The Most Ludicrous Aspect of the Official 9/11 Story (9/11 Hijacker Tactics Part I)

While there are many parts of the official 9/11 story that are hard to believe, the one part that really made me realize the story was a pack of lies was learning that not one of the four hijacked planes ever alerted air traffic control that they were hijacked.

The closest warning of a hijacking from a pilot was from flight 93-- where ATC heard a radio transmission from the plane of "mayday!" followed by sounds of a struggle (9/11 Commission Report). Then 35 seconds later, there was another radio transmission from flight 93 where the pilot was saying "hey get out of here-- get out of here-- get out of here" (9/11 Commission Report). This in itself is curious-- since the order of these transmissions is the opposite from what you would expect-- that is that first you would hear "get out of here", with sounds of a struggle, then "mayday". What made the pilot say "mayday" first?

Of course, the only way ATC learned of the hijackings was that the transponders went off and the phone calls made by passengers.

In fact, there is a simple and quick and subtle way airline pilots can alert ATC of a hijacking-- they press the code 7500 into the transponder. This code is even mentioned by the 9/11 Commission Report. According to "Crossing the Rubicon" by Mike Ruppert, this code can be punched in from the pilots steering column-- so it is not as though the pilot has to strain to press in the hijacking code.

So, anyone, please tell me--- how on earth did hijackers armed with only knives and boxcutters get into the cockpit and take over control of the plane without one of the two pilots pressing 7500 into the transponder (or even yelling "hijack" into the radio)?!?!?! And how did this happen four different times?!?!?! IT MAKES NO SENSE.

By all accounts, in every plane, the hijackers stabbed some of the flight attendants and some of the passengers before they took over the plane. So it is not as though there was no struggle and the hijackers just quietly slipped into the cockpit and quickly slashed the pilots' throats.

In any case, it defies belief that one of the flight attendents didn't call the cockpit and warn them that dangerous men were charging the cockpit.

Therefore, I defy anyone to give a plausible explanation for how the hijackers took over all four planes by force in a way that is consistent with the official 9/11 story. In fact, to make it interesting-- I will throw in a cash reward for anyone who can tell me what happened. Minimum $20, and I'll go higher if the story really has a lot of plausible detail.

Of course, one reason people don't question this aspect of the 9/11 story is because they have no other explanation for what might have been happening on those planes. That is, people think the hijackers MUST have been able to do this because there is no other logical explanation.

Well, first of all, it is interesting to note that according to firefighters who worked at the WTC disaster clean-up, three of four black boxes from the "hijacked" planes were recovered. The FBI is covering this story up, and indeed, the 9/11 Commission Report says that the black boxes WEREN'T found.

So what might these black boxes be hiding? Most likely the fact that these "hijacked" planes weren't really hijacked in the sense we have been told.

My guess is that these black boxes show one of two things. Either:

1) the planes that crashed into the WTC were drones piloted by remote control that weren't really flights 11 and 175, or

2) the hijacking of flights 11 and 175 was a drill or simulation-- until the pilots realized they had no control of the plane because the plane was being controlled remotely. In which case, the frantic sounds of the pilots were recorded as they struggled to retake control of the plane before it crashed.

The remote control theory is invoked to explain how these poorly trained hijackers could pilot three giant aircraft with such amazing precision into their targets. The idea that these hijackers who trained on little Cessna planes and Boeing flight simulators could pilot the hijacked planes so perfectly into three out of three targets is perhaps the SECOND hardest thing to believe about 9/11.

What is certain, and I feel this to the depth of my being, is that the official 9/11 story is a horrendous lie foisted upon the American people.

Further thoughts: One other possibility is that the pilots DID indeed punch in the hijacking code into the transponder, and that ATC WAS alerted, but that this is being covered up. Why would it be be covered up? Becuase this would mean that NORAD screwed up in their response even more than it did according to the official story. Perhaps NORAD screwed up because of the hijacking wargames that they were running that day. Overall, I find this possibility somewhat unlikely because, in contrast to the remote control theory, it has to assume the hijackers truly were great pilots. Second, it doesn't explain why they have kept secret the recovery of the black boxes. Although one could postulate that they were hiding the hijack alert data that was in the black boxes from flight 11 and flight 175, they still could have selectively released some flight data recorder data (as they undoubtedly did with flight 93).

In general, the whole official explanation for how the attacks succeeded rests on the fact that the hijackers were very sneaky and subverted the normal hijack alert system. Clearly this is wrong at some level. Either ATC was alerted of hijackings via the normal route and this is being covered up OR the normal hijack alert system was subverted because the hijackings were part of some pre-planned hijacking exercise that was intended to fool ATC. I tend to think the latter, but can't rule out the former.