top
Afghanistan
Afghanistan
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Who was on Flight 77?

by Jody Paulson
Is it possible they could have faked their own deaths?
Those who know me from my years of SF truth activism might be interested to know that there was a brief point of time when I (kinda/sorta) accepted the "official" narrative of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001. I don't know if you remember, but just as with the Gulf oil spill, immediately after the disaster there were calls to the general public to send solutions that might fix what went wrong.

Believe it or not, I actually sent the airlines what I thought was a brilliant idea: why not outfit all commercial passenger planes with a remote control override? It would have worked kind of like Onstar's anti-theft vehicle slowdown system (which didn't exist at the time). If a hijacker took over a plane, you could override the manual controls and bring it down from the tower, preventing it from being used to crash into buildings.

Little did I know that this kind of technology had already been developed by Global Hawk, a remote controlled plane being used in Afghanistan. But I soon found out -- a guy named Peter made a project of researching just who was on the passenger list for Flight 77 -- the "plane" that supposedly hit the Pentagon. He posted his initial findings on the news wire for http://indymedia.org.

"... Approximately 16 to 21 of the 58 passangers work at classified positions in the defense sector!!!! Look at how many of them are aerospace engineers. One is a lifetime CIA operative who works for veridian as an aerospace engineer, Yamnicky is his last name. The first passenger listed, Caswell, led a team of 100 scientists for the navy. Several work for Boeing and Raytheon on the Global Hawk in El Segundo, California.

"I think many people faked their deaths. Perhaps a remote control center was riding with these folks on the C130 transport plane many witnesses saw at the same time as the missile attack on the pentagon. Here's is the list of people in aerospace/defense/bush associates that were on the plane that disappeared (into the shadow gov?). I'm sorry this is a rough draft, these are all excerpts from AP, Boston Herald, W Post, NYT, and other mainstream sources. The passenger list must be scrutinized to figure out what happenned to the alleged flight 77."

-- [repost at http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/10/299484.shtml ]

Peter also mentions right-wing pundit Barbara Olson, wife of George W. Bush's lawyer, Ted Olson. Mrs. Olson supposedly called her husband from her cell phone during the hijacking. Mr. Olson report of what she said provided the only evidence that "... American 77, which was said to have struck the Pentagon, had still been aloft after it had disappeared from FAA radar around 9:00 AM" and was the only account of the terrorists having used box-cutters.

Personally, I don't think Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at all. The hole in the Pentagon is too small for a Boeing 757 to have hit it, there was no sign of the wreckage of a Boeing 747 after impact, the only footage we have of what happened amounts to 6 ambiguous frames (this from the one of the most heavily monitored areas on the planet), the hairpin turn the plane was supposed to have taken would have been impossible considering the G-force it would have produced, not to mention the fact that the pilot was an amateur, and why didn't the plane just crash through the roof, anyway, instead of hitting a mostly deserted area of the Pentagon that had recently undergone renovations?

Please look into these anomalies -- and discuss them amongst your friends. We're still at war with Afghanistan because of what happened on 9-11, and I'm convinced that what we have been told is not the truth. Our troops and our country deserve nothing less.
Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
by reality check
it's highly unlikely that 58 people faked their own deaths in a conspiracy to ram a plane or missile into a portion of the Pentagon. why? While the official story of what happened on 9-11-01 is hard to believe and the Bush Administration probably did at least know about it in advance, putting forward ridiculous claims that the plane miraculously disappeared and all the passengers went underground does not help the cause of supposedly revealing the "9-11 truth"

The writer doesn't even have this basic fact straight, saying "we are at war with Afghanistan" when in fact Afghanistan is a US ally in the phony war on terror.
by Fredric L. Rice (frice [at] skeptictank.org)
Yes, George W. Bush was a mass murdering Christian terrorist. Yes, Bush and his regime were and are traitors against the country. Yes, Bush and his fellow war criminals need to be rounded up, be tried and executed for their crimes against humanity.

Playing pretend that the Bush regime's crimes also include 911 conspiracy lunacy is stupid and pointless. It detracts from the *real* atrocities and treason that the Bush terrorists committed against the world.

911 "truthers" deliberately seek to throw mud on to the actual war crimes that the Bush regime committed in an effort to salvage their Republican leader's reputations.
>>911 "truthers" deliberately seek to throw mud on to the actual war crimes that the Bush regime committed in an effort to salvage their Republican leader's reputations.

Those who are claiming that real planes or real passengers were not involved in the attacks are called infiltrators, dupes, or people without critical thinking skills. The hoaxes are planted in them like seeds and they spread them like weeds, 24/7.

It doesn't take rocket science to understand why those claiming that 9/11 was either and inside job or was let happen would be infiltrated and disrupted.

