FAA Notified Military of 9/11 Hijacked Planes in Real-Time - Without Even Lifting a Finger


The official story of 9/11 is that the FAA delayed notifying the military about the hijackings. That false statement has been debunked elsewhere.

However, even if the FAA for some reason had not notified the military, it doesn't matter.


Because the Secret Service -- which is contact with the President and Vice President at all times -- was watching everything the FAA was watching on their radar:

So even if the FAA never even picked up the phone to inform the military of the hijacked airplanes, the Secret Service would have seen it with their own eyes, and the President, Vice President, and the military would immediately been informed of what was happening.

all true, but

The Secret Service is not the military. It's another level of bureaucracy, and potential for delay. Also, it is the responsibility of FAA to declare the plane as hijacked, and so the Secret Service may not know this immediately. A problem with a transponder is not the same as a live hijacking.

See my other post today...

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.

Thanks for thinking RADAR...

Robin Hordon There is a good chance that, because of the great work by folks who have never weaved aircraft through the skies looking at a radar scope, this exposure of the simple words of Barbara Riggs in that she stated something like: " they were tracking TWO airplanes headed towards WDC", yet another HUGE layer of the 9/11 onion will get peeled away.

Once Bronner came out with his disinfo CRAP in Vanity Fair, my blood pressure rose and I knew that it was time for me to speak out. David Ray Griffin eventually called me and I stated then, as I state now: DO NOT...buy into the HI PERPS shiftng the analysis of the events of 9/11 LATER in the day, like AFTER WTC2 was hit...and then continue on looking downstream from there because THAT...was their plan all along. After VF I just knew that the 9/11TM needed to focus upon what happened EARLIER in the day of on 9/11, and NOT LATER in the day of 9/11. An earlier look will tell the truth about the NORAD STAND-DOWN and the entire "9/11 Attack Scenario", and a later look would only tell the false story of: "It was the FAA's fault...and we need more money for the Defense Budget"...the usual "WA-WA-WA" by our highly paid military criminals.

Recently I have been able to push the time that Cheney, and an ADDITIONAL MILITARY radar source tracking AA77 backwards well before the "2 minutes notice" that these liars have foisted upon their corporate media whores. And I have always felt that we could push the "flight following" of AA77? [I have deep doubts that the primary target that most folks ASSUME is AA77 is actually AA77...] by the US Military back even farther...perhaps even to DEPARTURE.

BTW...I still feel that AA77 is the TRUE "False-Flag-Flight" of 9/11 [Burlingame???...] and it may be "THE" hijacked airliner that keeps popping up as being part of one of the "War Games" on 9/11. This scenario is what I now can call the "9/11 War Game Scenario"...as part of the overall "War Games" activities on 9/11. Much more on this down the road a bit...and Pinnacle will be a national hero...

And, if anyone was able to tolerate my bland, boring but deeply informational presentation up to Vancouver last year...

...The Institutional Stand Down of NORAD on 9/11/2001: An Air Traffic Controller's View of What Happened on 9/11...

...you will see that the change made in the Joint Chiefs of Staff Orders in June was critical to the "subtly" changed interceptor protocols thereafter...AND...such changes that take affect in June begin to take form MONTHS earlier. Consequently, not only do I have the actual AA11 "in-flight-emergency" demanding [and getting] action earlier than Bronner claims in the VF events of 9/11, I have the Military changing things to help "allow this to happen" just after the Bush Regime took office in 2001...aka...January-February. Now, that's looking backward more appropriately.

OH my goodness, what am I thinking of, Cheney made it clear that he DIDN'T meet with his counterterrorism task force until just before 9/11 when they had to check and see if all the details were...oops, there I go again, distrusting Cheney and the Bush Regime...

Anyway, you see, on 9/12/2001, the military's RADES outfit, [some sort of radar data collection/reconstruction outfit...], was able to SHOW...the alleged "flight paths" of the airliners the day after on 9/12/2001...so, here is the clue: If they had the radar data on 9/12/2001 showing what happened on 9/11/2001, well then, the truth is that they had the radar data on 9/11/2001. Its really that simple. Seems that someone deep inside somewhere may not have provided that data to the FAA and/or the NORAD folks on a badly needed "real time" basis.

So, back to "Real Time Radar Riggs"...the ridges and valleys of the Appalachians provide ACTUAL radar coverage "holes" deep in those valleys because the radar signals are blocked by the ridges that are aligned in a northeast-southwest direction. This is normal and to be expected in such mountainous regions...its SOP. My "speculative" point being...IF there was a swap, it could have taken place right near where AA77 was totally lost to positive radar contact in eastern Ohio. AA77 descending below radar coverage [something NOT shown on Pandora's BoxII] and heading west unseen by FAA radar until it could climb up and begin to "look like" any VFR aircraft to FAA radar...and then... a "whatever" popping UP from a valley floor heading eastbound towards WDC??? AND...if there was a swap, then it would be very visible to a "competent" radar antennae...but there was none out there...HMMM? More on this later as things heat up. A hint though...some info is developing about a possible Camp David crash...check out the ridges and valleys that I mention in relation to Camp David and where AA77 was lost to positive radar contact...its very interesting...

