando" .......
wow are you capable of making a comment on this board with out the need of ad hom attacts?

you guys really are bitter and twisted!
edit on 17-9-2011 by kaya82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by userid1
I'm curious - in watching the second video, it claims that the "hijackers" pretty much turned off their transponders in "radar gaps" for military or civilian radar coverage. If that's true, then how come Flight #93 turned off their radar *over* Akron OH (which does have a commercial airport for those who don't know) and well within Wright-Patterson AFB, and Cleveland radar coverage (if not Pittsburgh as well)? (Compare video map to map of US)

It goes on to suggest that flight #11 turned their transponder off "7 minutes" outside of Boston "just at the border of a radar gap" Really? ATC Boston can only see 7 minutes out in certain directions? Sound logical to anyone else? Further, the vid can only account for the radar gap access for 3 of the 4 planes. If this was such a "constructed" event as implied, why *not* all 4?

I'm also curious how this presentation knows *exactly* what the military capabilities are for radar coverage are as they claim, especially as they feel that Wright-Patt can't "see" more than 20-25 miles on radar...

The video uses this as a basis to then suggest that the planes were remotely controlled using sophisticated Ratheon equipment and that no hijackers were needed at all.

The poster did "Truthers" a disservice by combining an initial video where the ATC guy gives a pretty good reason why he thought the "squawk 7500" order was given - despite his own misgivings on the order. Then the poster gives us a video full of conjecture and what appears to be inaccuracies.

This is EXACTLY the type of patched together crap that gives "Truthers" a bad name and total lack of respect.
edit on 17-9-2011 by userid1 because: (no reason given)


This one was worth a star! Well reasoned. The perfect comeback for a presentation that is lacking and void of any aeronautical knowledge at all.



new topics

top topics



 
9

log in

join