https://911researcharchives.org/911/videos/Black 9-11- Money, Motive, Technology, and Plausible Deniaby.mp4 Black 9-11- Money, Motive, Technology, and Plausible Deniaby | Our Government Is Corrupt! - We Must Change This! We need to hold our government office holders accountable. If you have seen the first Die Hard film, then you know the plot. Fake a terrorist event to perform a heist. Get everyone looking for one type of event and not the other. It does not only happen in the movies... As it were; anyone in any position of failure of defense on 9/11 NEVER got fired or reprimanded, In fact most were promoted. How does that work for normal people, you fail in a very important way in your job and get promoted... |
https://911researcharchives.org/911/videos/Be the Next Hero- The Investigation of United Flight 93.mp4 Be the Next Hero - The Investigation of United Flight 93 | Investigation of United Flight 93 After planes crashed in New York and Washington, D.C. on September 11, 2001, employees at the Pittsburgh FBI weren't sure where to respond. Then news came of a fourth plane--United Flight 93--heading their way. Video Transcript I had an assignment to report to the Pittsburgh office that morning. I happened to be listening to the radio. They had a report of a plane hitting the World Trade Center. I thought, "Wow, I wonder. A mishap of a plane going to 1 of the airports?" Didn't strike me as terror at that time, I just didn't know what was going on. 'Course everybody remembers it, that first tower seen with the smoke. We're kind of in and out, and then of course the second plane hits Just about everybody in the office, I think, had crowded into the break room at that time, and everyone was obviously concerned as to what was going on. Then there was a report about the Pentagon |
Initially, we were thinking because I was on the Evidence Response Team that we would probably be going to New York to help there. Then when the plane hit the Pentagon, we weren't sure which location we'd end up at We then got a call about another plane potentially coming our way that was in distress. They believed it was coming from Cleveland and it may need to crash land at our airport here in Johnstown. now it was that this may be deliberate, that it may be acts of terrorism, it would potentially be a crime scene in our jurisdiction. Before we got to the airport though, we were told no, to divert from there, that a plane had crashed in Shanksville. And I just remember thinking, "That's our territory. That's our squad." I got back to my car, and started out of the city as quickly as I could. I think we finally arrived out at the scene between two and three o'clock that afternoon. The plane crashed shortly after 10 AM. We had an RA out near that site, and they responded initially. We would have been the first because it's 20 minutes as we drove that day. I expected to see fuselage, remnants of a plane, which I didn't see anything but pretty much smoke and some fires. I saw absolutely no signs that an airplane was present, no matter what direction I looked. You didn't know that a plane had crashed there. You had a crater and the initial crater was probably 15 feet deep but we didn't have big plane parts laying everywhere. It looked like the plane had hit but there's not a lot of evidence of the airplane. And I've described it a lot of times as, basically, a knife through hot butter. What I saw when I got out there was kind of, I'd describe it as a crater. There was a mound of dirt above it and when you stood above the mound, you could actually see the wings, the outline of the wings and the main fuselage, the center of the plane, how it went down into the ground. There was a misty smoke in the air from the jet fuel that had set the woods on fire. It was very barren, It had been a strip mine. So it was a a very barren area with some trees behind and that's what burnt. As far as the odor, it wasn't as bad as you might think. There were, obviously, certain spots that you would hit and you had the smell of death. My immediate reaction was, "There are no survivors here. This is not a rescue effort. This is a crime scene, a recovery effort." But it looked... like an organized form of chaos, if that makes any sense. Because you had o many people coming in, but all anybody wanted to do was to help. Once the perimeter was established and the next day as command posts were established, the evidence response team from Pittsburgh, Cleveland, I think Chicago, teams were called in. We had teams come in, and I thought to myself, "How are you going to have this many ERT teams from so many offices in the country come into this area and work as one unit?" It's not a natural sort of thing because you work with the same people day in and day out, and you know what to expect from them, but now you've got Knoxville, Cincinnati, Detroit, Louisville, Cleveland, working with Pittsburgh people, and West Virginia people. Anyone east of Pittsburgh went to either the Pentagon or the World Trade Center. All the teams that we brought in were west of Pittsburgh and within driving distance because all the flights had been grounded by that point. Construction Equipment. I think we had about a hundred ERT personnel come in, and that doesn't include all the support personnel that they brought in to support the mission. we had our safety officers there to check the air quality for us. Initially, they determined that we should be wearing regular tie back boots, and if we were working in the crater then we needed respiratory protection. You really can't go much beyond a 12-hour shift. People are on their hands and knees, crawling through this site, looking for debris, personal effects, and human remains. It's very physically and emotionally taxing. There were some real significant finds that they were getting very early on. I was shocked at the number of items that they were able to recover We found great evidence at Flight 93. We found the passports of the highjacks. We found the notes they had written for themselves. We found a knife that we believe was used by one of the highjacks. The other crash sites had a lot more things to