!!! NORAD TAPES obtained by Loose Change!!!!

these tapes have already been released.....i forget which magazine released it....(i have the link at home) but it's already in another forum....hold on i may have it under my favorities.....

they were told flight 11 was hijacked......then they were told that a civilian plane hit one of the towers....the news said it was cessna....and then the second plane was hijacked....but alls atc told norad was that the hijacked plane was still out there.....

by the end of it actually happening....the local norad in new york....thought there were still 5 hijacked planes including flight 11....

ahh...i found it.....
here's the actual article from vanityfair
here's the august 4th forum on ATS

it's eleven pages....so have fun....


p.s. edit for gramatical errors

[edit on 30-8-2007 by wenfieldsecret]

Originally posted by Matthew5012
So all anyone has to do to fly a secret mission of 4planes over the USA is to have there transponders turned to off. then everyone in the contry is totaly confused???

Only if the russians knew about that in the cold war hey!

Ah but think about it, if they had no transponders the Russian controllers wouldn't know whose they were either, thats the problem. Anyway if they came from overseas they would be tracked, but when they are over land when they disappear thats harder to solve.

Plus if you have no transponder no one knows whose side you are on, and BVR in a warzone, you want at least one side to not be shooting at you.

Originally posted by defcon5
I don’t see what the big deal is.
We knew a long time ago that there was some mix up with which planes where which, and Norad was being handed information from ATC. These kind of things happen when they are having to rely on a civilian group for tacking, and the aircraft was only visible on primary radar. With it on primary radar it blends into any kind of background noise that shows up on the radar system, and it becomes easy to lose track of as it switches between radar stations.


[edit on 8/30/2007 by defcon5]

Agreed...it would be VERY easy to lose a jet in clutter whose transponder is turned off. What a lot of people don't realize is how much goes into tracking a plane. It's a LOT more than just watching a dot move on a screen. All those radar screens you've seen in the movies? Forget you ever saw them, 'cause it doesn't look like that.

this transponder thing always made me wonder. are there any pilots here than can name where the transponder is located? is it in the same location on every plane? would someone who has only learned to fly in a small plane before KNOW where to find a transponder in a big plane? what times EXACTLY were the transponders switched off in each plane?

can anyone answer any of the above? thx

Originally posted by justyc
this transponder thing always made me wonder. are there any pilots here than can name where the transponder is located? is it in the same location on every plane? would someone who has only learned to fly in a small plane before KNOW where to find a transponder in a big plane? what times EXACTLY were the transponders switched off in each plane?

can anyone answer any of the above? thx

The transponder would not be hard to find if you've piloted a plane before. Every plane HAS to have a transponder if you want to legally fly, and they're all used in essentially the same manner. As long as you know what a transponder is, and what it's for, you'd have no problem finding it and figuring out how to use that particular transponder.

As far as what time they were turned off, I don't know off the top of my head, but I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find if you google it.

Originally posted by justyc
this transponder thing always made me wonder. are there any pilots here than can name where the transponder is located? is it in the same location on every plane? would someone who has only learned to fly in a small plane before KNOW where to find a transponder in a big plane? what times EXACTLY were the transponders switched off in each plane?

can anyone answer any of the above? thx

yes, yes, and yes.....

in the center of the console between the two pilots

it's not like they started flight training in january of '01

hani hanjour had some 600 hours and was qualified in '99

(i'm sorry but from where i am i cant access all my sources so you gotta take my word or dont believe it)

If the NORAD tapes are unaltered, this could be breaking news.

do you know what the impact of these tapes would be?

considering its "loose change", probably...NOTHING, just like the "loose change" video.

there still hasnt been "solid proof", as one person called it, of anything.

there is so much heresay taken as truth by conspiracy theorists its disheartening.

reply to post by wenfieldsecret


thanks for that info. would the switching off of the transponders actually have made a difference though as they presumably could still be tracked by conventional radar? it just seems a bit pointless to me if they knew they were going to crash the planes anyway. like the london underground suicide bombers buying return tickets

reply to post by justyc


unlike other posters i don't know too much about the ATC radars....but what i do know is that the radars do see alot....but the transponder is so that the controllers no which plane they're dealing with....they'll call your plane and be like "squawk ####" and when the number changes on the radar (next to your dot) then they'll know who they are dealing with....if that number dissappears.....it's just a green dot among many many dots....

tho there is the problem with the pilots being able to change to a hijack code....they prolly would have been instantly killed by the hijackers....

75## is the hijack code...or maybe 76## or 77##....i know those three stand for specific emergincies but i dont know which witch is which......


p.s....everyone saying "breaking news" needs to check out my post at the top of this page.....(page 2)

[edit on 30-8-2007 by wenfieldsecret]

Originally posted by apex

Originally posted by Matthew5012
So all anyone has to do to fly a secret mission of 4planes over the USA is to have there transponders turned to off. then everyone in the contry is totaly confused???

Only if the russians knew about that in the cold war hey!

Ah but think about it, if they had no transponders the Russian controllers wouldn't know whose they were either, thats the problem. Anyway if they came from overseas they would be tracked, but when they are over land when they disappear thats harder to solve.

Plus if you have no transponder no one knows whose side you are on, and BVR in a warzone, you want at least one side to not be shooting at you.

i hear what your saying but there still going to light up like a christmas trees and be red flagged by the system!

To give you guys an idea of a normal day of air traffic over the United States, this is a snapshot of the FAA FACET control screen. Keep in mind, this is 5 years AFTER 9/11 when air travel levels were supposedly down.

Where's AA11?:



Hint: Every one of those yellow spots is a plane without a transponder code showing.