SOME of the sincere and critically-thinking 9/11 researchers (who reject the "no plane" "fake plane" "fake passenger" "fake hijacker" claims) include:

Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice
http://stj911.org/
Scholars and supporters examining the 9/11 attack with a focus on the scientific method

Journal of 9/11 Studies
http://www.JournalOf911Studies.com
Peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic-only journal covering research related to 9/11/2001

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
http://www.AE911Truth.org
Association of architects, engineers and affiliates investigating the “collapses” of the WTC high-rises on 9/11/01

The Complete 9/11 Timeline
http://www.CooperativeResearch.org
A comprehensive timeline and information resource to understand the events of 9/11

9-11 Research
http://911Research.wtc7.net
An attempt to uncover the truth about September 11th, 2001

9-11 Review
http://www.911Review.com
A resource for understanding the 9/11/01 attack

Truth Action
http://www.TruthAction.org
On the Eleventh Day of Every Month, meet up and spread the word with activists in the streets of your community

Truthmove
http://www.TruthMove.org
Personal and social change through the process of truth

9/11 Reports
http://911reports.wordpress.com/
In the Network Age, the Empire is Transparent

Arabesque: 9/11 Truth
http://www.Arabesque911.blogspot.com
A Blog Devoted to Discussing 9/11 News, Research, and Disinformation

CIT Watch
http://citwatch.blogspot.com
Keeping an Eye on Citizen Investigation Team

Visibility 9-11
http://www.Visibility911.com
Website for weekly radio program of Michael Wolsey

WTC7.net
http://www.WTC7.net
The Hidden Story of WTC Building 7

They are all recommended reading if you are buying the official story of the attacks.

And if you think all who work to expose the truths of the attacks are "truthers", "conspiracy theorists" and nuts, you are exactly where Bush Co worked hard to get you to.
Indeed.

Therefore, the "truthers" are nuts, so ignore everything they say. Right?

----------
Information Warfare:
Ideas as Weapons in the Era of Deception

Trojan Horses
http://911review.com/disinfo/index.html

The 9/11/01 attack was a complex psychological operation carefully designed to conceal the truth, in spite of numerous obvious red flags in the fraudulent official story. As such it relies on the dissemination of memes that overpower rational consideration of the evidence. One of the most important memes is the idea that all people who question the basic tenets of the official story are loony conspiracy theorists, whose ideas are not worthy of consideration. Part of the construction of this meme was to make the attack so audacious that even a straightforward accounting of the basic facts sounds too outrageous to possibly be true.

The ideas that the Twin Towers were destroyed by explosive demolition and that top-level administration officials were involved in the planning and execution of the attack are so painful that most people reflexively reject them, even if that means ignoring mountains of evidence. Nevertheless the perpetrators run the risk that these ideas will gain currency and begin to be examined with some objectivity if the loony conspiricism meme fails to maintain its hold.

Nonsense as a Weapon

An effective tool for reinforcing the loony conspiricism meme is the introduction of theories that that have no basis in evidence, such as the idea that no planes hit the towers. The association of these ideas with the careful research of investigators in the 9/11 Truth Movement stands to set back the cause of awakening the larger public to the facts of the attack.

A series of websites have promoting more or less obvious hoaxes since the attack. Examples are 911Review.org (See 9/11 Review REVIEWED), and Physics911.net. Both adopted as their centerpiece the idea that no jetliner crashed at the Pentagon -- an idea that may be single most elaborate and well-orchestrated hoax used to undermine the credibility of the 9-11 Truth Movement.

More traditional media such as videos and books have also been used to discourage rational inquiry into the crimes of 9/11/01 by associating alternatives to the official narrative with uncritical thinking and junk science.

Several of these websites, videos, and books have been promoted in segments of the 9/11 Truth Movement that may seem surprising, given how effectively such material is used by the cover-up as ammunition against the spectrum of 9/11 Truth efforts. (A prime example of this is the March 2005 Popular Mechanics attack piece.) There are many possible reasons for this:

* Because people inclined to accept that the attack was an inside job tend to be more open-minded in general, they are more likely to entertain a range of ideas, and are somewhat handicapped in appreciating the potency of ill-founded or poorly presented theories in discrediting good research.

* Many working on social justice causes like 9/11 are reluctant to admit that there are saboteurs in their midst. The idea that the struggle to expose the crime is just a contest between the official story and alternatives is comforting in its simplicity. Recognizing that the struggle is a two-or-more-front war of ideas can be intimidating or even overwhelming.

* Hoaxes come in many levels of sophistication and subtlety. Whereas few people have ever taken the hologram plane theory seriously, and the pod-plane theory was long ago rejected by most aspiring 9/11 activists, the Pentagon no-jetliner theory continues to detract from substantive evidence implicating insiders in the attack.



We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$40.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network