deal with. They have buildings collapsing on the sites. They had a lot of recovery efforts. They had a lot of people who survived in the collapse of those buildings that they had to rescue. We didn't have a building collapse. The only people injured at this site were the forty people who were killed on that plane. Once we did start processing, there was a big push to find the black boxes so that we could out maybe what had happened on board the plane. We were pretty sure that the flight data recorder and cock pit voice recorder were going to be in the crater. They were concerned that there was a possibility that they could have landed in the pond, so we brought in divers from the Navy, because at the time only the Navy had the equipment to hear the cockpit voice recorders and flight data recorders ping when they were underwater. We actually found the first recorder in the crater five minutes before they arrived on the scene. I can't remember if it was that night or the next night, we ended up finding the other recorder in the crater as well. I was there when we discovered the black box. There was a lot of pressure from all of the sites, not just New York and the Pentagon, to locate the data recorder and the black box. It was a big deal when we did find it and I believe it was slightly over 25 feet into the crater. In the case of the flight data and voice recorders, they were taken out to Seattle because they were damaged to the point where they had to go back to the manufacturer. Agents were hand carrying those, and flying them out across country. I'm the chain-of-custody for the cockpit voice recorder. So we had had a gentleman from ERF who was an audio specialist and myself, we accompanied the evidence out to the state of Washington - Honeywell. Honeywell worked through the first day, and then midday Sunday they started up again, and they worked into the evening and they got it. There's a certain high pitch frequency which is just, you might call it white noise, but on the airplane it's this high pitch tone. During a certain struggle with, which I'll presume to be the pilot because you do hear some screaming and some 'No.' Then a winded individual gives a command. Maybe five minutes later, that same sort of speech is given. That is the only English that I hear that I presume to be coming from the person who's now in control of the airplane. There's breaking glass. I don't know if I can say there's a fight going on but clearly there's some - aggressive action. Over the copier machine - color printer - is coming out the flight data recorder output. And the pilot explained what the various printouts were. There were a number of pages that came off, and essentially it shows from on the ground, takeoff, to the crash. The pilot attempted to knock people off balance by to knock people off balance with the movement of the control stick but because you're in the center line, it's not going to do nearly as much. The FBI pilot noted that if an experienced pilot were in control of that plane, he would have dipped the plane up and down to knock people off their feet that way. Which, of course, is not what occurred. And even though it may have slowed people down the first time, in the second iteration where that person controlling the plane does this, physics ended up taking over, and towards, right before the end of the that flight, the plane actually inverts. I want to say that the final speed was near or just nexus of 600 miles an hour. if you look at the response at Shanksville, you look at the investigation that was done, you look at the recordings and the phone calls that were made, you can piece together what the passengers on that plane did. At no part of our investigation showed that anything happened other than what has been told to the public over the last 15 years - The passengers on Flight 93, in a heroic action, charged the cockpit of that airplane, and cause dthose hijackers to abort their mission, and take that plane into the ground. I think they pretty much are heroes naturally but true Americans. They did something that no one hopes to be called to do and pretty much you know your fate and to be able to do that, the belief is that plane was going to D.C,. to Washington DC. Where it went down, unfortunately the only victims were them and they saved countless numbers of lives, destruction, devastation, in a day that already had so many tragedies The site, I think it's just a great tribute to the people on the plane that they've kept it so simple. I try to get back. I try to get my family back up there to show them the history of what occurred, and to me that is solemn ground. To me it's a national cemetery. They were the first people to fight back against the forces of evil that took those planes down. You hope you're never called to do that but what they did was... They are, true heroes. True American heroes. I think the legacy of what happened at Shanksville is that we still live with the effects of 9/11 today. Nobody that was alive at that time is unaffected by it, whether you were in the bureau or not. We live in a different world now. It changed the FBI, it changed the world as to the way we look at things and we do things. It's really hard to believe that there are so many people that have come into the FBI since September 11th and really didn't live through our experiences in the FBI in that role. For so many of us that work those sites, that's what we really remember most about our career. We did a very good job and I think we hold our head high. But know that you can't let your guard down. You've got to be ready for the next time. We all just need to be vigilant and, you know, be the next hero, hopefully, if you see something. |
