Are the Hijackers-- the Real Ones-- Still Alive and With Us Today?

We are all aware of the "still-alive" hijackers. This of course is a facetious term referring to completely innocent men who may have had their identities stolen and used by the real culprits on 9/11. But what about the real hijackers, the men who actually commandeered the planes? Is it possible they could have escaped the planes before the crashes?

Some contend that there were no hijackers at all, that the planes were diverted solely by remote control. Several credible phone calls from the flights, however, such as those from Betty Ong (AAL11) and Tom Burnett (UAL93), provide pretty good evidence that there were indeed real hijackers on the planes for at least some period of time.

That the attacks were carried out by men intent on suicide has always been an assumption on the part of just about everybody. Such as assumption has naturally led to the blaming of the al-Qaeda Arabs, who are from a culture where suicide attacks are supposedly a regular practice. The theory that the hijackers may not have been Arabs at all, but men portraying themselves as Arabs, for the purpose of framing Arabs, has to contend with the argument that while some Arabs have been known to carry out suicide attacks, the professional agents employed by state intelligence agencies have no such history.

But is it possible that the hijackers were indeed professional agents, disguised as Arabs, who had no intention of dying when the planes crashed? There is only one way to escape a moving airplane, and that is with a parachute. Could the agents have hijacked the planes, then rigged the cockpits for remote navigation to their targets-- then, with the passengers herded to the backs of the planes, have bailed out to safety from the cargo holds of the planes?

Such a scenario seems like something from a James Bond film. But the distinct possibility of its occurrence was brought to my attention when I read a few excerpts from a book written by ex- Navy SEAL Chuck Pfarrer.

Before I write one more word I want to make one thing clear. In no way am I suggesting that the Navy SEALS or any other branch of the US military participated in the hijackings of 9/11. The following quotes on show that such a maneuver as I am suggesting is possible, and is a regular procedure with the SEALS, and therefore may also be a procedure in other para-military organizations around the world, including those of Israel.

[from Warrior Soul: Memoir of a Navy Seal by Chuck Pfarrer page 5. (Random House 2004):]

"Jumping out of commercial airliners is an operation, or op, we call a "D. B. Cooper." Using scheduled air traffic to insert into a hostile country, or a denied area, is a SEAL specialty.

Most people do not parachute on purpose from jet aircraft. The planes are too fast, and the turbulent air dragging in their wake can snap your spine and pop your hips from your pelvis. We were trained to jump from commercial airliners because they are ubiquitous and nonattributable. It is one thing to prohibit American military aircraft from flying over your country. It is quite another to close down your airspace to all commercial traffic. Libya, Syria, Cuba, and a host of other thug nations allow commercial flights to fly through their airspace. This is all the opening a SEAL Team needs. Unknown and unseen, a SEAL element can parachute into any place on earth. One might insert: that is, provided one survives the jump. The trick is to exit in correct body position and deploy your parachute after the appropriate delay. There are two principal types of SEAL parachute operations: HALO, or high altitude, low opening; and HAHO, high altitude, high opening.

In a HALO drop, you exit the aircraft at 35,000 feet on oxygen and open your parachute low, at 2,000 feet, to avoid detection. A jumper falling at terminal velocity, roughly 120 miles an hour, would scream in for a full three minutes before opening his parachute.

In a HAHO drop, jumpers exit the aircraft above 35,000 feet, but their parachutes are deployed after a brief delay, maybe three seconds, opening high instead of low-sometimes literally in the jet stream. The team floats under canopy at 33,000 feet, then groups together and glides in formation toward the target.

At six and a half miles up, the MT-1-X parachute has a thirty-knot forward airspeed, and you can cover a lot of miles before you ever see any dirt. Depending on the winds aloft, a jumper can touch down twenty or thirty miles from where he exited the aircraft. It's a good way to drop into a place where you are neither expected nor welcome."

Pfarrer also tells an anecdote about his last jump, including this:

"As the flight attendants closed the doors and made ready for departure, I found my seat and managed to push my duffel into the overhead rack. I had definitely exceeded the recommended dimensions for carry-on luggage. Concealed in my bag was an MT-1-X military parachute."

As a final note, according to my research we have only two pieces of evidence showing the hijackers still on the planes in the last 10-15 minutes of flight. They are:

1.) The Cockpit Voice Recorder from UAL93, the one where the hijacker yells "Allah o Akbar," and in which the noises made by people outside the cockpit door were miraculously recorded. This recording was played only for a few members of the victims' families, many of whom felt it was tampered with.

2.) The phone call allegedly from Todd Beumer, who supposedly called a Verizon phone operator (instead of his pregnant wife) and chatted with her for 45 minutes-- a conversation in which he recited a prayer which his wife had never heard from him before.

In sum, we don't know if the hijackers parachuted to safety on 9/11. But based on the information provided by the above quotes, we must consider it as a possibility.

While what you say is physically possible...