Matthew5012, the military information came almost exclusively from FAA radar sites. Unless the planes were flying at supersonic speeds, there is no way to tell a civilian airliner flying at 600 knots, and a Russian Backfire flying at 600 knots unless you flagged it coming in over the ocean, and KNEW it was a Backfire before it crossed the coast. At which point you would have tried to intercept it then, not after it was over the US.

[edit on 8/30/2007 by Zaphod58]

Originally posted by Zaphod58


Hint: Every one of those yellow spots is a plane without a transponder code showing.

Yes, but when every other one has a transponder on, and 4 don't, how hard does it become then?

Just because the transponder is on doesn't mean it's showing up on the radar screen. You, as a controller, have to specifically look for a planes code. If you have no idea where the plane is, then you have to look at EVERY code...with that many planes on the screen, it becomes a jumbled mess that you literally can not read.

Actually quite difficult. Primary skin paints can be very intermittent, and very faint on the radar screen. And not all radar sets are primary sets. Where Flight 77 turned off their transponder there were only two primary sets, and they flew over an area that only had secondary sites.

But the thing about 9/11 is that only ONE flight left the transponder off. Three of them changed the codes, which caused some confusion, and only Flight 77 left their transponder off. Once the transponder changes, then the controllers have to spend time figuring out who the flight really is, and if someone else told them to change codes, and it delays the response further. As for the military thinking that Flight 11 was still in the air, they were relying on the FAA to tell them the planes were down, and the FAA didn't do that for a long time with that flight. Unless they know for sure it's down, they're going to HAVE to assume that it's still airborne.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
But the thing about 9/11 is that only ONE flight left the transponder off. Three of them changed the codes, which caused some confusion, and only Flight 77 left their transponder off.

This is the first I've heard of this. A source would be nice. Not that I'm doubting you. Thanks.

Oh sorry, I misremembered that. I just woke up and my brain hasn't had its morning dose of caffeine yet. Only one flight changed codes, but the other three had problems with tracking, and figuring out altitudes of the planes. Boston Center also didn't follow procedures with notifying the military about Flight 11. The FAA notified the military, but didn't request an escort, and later after they went up their chain of command, they attempted to notify a military station that had been phased out and was no longer in service to launch fighters.

Most controllers, unless they have to, don't leave their radar screens in a mode that will even see primary radar returns. They can reconfigure them to show primary returns, and they did on 9/11, but a radar screen shows a LOT of normal data, and a lot of transponder codes, so it's very easy to lose a primary return, especially if one controller is tracking it, and he hands off to another controller. During that hand off, they can lose the primary return and take time to find it again.

Originally posted by Tynee
there is so much heresay taken as truth by conspiracy theorists its disheartening.

Yeah, almost as disheartening as the percentage of the population that blindly believes what the TV told them about what happened that day.

What really gets to me is the fact that many people will believe that the ' highjackers' in all four cases, managed to clear out both pilots from the cockpits and disable the transponders, but they cannot explain how it is that all of the pilots were totally unable to flip a switch and activate the ' Highjack code '.

Imagine 2 pilots up front, in all 4 planes, that is eight people that had to be removed from a cramped and tight space, be replaced by the ' highjacker ' pilots, and then deactivate the transponders. they could do all of that but not ONE pilot in any plane could take one second to flip the switch and notify the highjack. It is impossible, unbelievable, beyond the realm of possibility.

Those pilots would have fought back, would have never given up the cockpits that easily, no matter what. All FOUR cockpit doors must have been standing wide open, right? Then all eight pilots must have for some reason decided, for the first time in aviation history, to let the ' highjackers ' take over the plane, and all with boxcutters!!

Anyone who believes that would no doubt believe that the highjackers could have navigated the craft, flown them expertly and accomplished all this with no training on heavy jets. Amazing what some people will believe.There is no way that scenario could be true. Recall the tapes of Flt. 93, with Cleveland tower speaking to the pilot secons before they did not respond back? It took just a second to lose contact. those aircraft were taken over by automatic controllers and flown wherever.

It is beyond the realm of possibility that eight pilots would have decided to act in a way never before seen, and without a struggle, and without the aircraft displaying signs of being taken over..no way. The whole story we have been asked to swallow is beyond ridiculous and only the gullibility of the people allows it to keep going on.

No matter what the tapes show, there is NO WAY that those aircraft were taken over by men with bladed weapons in an instant..no way. Simply impossible. the pilots would have fought to the death to remain in control of their planes, and the fact that all of the four planes were taken over without a whimper and within seconds tells the tale. The transponders were deactivated the instant that the remote controller took over the computers and directed the planes according to their nefarious plan.

There is no other explanation that makes any sense at all.None. No one could possible believe that four planes could be taken in seconds without any resistance from the crew, and flown to targets far away, with great percision, all by second rate pilots that had NEVER trained in heavy planes. Beyond belief for anyone except a rabid Bushie that can see and hear no evil despite all of the facts. the time it took to overcome the planes tells us all we need to know; it HAD to be done remotely, that is the ONLY explanation that makes any sense.

Why did not ONE pilot flip the switch and activate a highjack code? Are we to believe that not ONE pilot thought this a good idea? While the pilots were allegedly being dragged out of the cockpit, dead or alive another pilot could have and WOULD have flipped the switch. No way that 4 planes failed to do this..impossible. they could not do it because all systems were overtaken from the ground. that is the only answer.

reply to post by eyewitness86


you would have to do a study of hijacked planes and the frequency with which the pilots pressed the button to know whether anything is unusual here.

real world events are sometimes not text book rule examples