https://911researcharchives.org/911/videos/9-11 Experiments - The Force Behind the Motion.mp4 9-11 Experiments - The Force Behind the Motion | There are many experiments and videos on the internet that show that the official story cannot be true about the collapse of these buildings, yet not one experiment or video that shows how the official story is correct. That should say volumes right there. it' like stating that the dinosaurs did not exist even though the bones of these massive creatures are found. the opposition would just say, no they are too big to have existed in the face of absolute proof. However there are those ancient ones who said the world was flat and the earth was the center of the universe; and when anyone doubted what they said they were shunned, insulted, ridiculed, imprisoned or even killed. Does this sound familiar to the 9/11 debunker's. A mind with a belief system is the most difficult to change because it is closed to anything new if it does not fit nicely into their belief system. They will ignore any and all facts that do not support their belief. How can a nerd be smarter than our government agencies and the debunker's. Read More... |
Newton's laws of motion are three physical laws that, together, laid the foundation for classical mechanics. They describe the relationship between a body and the forces acting upon it, and its motion in response to those forces. More precisely, the first law defines the force qualitatively, the second law offers a quantitative measure of the force, and the third asserts that a single isolated force doesn't exist. These three laws have been expressed in several different ways, over nearly three centuries,[1] and can be summarized as follows: First law: In an inertial reference frame, an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force.[2][3] Second law: In an inertial reference frame, the vector sum of the forces F on an object is equal to the mass m of that object multiplied by the acceleration a of the object: F = ma. (It is assumed here that the mass m is constant - see below.) Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body. |
Laws Newton's first law Main article: Inertia Explanation of Newton's first law and reference frames (MIT Course 8.01)[11][12] The first law states that if the net force (the vector sum of all forces acting on an object) is zero, then the velocity of the object is constant. Velocity is a vector quantity which expresses both the object's speed and the direction of its motion; therefore, the statement that the object's velocity is constant is a statement that both its speed and the direction of its motion are constant. The first law can be stated mathematically when the mass is a non-zero constant, as, | |
Consequently, An object that is at rest will stay at rest unless a force acts upon it. An object that is in motion will not change its velocity unless a force acts upon it. This is known as uniform motion. An object continues to do whatever it happens to be doing unless a force is exerted upon it. If it is at rest, it continues in a state of rest (demonstrated when a tablecloth is skillfully whipped from under dishes on a tabletop and the dishes remain in their initial state of rest). If an object is moving, it continues to move without turning or changing its speed. This is evident in space probes that continuously move in outer space. Changes in motion must be imposed against the tendency of an object to retain its state of motion. In the absence of net forces, a moving object tends to move along a straight line path indefinitely. Newton placed the first law of motion to establish frames of reference for which the other laws are applicable. The first law of motion postulates the existence of at least one frame of reference called a Newtonian or inertial reference frame, relative to which the motion of a particle not subject to forces is a straight line at a constant speed.[8][13] Newton's first law is often referred to as the law of inertia. Thus, a condition necessary for the uniform motion of a particle relative to an inertial reference frame is that the total net force acting on it is zero. In this sense, the first law can be restated as: In every material universe, the motion of a particle in a preferential reference frame Φ is determined by the action of forces whose total vanished for all times when and only when the velocity of the particle is constant in Φ. That is, a particle initially at rest or in uniform motion in the preferential frame Φ continues in that state unless compelled by forces to change it.[14] Newton's first and second laws are valid only in an inertial reference frame. Any reference frame that is in uniform motion with respect to an inertial frame is also an inertial frame, i.e. Galilean invariance or the principle of Newtonian relativity.[15] |
Newton's second law Explanation of Newton's second law, using gravity as an example (MIT OCW)[16] The second law states that the rate of change of momentum of a body is directly proportional to the force applied, and this change in momentum takes place in the direction of the applied force. The second law can also be stated in terms of an object's acceleration. Since Newton's second law is valid only for constant-mass systems,[17][18][19] m can be taken outside the differentiation operator by the constant factor rule in differentiation. Thus, |
where F is the net force applied, m is the mass of the body, and a is the body's acceleration. Thus, the net force applied to a body produces a proportional acceleration. In other words, if a body is accelerating, then there is a force on it. An application of this notation is the derivation of G Subscript C. Consistent with the first law, the time derivative of the momentum is non-zero when the momentum changes direction, even if there is no change in its magnitude; such is the case with uniform circular motion. The relationship also implies the conservation of momentum: when the net force on the body is zero, the momentum of the body is constant. Any net force is equal to the rate of change of the momentum. Any mass that is gained or lost by the system will cause a change in momentum that is not the result of an external force. A different equation is necessary for variable-mass systems (see below). Newton's second law requires modification if the effects of special relativity are to be taken into account, because at high speeds the approximation that momentum is the product of rest mass and velocity is not accurate. Impulse An impulse J occurs when a force F acts over an interval of time Δt, and it is given by[20][21] Since force is the time derivative of momentum, it follows that This relation between impulse and momentum is closer to Newton's wording of the second law.