...if I were the master planner of 9/11 I would not use this method and the undue risk of things going wrong that it adds to an already bewildering group of things that could go wrong.

Potential Problem 1
Having actual persons board the planes to actually hijack it (regardless if they are to parachute out later or not) adds the potential that the HJ itself could go awry and become delayed, and/or completely thwarted by passengers, cabin crew, and flight crew. All it would take would be for the main attack on the cockpit to become stalled, and for the actual pilot to set the transponder to the HJ code and/or call out on the radio verbally, announcing a HJ in progress for the entire aerospace system to hear - even if a second hj attempt on the cockpit is successful in the following minutes, you have a giant cat now out of the bag, on record, time stamped etc, not just wandering planes off course with turned off transponders. Again this is regardless of the parachute thing after the fact, but I wanted to mention it in the generality of actual HJ on planes

Potential Problem 2
Lets assume the HJ ops happen to be in the know of the planned fate of the plane they are on, and they are going to parachute out after their job is done. Ok, so they do the job, all goes according to plan etc. Now they bail out successfully... Out of the potential thousands of people on the ground with a vantage point, all it would take is for one person on the ground to think it odd enough that there are 4 or 5 parachutes coming down in my area (not a skydiving area possibly?), and call the authorities. Or possibly a police patrol witnessing the parachutes first hand. I would think the last thing the planners would want is their ops getting arrested by some local police in NJ say (assuming a bail out over Jersey enroute to NYC).

As a general speculation of mine, what I think would be most feasible is that regardless of what method was used to commandeer the planes there were people out in the public (the "patsies" if you like, or "shills" even) that definitely had the job of getting themselves noticed and on record in various places (ie Hotels, resturaunts, flight schools, airports, etc etc). Since the technology existed in 2001 to electronically take over the planes, if I were the 9/11 planner, I would leave as little as possible to human error and human randomality, I would never put people (the HJ shills) on the planes with any intention of carrying out an actual HJ. I might put them on the planes, thats for sure, but merely as passengers, by telling them they are to fly to city X and will be given instructions later, etc. Now I have my "witnesses" on the planes...just where I need them to be. Then, obviously, the plane is electronically HJ'd, and the flight crew is helpless, and so is everyone else on board...

Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB

Thank you for your comments.

Thank you for your comments. You made some very good points.

Given the modus operandi that I think was used, it would have been downright impossible for the hijackings to have been thwarted by the passengers or the crew. I am proposing highly trained professional hijackers who had guns, and may even have had pilot credentials, allowing them into the cockpit with the near complete trust of the pilots. Under such a scenario, the hijacker could have waited for the right moment and quickly shot both pilots through the head with a silencer-equipped gun. Absolutely no chance for resistance from the pilots-- and the passengers may have been oblivious to these shootings. (Keep in mind, the hijackers had the option of aborting the operation if something seemed wrong. Who knows, there may have been four or five other flights slated to be hijacked that were aborted for some reason.)

I cannot emphasize enough that these hijackers would have been carefully selected and rigorously trained for this mission-- probably completing their training on the exact same model of aircraft.

Regarding potential problem #2. With the planes under the control of remote navigation, they could have been guided to a precise GPS point pre-chosen by the conspirators for the hijackers to make their jumps. If it were me planning the operation, I'd choose a rural area where some skyjumping airports are nearby, and where the sight of parachutes in the sky is common. We have to realize that no one was looking up at the skies on the morning of 9/11 expecting hijackers to be parachuting down. Hardly anyone had any clue as to what was going on until several hours after the attacks had begun. I don't believe the planes were even known to have been hijacked for quite some time. The fact that the towers were burning on TV having been hit by planes is not going to make sheriff in rural Ohio look to the skies for suspicious activity.

And even if some of the hijacker/skyjumpers were apprehended by local authorities, what is the worst case scenario for the conspirators? The FBI, on orders from Benjamin Chertoff in the Justice Dept., would have arrived immediately to take the men into custody. The local police would have been ordered to remain silent about the whole thing. It would turn out that the men all had neat and clean alibis, that there is no evidence they did any hijackings, and that they were just recreational jumpers-- and they would be quietly released and allowed to return to their country.

Didn't pretty much the exact same thing happen to the men who were caught by the NYC police laughing and celebrating while filming the twin towers burning?

Thanks also. I agree that it is possible

that something like this could occur, I was just wondering why it would be necessary to do? Why have people board the planes, perform a HJ, rig/setup the plane in mid-flight to fly to a target, and bail out with parachutes? I'm not arguing with you, I am just wondering the benefit of that scenario as opposed to: Let the normally scheduled flights take off, take them over electronically, and let the preinstalled missile guidance system fly them into their targets. Same end result, way less planning and potential to go wrong.

Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB

Human intelligence trumps technology

In fact, a completely remote and electronic takeover of the planes with no human participation on board would have way more potential to go wrong. For starters, how would the crew be prevented from calling ATC and reporting the situation? Furthermore, I believe there are numerous methods by which the crew can counteract any such remote takeover. That, of course, is no problem if they are dead.