BACK ONTO HARD EVIDENCE... it is so very critical to remember that...nobody anywhere, at any time, at any FAA or military facility EVER positively re-radar identified AA77...and this INCLUDES the "infamous" primary target that "popped up" right in the vicinity of these Appalachain ridges and valleys just west of Dulles. You know, its the target that almost everybody PRESUMES was AA77...the target that, although the HI PERPS cannot PROVE through hard evidence actually hit the Pentagon, nonetheless, want eveyone to believe that this "non-proof-evidence" is indeed PROOF that this target was AA77. HMMM...seems a bit of a circular proof to me...and it gives me a headache.

But now, "Real Time Radar Riggs" may have really spilled the beans...so we must ask the following questions: At what geographical and "time" point was the SS "tracking TWO targets" heading to WDC?...and was one of them AA77?...[which the Pentagon Brassiers have stated it was NOT tracking/flight following...even though the "young man in the PEOC" was proving that the military/SS WAS following a primary target...]...and exactly "which" RADAR FACILITY was it that was providing this radar data? If it was military radar data, somebody is lying again! And if it was FAA radar data, well, somebody is lying again!

And here is another possible kicker or two:

Bush reported "seeing" the first airliner hitting the North Tower...and most Truthers are thinking that there may have been some sort of local camera and transmitter device on Manhattan...[and that certainly may be], BUT...its wasn't neccessary. Its a complicated story but, I can assure you that, even a "half trained eye" could simply look at the FAA target and "tracking system" in use for AA11 and be able to tell WHEN AA11 hit WTC2...because the computerized data changes when the computer "track" looses its target.

SOOOOOO...IF, the SS has the exact data that the FAA ATC system has REAL TIME, maybe the SS had such a visual readout RIGHT INSIDE BUSH'S LIMOSINE on the way TO the school? Maybe Bush wasn't lying when he stated he "saw" the FIRST airliner "hit" the building. And maybe Card [?] was telling him that the "second plane hit" and now it was time for him to leave the classroom so that it looked more reasonable?

And then of course, wouldn't THIS bring a different meaning to Bush's words: "Looks like I hit the TRIFECTA..."

Most pundits thought that he meant he would gain politically, economically and militarily as commander in chief...

I sorta think that it was because they got THREE BUILDINGS! How about THAT for a wierd thought?

Anyway, thanks so much for all of "your radar eyes"...its always better to have more eyes on the radar when things are a bit touchy...we always help our brothers and sisters out of difficult jams...I've saved a few for the clan, and others have certainly saved my bacon...

And of course, lets be CIVIL...and lets be INFORMATIVE...and lets do "CI"...the NEW millenium's NEW tactic for effective activism...

Love, Peace and Progress with:


Robin Hordon

Good points.

You have the experience in this area.

I hope you will post more often here to help those of us who are not as knowledgable on the Flight Tracking System.

"...and lets do "CI"...the NEW millenium's NEW tactic for effective activism..."

By the way What does the abbreviation CI mean?

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

Maybe Nothing Hit the Pentagon

Thanks for your insight on the radar and on the sociopaths.
The PentaCon.com film maker told me he thought nothing hit the Pentagon and that they were faking a hit with planted explosions, and that the plane simply sailed over the building, which Pandora's Box could have indicated. Robin if you read this, please comment.

Location Of Radars Possibly Tracking 77?

I am not knowledgeable about radar, was wondering about Wright Patterson AFB in Dayton,Ohio. Eastern Ohio is hilly but does not have mountains, 500' 600' elevation from valley to top is about the maximum. West Va does have mountains common in the 3000' 4000' range.

I have always been curious about what ATC's actually did in Boston at 8:13 am when they knew something out of the ordinary was happening with AA 11. The official version has people dithering for 10-15 minutes which I find hard to believe.

It DOESN'T MATTER if the transponders were turned off.

It DOESN'T MATTER if the transponders were turned off. Airplanes are still tracked even on the standard, everyday, FAA radar with NO transponder information.
They knew EXACTLY(!) where the airplanes were. The only information that is lost by turning off the transponder is the ALTITUDE data. The airplanes still return a "target" on the radar. There should have been military fighters up immediately.

Even commercial airplanes nearby would have "seen" the targets on their own TCAS displays. TCAS stands for Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System. They have been on all commercial airliners for 15 to 20 years. If another airplane is in the area a "blip" shows up on the cockpit display. If the airplane's (associated with the blip) transponder is not on, you simply don't get any altitude data. If a pilot sees a blip with no altitude information, he simply has to look in the direction of the blip and then scan up and down to locate the airplane. He knows EXACTLY where the blip is, e.g., 16 miles out at "two o'clock." The pilot simply looks at "two o'clock" and looks up and down to see the airplane. If any commercial airliner close by could have located the hijacked airplanes, Military fighters could have "locked on" to the hijacked airplanes in literally no time. The controllers would tell the fighter EXACTLY where the airplane is but not its altitude.

To use "transponders turned off" as an excuse is front and central to the disinformation campaign. People will believe anything: "We can put a missile down a house chimney from 30,000 feet but we can't 'find' a large hijacked airliner because the hijackers didn't play fair and turned the transponders off so we didn't know its exact altitude. Therefore we gave up and kept the fighters on the ground."