[22] Impulse is a concept frequently used in the analysis of collisions and impacts.[23] Variable-mass systems Main article: Variable-mass system Variable-mass systems, like a rocket burning fuel and ejecting spent gases, are not closed and cannot be directly treated by making mass a function of time in the second law;[18] that is, the following formula is wrong:[19] The falsehood of this formula can be seen by noting that it does not respect Galilean invariance: a variable-mass object with F = 0 in one frame will be seen to have F ≠ 0 in another frame.[17] The correct equation of motion for a body whose mass m varies with time by either ejecting or accreting mass is obtained by applying the second law to the entire, constant-mass system consisting of the body and its ejected/accreted mass; the result is[17] where u is the velocity of the escaping or incoming mass relative to the body. From this equation one can derive the equation of motion for a varying mass system, for example, the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation. Under some conventions, the quantity u dm/dt on the left-hand side, which represents the advection of momentum, is defined as a force (the force exerted on the body by the changing mass, such as rocket exhaust) and is included in the quantity F. Then, by substituting the definition of acceleration, the equation becomes F = ma. |
Newton's third law | |
An illustration of Newton's third law in which two skaters push against each other. The first skater on the left exerts a normal force N12 on the second skater directed towards the right, and the second skater exerts a normal force N21 on the first skater directed towards the left. The magnitudes of both forces are equal, but they have opposite directions, as dictated by Newton's third law. A description of Newton's third law and contact forces[24] The third law states that all forces between two objects exist in equal magnitude and opposite direction: if one object A exerts a force FA on a second object B, then B simultaneously exerts a force FB on A, and the two forces are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction: FA = −FB.[25] The third law means that all forces are interactions between different bodies,[26][27] or different regions within one body, and thus that there is no such thing as a force that is not accompanied by an equal and opposite force. In some situations, the magnitude and direction of the forces are determined entirely by one of the two bodies, say Body A; the force exerted by Body A on Body B is called the "action", and the force exerted by Body B on Body A is called the "reaction". |
This law is sometimes referred to as the action-reaction law, with FA called the "action" and FB the "reaction". In other situations the magnitude and directions of the forces are determined jointly by both bodies and it isn't necessary to identify one force as the "action" and the other as the "reaction". The action and the reaction are simultaneous, and it does not matter which is called the action and which is called reaction; both forces are part of a single interaction, and neither force exists without the other.[25] |
The two forces in Newton's third law are of the same type (e.g., if the road exerts a forward frictional force on an accelerating car's tires, then it is also a frictional force that Newton's third law predicts for the tires pushing backward on the road). From a conceptual standpoint, Newton's third law is seen when a person walks: they push against the floor, and the floor pushes against the person. Similarly, the tires of a car push against the road while the road pushes back on the tires—the tires and road simultaneously push against each other. In swimming, a person interacts with the water, pushing the water backward, while the water simultaneously pushes the person forward—both the person and the water push against each other. The reaction forces account for the motion in these examples. These forces depend on friction; a person or car on ice, for example, may be unable to exert the action force to produce the needed reaction force.[28] |
https://911researcharchives.org/911/videos/TV nerd beats NASA engineer with 9-11 Truth physics.mp4 TV Nerd Beats NASA Engineer With 9/11 Truth Physics | Sometimes The Truth About 9/11 Shows Up In The Oddest Places. On a recent episode of the TBS reality show King of the Nerds, a bubbly, pink-haired video game blogger named Danielle was the unlikely winner of one phase of a science-related competition that pitted her against a NASA engineer and three other contenders. The most intriguing aspect of her upset win was that Danielle used "9/11 conspiracy" websites to outsmart her rivals. I came across this video that dropped a bowling ball through a tower of supported separated sheets of glass and the contestants had to guess how many sheet of glass the bowling ball would go through before stopping and that got me thinking; what a visual that would be to show how the towers collapsed or did not collapse. Expanding on this idea; enlarge the panes and restructure the rig, set it on fire... This is the video that should be circulating the internet. Let the debunker's explain this away! Physics is REAL! The debunker's M.O is to most likely ignore it... What I am gleaning to; is to stack sheets of glass (tempered or not) as the floors similar to the way that the trade center towers were built (of course weighing them etc...), then dropping a weight equivalent to multiple floors above the point of collapse onto the glass to show that how many floors (weight) that one would have to place above the point of collapse for it to break thru all the glass floors below. I am sure you get my direction with this test. |
I have sent this suggestion to Architects & Engineers For 9/11 Truth. This visual results can be proven time and time again. Release the results along with the testing specifications for others to repeat the test (peer review). When an organization can no longer be trusted to tell the truth, we HAVE to make a new one that can. |