More importantly, it was the motive of the conspirators not only to fly the planes into buildings, but to frame Arabs for the crime. What better way to do that then to stage a real "Arab" hijacking on the planes-- with the role of Arabs being played by dark-skinned agents-- and then have real people transmit their false impression of an Arab hijacking via their airphone calls? This is what whipped America into a rage-- the reports of terrified people on the planes reporting vicious acts being carried out by "Middle Eastern looking" men.

Every great general, and every great spymaster, knows that human intelligence always is superior to technology. With their people on the planes and in control of the situation, the possibility of anything going wrong was greatly reduced.

You seem to forget something andre!

The fact is, and it's been proven by pilots and air trafic controllers , that it is absolutly impossible to place a phone call from an airplane in flight. Do your homework man. It's important. By the way: the parachute thing is not very credible. 911 movement needs serious observation...

You can't hide a lie for long. Truth shall come out.

I agree all comms from the planes... most likely all disinfo, the radio, the seatback phones, and of course the impossible cell phones. I dont trust one shred of any of it. Its funny how in one of the flight 93 calls a "bomb" is mentioned. Inserting plausible deniability in real-time because they knew they would have to shoot it down? (since it was 40 mins late taking off)

Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB

I've done my homework. I've

I've done my homework. I've studied the records of the phone calls until I was blue in the face. I know them all by heart. It's absurd to say it's impossible to place a phone call from a flight. Phone calls can obviously be made from the seatback airphones that are installed on most planes. It was from these phones that most of the calls from the planes were made. None of them were made from cell phones, despite whatever reports were made that they were. Those reports are either disinformation or were honest errors.

It is possible that some of the phone calls were indeed bogus. I am suspicious of the call allegedly made by Todd Beumer to Lisa Jefferson at Verizon wireless. It is possible that this call was staged by the conspirators, and that's why they chose to call a stranger.

The other calls, however, that contradict the official story-- like Tom Burnett's reporting guns or Betty Ong's reporting the seat numbers of the hijackers-- were real. Those calls were made by seatback airphones. There's no reason to believe otherwise.

Interesting blog.

Interesting blog.

Here's another hypothesis: Betty Ong (and even some of the passengers) were enlisted to participate in one the hijacking drills occurring on the morning of 911.

According to this scenario: at no time did anyone on the plane actually believe a real hijacking was taking place. They were merely reading scripts. This would explain Betty's superhuman calm, although as a professional she may have been fairly calm even during a real hijacking. It is even possible that the individuals enlisted to carry out these "drills" had no idea the drill was about to go live, and were, in effect, double-crossed.

Amalgam Virgo called for FBI agents to "play" hijackers on a "LIVE FLIGHT". Perhaps Amalgam Virgo was "bumped up" to 911; certain individuals "played" hijackers as part of a "red team"; airline personnel and passengers were told of the "drill" and asked to participate; then the planes were either remotely hijacked or swapped.

This seems more plausible to me than the scenario you outline, although I still voted your blog a ten for thinking outside the box.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

Except that there is no

Except that there is no precedent for commercial airline crews to suddenly be asked to participate in a hijacking drill during a real flight. Remember, Ong also reported seat number 9B as belonging to a hijacker. That seat was assigned to Danny Lewin, an officer in Israel's Sayerat Metkal, an elite commando unit! Was that part of the drill too? Tom Burnett called his wife from UAL93 and said the hijackers had guns. Was that part of a drill?

No way. These were real calls made by real people using the seatback airphones.

(But thanks for the ten rating anyway.)

"Except that there is no

"Except that there is no precedent for commercial airline crews to suddenly be asked to participate in a hijacking drill during a real flight."

I just mentioned it: Amalgam Virgo. It was announced prior to 911. Although not osensibly performed on that day, it could easily have been "bumped up". It called for FBI agents to "play" hijackers on LIVE FLIGHTS. Obviously the personnel would be informed, lest the agents or the crew be subject to unnecessary risk (or law-suits). In order for a "hijacking drill" to serve any purpose both the on-board crew and individuals on the ground would have be notified; it is also likely that they would be asked to participate in some capacity.

"Tom Burnett called his wife from UAL93 and said the hijackers had guns. Was that part of a drill?"

Did Burnett call his wife? Was his voice recorded while reading a script and phoned in by someone else? Who knows? As for guns, why not? Beats box-cutters. Presumably the drills aimed at authenticity.

"That seat was assigned to Danny Lewin, an officer in Israel's Sayerat Metkal, an elite commando unit! Was that part of the drill too?"

That's interesting and actually lends credence to both theories. Lewin could have been one of the "fake hijackers" enlisted by the FEDS.

I'm not saying your theory is impossible -- like I said I think it's an interesting blog -- it's just that when we already know that there were "hijacking drills" occurring that day I tend to view things through a certain lens. It's even possible that a combination of what you describe and what Tarpley describes was employed.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month