Kikapu,
• Why was it that when the FDR data from #93 was run on a United Airlines FDR analysis computer, the software was in many instances, incompatible and data could not be read? A UA computer that couldn’t read the software it was designed specifically to read?
• The ‘recovered’ FDR also showed that the flight deck door had been closed before departure from the gate and was not opened during the flight. So, how did the hi-jackers manage to get onto the flt. deck or.......... was it the UA Captain and FO flying the plane .................. or was it stuck in a control mode whereby it was responding to the last set of instructions inputted from where ever, which then remained frozen until UA#93 was maybe shot down over the Great Lakes?
(Corrected – it was United not American Airlines)
The above contradicts each other, don't you think?
Basically .....Nope. I hope I have explained that one? If it is of interest then you can see the facts relating to the whole episode regarding the software incompatibility on ‘Pilots for 9-11 Truth’.
Why was the flight deck door monitored, I am afraid I don’t know the answer and really can’t even speculate to that but, that it was monitored is fact and was one of the FDR parameters. The early FDR were wire recorders and had a limited capacity but, the modern ones are solid state with a capacity orders of magnitude greater than the early ones. If my experience in the oil/gas industry is anything to go by ............ if it is in the system ‘they’ want it recorded!!
WTC#7 had a very great significance as you would have noticed if you checked who some of the tenants of the building were? The tenants and what they were involved with, were of great significance to some people.
You say that ‘
........the targets needed to be known targets’....did they? I think targets of consequence would be a better description, qualified by who they were of consequence to?
If WTC#7 was the intended target, it was no more difficult to hit than the twin towers .... in the hands of somebody that knew how to fly a 757! The smoke would not have obscured the target as most of it was way above the altitude required to hit WTC#7, if it was in fact destined to impact WTC#7 in the same time period as the twin towers were hit, i.e. before the collapse. At 615 ft WTC#7 was tall enough to stand out from other buildings. It was, after the twin towers, the tallest building in the complex and could be approached over the river.
You have not thought through the idea of Chicago buildings as targets. That is as bad an idea as flying half way to the West Coast to turn around and head back to hit the Capitol/White House. If Chicago was the target then effective planning would suggest hijacking a flight from Chicago at the same time as the others were hijacked from the New York region to attack New York targets. So, I do not think it feasible that Chicago was a target.
By waiting for almost 45 minutes to effect the hijack, which was after the impact with the twin towers, any attempt at any target would have been fruitless as NORAD response time (
supposedly) would put them in a no win situation as a hostile in very heavily protected air space. Another thing to consider is that navigating an aeroplane at some 30.000 ft. Is not a matter of looking out of the window, and using the view like a road map. The pilot hijacker had little aviation experience and had zero hours on type. His chances of locating the target, without significant instrument experience whatever the target may have been, was in practical terms zero.
As for the planes being controlled electronically, “fly by wire”, is a very far-fetched imagination on your part.
Guilty! All modern aircraft are fly-by-wire, commercial and military. Everything is converted from the pilots physical instructions by several computers, to servos which move the control surfaces and adjust engine and other settings. It would be the norm for any computer to have a facility built into the software to enable a ‘maintenance’ function where by it would be possible to force outputs and defeat inputs. This is essential when commissioning a chemical plant and I see no difference when you check out and commission an aircraft. So, it is not so far fetched on a technical level. By software ‘adaptation’ it would be a simple task to ‘lock-out’ any direct control by the crew and override their inputs with remotely derived signals from another location, such as another aircraft.
If you were to question what sort of person would deliberately take over control of an aircraft and use it as a missile by remote control, then we need to look at the people who carried out these attacks? It seems that Muslim extremists appear have the capability of committing acts that are against their own religious teachings and contrary to the standards of civilised humanity. But what are we saying here? That only Muslims are capable of such acts and that ‘we’ civilised ‘non-Muslim’ people are full of compassion for our fellow man irrespective of his/her religious beliefs? There are as many fruit balls in our civilised world as there are in the in the least developed and religiously dominated world that these terrorists come from. So, I do not think the fact that a few thousand people were going to die because of their warped actions, is something that only applies to the ‘other side’. Given the right incentives and the ability to take actions without any transparency and almost guaranteed immunity........... I would not put it past certain politicians to act in a way that was 100% in their own interests and totally devoid of compassion or consideration for others.
National security is used in many cases as a ploy, to prevent others finding out dirty little secrets of those in power. WikiLeaks has shown that to be a fact. The 9-11 information that is being withheld has little to do with National Security. What they want to hide are certain facts that would put a whole new scenario before the people and that is something the political crowd could not allow. If there were issues that were likely to endanger National Security, there is nothing to stop these being presented in a closed court session.
What you have to take into account is, that there are those in power who also have imagination and also the means to turn it into a reality. I said a few posts back that one of the easiest ways of achieving an end without getting your hands dirty is to firstly delegate and then use the enemy to do your dirty work for you. I think maybe to explain this, he following story is a good example of that:
A criminal, locked up in prison for robbery where the stolen money had never been recovered, receives a letter from his wife, in which she complains about the state of the garden and says she was going to get contractors in to tidy it up. The prisoner, knowing all his mail was censored replied that, ABSOLUTELY and UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES must she dig up the garden! He gets another letter a few days later to tell him that the Police had turned up one day with excavators and dozens of policemen.... and dug up the garden!Feed the enemy with the right information and it surprising what can be achieved? My feeling is that this could well be the case with Al Queda and the Muslim involvement on 9-11. We all saw with our own eyes what happened, accepted what we were told. (
I did for at least eight years) It would be easy to feed information to an enemy; turn a blind eye to certain intelligence, even to see off anybody that got too close to what was going on and just let events run their course. Only a very few really wanted to know the details as the whole thing was not just the hi-jacking bit but, it also opened up a whole load of opportunities for the gratification of personal gains, whilst blaming it all on 19 Muslims and their boss!
I thought that when the Presidents aid whispered in GWB’s ear that a second plane had crashed into the other tower, he had that gob-smacked look on his face that said “
Oh, shit what the hell am I going to do now?” I don’t think he knew the details but he sure as hell knew something was going on and when he realised what was happening he had no idea what to do next, so he froze!
Another thing you might like to consider. We have heard all the stories and criticism about NORAD and its obvious failings on 9-11. This was put down to the fact that an exercise was being carried out at the time and there was some confusion. Apparently, the exercise was under the direct control of Dick Cheyney (
that had never happened before) and believe it or not, it had the scenario of SIMULATED airliners being hijacked and crashed into the WTC!!!!! Coincidence ... or what? During an address by Condi Rice after 9-11 she is seen on TV live, saying that the Administration had never considered the incidents of 9-11 as a likely scenario. Strange? Do these people ever talk to one another?
Now I will switch my imagination into overdrive! Given the above it could be that the simulated aircraft were not simulated at all and, unknown to the person flying the simulated aircraft, were in fact REAL aeroplanes? Yes, I have a great imagination but, when you look into the events this is feasible. Who ever the pilots of the simulated aircraft were, they didn’t have a clue that they were actually flying real hijacked aircraft and, after the event, were told in no uncertain terms what would happen to them and their families if they shot their mouth’s off. Fear is also a weapon of power.
-----------------------
All this gives my over active mind something to think about in addition to World financial terrorism and, as you say ‘
I'm sure we will talk more on this another time’.