On the website 911crashtest.org, Steve De'ak had an idea that I think is great. What I propose is that a reparable organization perform these test with the data shared for peer review. I offered this idea to Architects & Engineers for 9/11 For Truth to get their reaction. This I think would be a great way to show what is or isn't possible. All this speculation about this incident could be over and done with. The tests should be performed a number of times with varying speeds and various plane parts to see at what speed something like what happened with the plane and the WTC Tower is possible or not. Now Popular Mechanics who is debunking 9/11 and is using theory instead test; owns the popular T.V. Show Myth Busters and to this day has decided NOT to do any debunking that can be proven or disproven like this test. You have to ask yourself WHY? They have all the technology, the facilities and the show that does nothing but TEST the facts about myths. It would seem that this would be the perfect way to end speculation with facts... BUT THEY DO NOT!, strange. Nothing to gain everything to lose maybe... The truth needs to be exposed; Good or Bad! |
Second Controller Speaks About Korean Airliner Incident on 9/11 By Lori Townsend, Alaska Public Media - September 12, 2011 Another Air Traffic controller who says he worked with Korean flight 085 that was diverted to Whitehorse on Sept. 11, 2001 has come forward with additional details of the day's events. APRN reported Friday that retired Air Traffic Controller Rick Wilder says the pilot was ordered to squawk that he had hijackers on board. Dave Connett worked as an Air Traffic Controller in Anchorage for 15 years and was also in the tower and worked the flight that was suspected of being hijacked that day. Connett contends he was the one that first ordered the pilot to squawk the 7500 hijack code. Connett says it was because of a message the pilot had sent to his own company Korean Airlines. "He as I understood it, Sent a company message, saying he was hijacked and that got to us so we were expecting a hijacked aircraft when we finally did greet or identify him and talk to him." Connett said. Connett says he asked the pilot to verify squawking 7500 and he says the pilot said disregard. Then Connett's area manager told him to squawk the hijack code. Connett says he gave the order and the pilot did not argue, he complied. "So at that point, we figured well he must be getting hijacked. I was given instructions that he could not go to Anchorage. So I tried to turn him away from Anchorage and he was very resistant. It took several transmissions to convince him that he could not and he was not going to go to Anchorage." Connett said. Connett says he's also a pilot and had never before given such a command. He says the order to tell the plane to squawk 7500 – meaning it had been hijacked – surprised him. But he looked later and it was in the FAA manual. He says when those regulations were written, it was presumed that a hijacker would be someone bursting into a cockpit with a weapon. Connett says. "And one of those would be, a scenario that if a hijacker is standing in the cockpit and he's telling a pilot what to do, and the controller tells him to do something, like squawk 7500, the hijacker normally wouldn't know what that means. So if the pilot did it it would confirm that he is being hijacked. But if he wasn't being hijacked it is incumbent upon the pilot to say, to know the code and to say, no I'm not being hijacked." The pilot's lack of protest about the code added to the suspicion that the Korean jet had been hijacked. This confusion is what then NORAD commander, now Air Force General Norton Schwartz outlined when he spoke to reporters in the days after the event. Schwartz said that if controllers asked pilots to confirm if they were squawking that code, the correct response would be negative, negative, I am not that code. General Scwartz continued. "Apparently what occurred was that the crew either misconstrued what was said or perhaps what was said wasn't exactly, you know, according to the text book and they understood that they should squawk that code." Dave Connett says he wanted to clarify some of the day's events and affirm that the jet had been sent to Whitehorse because of concerns it was in fact a hijacked plane and it was determined that sending it to Whitehorse endangered less lives than Anchorage. |
https://911researcharchives.org/911/videos/Rick Wilder Anchorage Air Traffic Controller Was Ordered to1.mp4 Rick Wilder Anchorage Air Traffic Controller Was Ordered to tell Korean Air 085 to squawk 7500 which is the frequency to signal a Hijack. | shoestring911 - Sunday, 18 April 2010 Was Korean Airlines Flight 85 a Simulated Hijack in a 9/11 Training Exercise? Several hours after the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington occurred, a passenger aircraft heading to the U.S. from Seoul, South Korea, was mistakenly considered hijacked. In a little-reported series of events, the pilots of Korean Airlines Flight 85 gave numerous indications that their plane had been taken over by hijackers, even though it had not. KAL 85, a Boeing 747 that had been due to land in Anchorage, Alaska, for a refueling stop, was consequently diverted to an airport in Canada. The military launched fighter jets to tail it and, with authorization from the Canadian prime minister, threatened to shoot the plane down if it refused to change course. Only after KAL 85 landed were officials able to confirm that no hijacking had taken place. While a person might suggest this crisis was just the result of confusion due to the unprecedented events earlier that day, the number of indications the pilots gave that their plane was hijacked, and their repeated failure to confirm that this was not the case, raises another possibility: Could KAL 85 have been playing the part of a hijacked aircraft in a military training exercise? |
This explanation would make sense of the pilots' otherwise inexplicable actions. And there is additional evidence supporting this possibility: On September 11, NORAD--the military organization responsible for defending North American airspace--was in the second week of a major exercise. Five days earlier, that exercise included two scenarios with remarkable similarities to the apparent crisis involving KAL 85. In one scenario, members of a fictitious terrorist group hijacked a Korean Airlines 747 bound from Seoul to Anchorage; in the other, a 747 bound from Japan to Anchorage was hijacked, and changed course for Canada. We know that the U.S. and Canadian military were in fact conducting several exercises on the morning of September 11. Those exercises were supposedly canceled promptly in response to the attacks. But if KAL 85 was a simulated hijacking, it would mean at least one exercise continued well into the afternoon, hours after the attacks took place. This would raise serious questions: When exactly did the military exercises really end that day? If they were called off promptly, as has been claimed, how many people were aware of this? Did some believe the exercises were continuing in spite of the real-world attacks? And was there a sinister but as-yet-uninvestigated relationship between the real-world attacks and the military exercises they coincided with? |
A Korean Airlines Boeing 747 | KOREAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 85 Korean Airlines Flight 85 was a Boeing 747 with 215 people on board, flying from Seoul to New York. It was heading for a refueling stop in Anchorage when it began behaving suspiciously. Beginning shortly after 11:00 a.m. (this and all other times given are Eastern time), its pilots gave repeated but inconclusive indications that their plane had been hijacked, even though no hijacking had taken place. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was alerted to the suspect flight shortly before noon, and it in turn notified NORAD. [1] Concerns over whether KAL 85 had been hijacked led to the plane being diverted away from Anchorage. It was first redirected toward the remote airport at Yakutat, Alaska. But because of deteriorating weather around Yakutat and because the plane was running low on fuel, the decision was made to instead have KAL 85 land at Whitehorse Airport in Canada's Yukon Territory. [2] |
KAL 85 landed at Whitehorse Airport safely and without incident at 2:54 p.m. But only after the co-pilot was escorted off the plane and interrogated were officials able to determine that the flight had not been hijacked. [3] PILOTS INDICATED PLANE WAS HIJACKED The first indication of a possible hijacking was at 11:08 a.m., while KAL 85 was flying across the Pacific Ocean and hundreds of miles from mainland Alaska. The pilots sent a text message to Korean Airlines headquarters, which included the letters "HJK." These three letters were a known code for signaling a hijacking. The message did not immediately raise any concerns. However, ARINC--a company that airlines pay to transmit text messages to and from their planes--had begun scanning all the communications it transmitted that day to search for any additional hijacked aircraft, and one of its technicians came across the message, apparently shortly before noon. Concerned that it was a coded plea for help, ARINC officials notified the FAA of the message. KAL 85 showed its next indications of being hijacked after it entered the airspace of the FAA's Anchorage Center at around 1:00 p.m. An Anchorage Center air traffic controller, aware of the concerns about KAL 85, asked the pilots about the status of their aircraft. In his radio transmissions, the controller included the code word that indicated a query as to whether the plane had been hijacked, in case the pilots were unable to acknowledge this freely. (Pilots are trained how to respond to such coded messages.) However, the pilots of KAL 85 offered no reassurance that their flight had not been hijacked. Instead, at 1:24 p.m., they switched their plane's transponder (a device that sends information about an aircraft to controllers' radar screens) to "7500," which is the universal code meaning a plane has been hijacked. As USA Today put it, "Suddenly ... a routine flight became a potential new attacker." As KAL 85 continued toward Anchorage, controllers again sought clarification of its situation. But, as author Lynn Spencer described, "each time controllers query the aircraft, the pilots offer no reassurance that they are not, in fact, hijacked." Instead, KAL 85 transmitted the beacon code indicating it had been hijacked for 90 minutes, from 1:24 p.m. until 2:54 p.m., when it landed in Canada. [4] A report published by the government of Yukon in November 2001 in fact stated, "There were five separate and ongoing indicators of a hijacking situation" on KAL 85, although the report did not specify what each of those indicators was. [5] And yet KAL 85 was never hijacked. The FAA's Command Center in Herndon, Virginia, was in contact with Korean Airlines headquarters, which emphatically maintained it had received no indication that the flight was in trouble. [6] Might the "indicators of a hijacking situation" therefore have been because KAL 85 was playing a hijacked aircraft in a training exercise? POSSIBLE HIJACKING TAKEN SERIOUSLY The military and other government agencies took the indications of a possible hijacking very seriously. After the FAA was notified of the letters "HJK" appearing in a text message from KAL 85, it alerted NORAD. [7] NORAD then ordered Elmendorf Air Force Base, near Anchorage, to launch two armed fighter jets to intercept the suspicious plane. [8] These jets flew about a mile behind KAL 85, shadowing it so its crew and passengers would not realize there were fighters close by. Two Royal Canadian Air Force fighters were also launched in response to KAL 85. Fighters escorted the plane until it landed at Whitehorse Airport. They then remained circling overhead, in case the plane tried to depart suddenly. [9] Lieutenant General Norton Schwartz, the commander of the Alaskan NORAD Region, has recalled his concerns about KAL 85, saying: "[W]e just had three attacks on the East Coast and perhaps a fourth. It was completely plausible to me that so sophisticated an operation on the East Coast could be replicated on the West Coast. So this was a plausible threat." [10] KAL 85 was even threatened with being shot down. Schwartz told controllers at the FAA's Anchorage Center that the plane would be shot down if it refused to divert and remained on course for Anchorage. [11] A NORAD commander contacted Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and asked for authorization to shoot down the plane. As Chrétien later recalled, he "authorized it in principle," telling the commander: "Yes, if you think they are terrorists. You call me again, but be ready to shoot them down." [12] Other agencies also took the possible hijacking seriously. When KAL 85's pilots switched their plane's transponder to the "7500" hijack code, it led to what USA Today described as "a frenzy of activity." The governor of Alaska ordered the evacuation of federal buildings and large hotels in Anchorage, along with the Trans-Alaska Pipeline terminal. [13] After learning that KAL 85 was heading for Whitehorse Airport, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) removed children from local schools and evacuated buildings considered likely terrorist targets, such as Whitehorse City Hall. Part of the Alaska Highway was closed, a security perimeter was established around Whitehorse Airport, and non-essential staff members were evacuated from the airport terminal building. [14] KAL 85 continued being treated as a potential threat even after it landed at Whitehorse. After touching down, the plane was directed to a secluded area on the tarmac. It was surrounded by heavily armed RCMP emergency response officers. After an officer asked to speak with a member of the flight crew, the co-pilot emerged and was escorted off the plane at gunpoint. According to a local resident who saw the incident, the co-pilot had his hands up and "had everyone drawing down on him, and he had to take some clothes off, wave his shirt in the air and all that." [15] The passengers were not allowed off the plane until more than two hours after it landed. The following morning, the RCMP had a bomb-sniffing dog search the aircraft. The plane's cargo was also searched for any threats, but none were found. It wasn't until a couple of hours later, still early in the morning of September 12, that the RCMP finally confirmed that KAL 85 had never been hijacked. [16] CONFUSED EXPLANATIONS WHY PILOTS SIGNIFIED A HIJACKING One thing that is suspicious is the way Korean Airlines and the government agencies involved with these incidents were subsequently reluctant to explain why KAL 85 had given indications of being hijacked, or they gave conflicting explanations. Could this have been because these organizations needed to cover up the fact that--despite the attacks earlier on in New York and Washington--a hijacking simulation was still being carried out on the afternoon of 9/11, in which KAL 85 played the hijacked aircraft? Apparently the first explanation for the series of events involving KAL 85 was offered several hours after the plane landed at Whitehorse Airport. An airport spokeswoman announced simply, "There was a communications problem aboard the plane so [the pilots] were unable to communicate and respond properly to the [air traffic control] tower anywhere they went." [17] The Anchorage Daily News later reported: "At the time of this September 11 incident, little was publicly disclosed about the wayward signals from the Korean pilot. The airline and flight crew have kept mum about what happened that day." But, to explain why the pilots included the letters "HJK," signaling a hijacking, in a text message, Korean Airlines administrator Michael Lim suggested they had intended this as a question rather than a warning, but this was unclear to those who read the message, because pilots are unable to type question marks into their texts. [18] However, the airline's operations chief, David Greenberg, gave a different explanation. He said the pilots' text message was "innocent, part of a routine discussion on where to divert the flight after airspace in the United States had been closed." Greenberg said the pilots used the three-letter hijack code "to refer to the hijackings that day." [19] Author Lynn Spencer pointed out that this was "an odd idea for the pilots to have, and contrary to their training. But for whatever reason ... they made a very dangerous bad call." [20] The reason why the pilots switched their transponder to the code signaling a hijacking is, as the Anchorage Daily News put it, "not entirely clear." [21] Eleven months after 9/11, USA Today reported: "To this day, no one is certain why the pilots issued the alert. Airline sources say that exchanges between pilots and controllers were tense that morning. Some pilots objected to orders to reroute their planes. The Korean pilots may have misinterpreted the controller's comments as an order to reset the transponder." [22] The military reportedly blamed the false alert on "muddled communications between air traffic controllers and the flight crew aboard the plane." But Korean Airlines claimed that the pilot of KAL 85 "believed he was directed by air traffic controllers at the FAA's Anchorage flight control center to send out the hijack signal." The airline's administrator, Michael Lim, said: "Our captain was following their instruction. [The Anchorage Center] even told the captain to transmit code 7500, hijack code. Our captain, who realized how serious it is, they were just following instructions." Adding to the mystery, two weeks after 9/11 it was reported that Korean Airlines had "declined to make available a tape recording of conversations between the pilot [of KAL 85] and KAL officials on the ground in Anchorage," and that the "FAA won't discuss any details of the case." [23] There was even some uncertainty and secrecy over why Whitehorse Airport was chosen as KAL 85's new destination after it was diverted. The report published by the government of Yukon in November 2001 stated: "The question of why this potentially dangerous aircraft was directed to Whitehorse rather than another airport remains unanswered by senior national agencies, the [FAA], NORAD, and Transport Canada. ... [Q]uestions about the decision-making process to re-direct [KAL 85] to Whitehorse have not been answered in any significant detail." The report added, "It is expected that greater detail on this will not be forthcoming from these agencies in the short-term." [24] WAS KAL 85 PART OF AN EXERCISE SIMULATION? This secrecy and confusion would certainly make sense if these agencies were trying to cover-up KAL 85's involvement in a training exercise. What makes this possibility seem even more likely is that, five days before 9/11, NORAD practiced two exercise scenarios with an uncanny resemblance to the apparent crisis involving KAL 85. Those scenarios were part of its annual exercise, "Vigilant Guardian," which was still taking place on September 11. In one of the scenarios on September 6, 10 members of a fictitious terrorist group called "Lin Po" hijacked Korean Airlines Flight 357, a Boeing 747 flying from Seoul to Anchorage--in other words, a plane resembling KAL 85. The terrorists issued demands and threatened to blow up the plane if these were not met. They also killed two passengers. NORAD directed fighter jets to get in a position to shoot down the hijacked 747, and ordered its Alaskan region to intercept and shadow the plane--similar to what it did in response to KAL 85 on September 11. The scenario involved the plane eventually landing in Seattle, Washington. [25] In the other exercise scenario on September 6, a Boeing 747, also bound for Anchorage, was hijacked by terrorists, although in that case the plane had taken off from Tokyo, not Seoul. A fictitious terrorist group called "Mum Hykro" was threatening to "rain terror from the skies onto a major U.S. city unless the U.S. declares withdrawal from Asian conflict." Some of the plane's passengers were killed. The plane changed its course to Vancouver, Canada, and then to San Francisco, California. The military was directed to respond, by providing "covert shadowing" of the hijacked aircraft, presumably by fighter jets. NORAD had to liaise with the appropriate air traffic control center. Its Alaskan region and Canadian region participated in the scenario. Again, we see similarities to the events involving KAL 85 five days later. [26] Might the apparent hijacking of KAL 85 on 9/11 have therefore been a simulation intended as a follow-up to these two previous scenarios? Clearly, the actions of KAL 85 and the plane's possible involvement in a military exercise require more investigation. But the fact that exercises resembling the real-world attacks were taking place on September 11, and--if my conclusions about KAL 85 are correct--at least one of those exercises was still going on hours after the attacks in New York and Washington took place, should be of concern to us all. NOTES [1] Alan Levin, "Korean Air Jet May Have Narrowly Missed Disaster." USA Today, August 12, 2002; Patty Davis, "Korean Jet in 9/11 'Hijack' Scare." CNN, August 14, 2002; Lynn Spencer, Touching History: The Untold Story of the Drama That Unfolded in the Skies Over America on 9/11. New York: Free Press, 2008, pp. 256-257. [2] Alaska Legislature Joint Senate and House Armed Services Committee, Presentations by Lieutenant General Norton Schwartz and Major General Willie Nance Jr. 22nd Leg., 2nd Sess., February 5, 2002; Zaz Hollander, "High Alert." Anchorage Daily News, September 8, 2002. [3] Alan Levin, "Korean Air Jet May Have Narrowly Missed Disaster"; Zaz Hollander, "High Alert"; Lynn Spencer, Touching History, pp. 278-279. [4] Alan Levin, "Korean Air Jet May Have Narrowly Missed Disaster"; Patty Davis, "Korean Jet in 9/11 'Hijack' Scare"; Zaz Hollander, "High Alert"; Lynn Spencer, Touching History, pp. 257, 277-278. [5] September 11, 2001, Whitehorse International Airport Emergency: Public Findings Report. Whitehorse, Yukon: Yukon Government, November 13, 2001, p. 17. [6] Lynn Spencer, Touching History, p. 278. [7] Alan Levin, "Korean Air Jet May Have Narrowly Missed Disaster." [8] Zaz Hollander, "High Alert"; Lynn Spencer, Touching History, p. 257. [9] "Stranded Passengers Flood Canadian Airports." CBC News, September 12, 2001; Zaz Hollander, "False Sept. 11 Hijack Signal Put Air Force on Alert." Anchorage Daily News, September 29, 2001; Alaska Legislature Joint Senate and House Armed Services Committee, Presentations by Lieutenant General Norton Schwartz and Major General Willie Nance Jr.; Zaz Hollander, "High Alert." [10] Alaska Legislature Joint Senate and House Armed Services Committee, Presentations by Lieutenant General Norton Schwartz and Major General Willie Nance Jr. [11] Alan Levin, "Korean Air Jet May Have Narrowly Missed Disaster"; Lynn Spencer, Touching History, p. 278. [12] Shawn McCarthy, "PM Says U.S. Attitude Helped Fuel Sept. 11." Globe and Mail, September 12, 2002; Sheldon Alberts, "PM Links Attacks to 'Arrogant' West." National Post, September 12, 2002. [13] Alan Levin, "Korean Air Jet May Have Narrowly Missed Disaster"; Patty Davis, "Korean Jet in 9/11 'Hijack' Scare." [14] September 11, 2001, Whitehorse International Airport Emergency, pp. 14-15. [15] "Korean Passenger Jet Diverted to Whitehorse Treated as Hijacking: RCMP." Canadian Press, September 12, 2001; "Korean Planes Make Emergency Landings." United Press International, September 12, 2001; Zaz Hollander, "False Sept. 11 Hijack Signal Put Air Force on Alert." [16] September 11, 2001, Whitehorse International Airport Emergency, pp. 17-18. [17] "Korean Passenger Jet Diverted to Whitehorse Treated as Hijacking: RCMP." [18] Zaz Hollander, "High Alert." [19] Alan Levin, "Korean Air Jet May Have Narrowly Missed Disaster." [20] Lynn Spencer, Touching History, p. 279. [21] Zaz Hollander, "False Sept. 11 Hijack Signal Put Air Force on Alert." [22] Alan Levin, "Korean Air Jet May Have Narrowly Missed Disaster." [23] Zaz Hollander, "False Sept. 11 Hijack Signal Put Air Force on Alert." [24] September 11, 2001, Whitehorse International Airport Emergency, p. 5. [25] "NORAD Exercises: Hijack Summary." 9/11 Commission, n.d. [26] Ibid. |