Whistleblower Reveals "Backdoor" 757 Remote Control And Flight Crew "Lockout" Technology Available Prior To 9/11

(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Wayne Anderson, an Avionics Technician is interviewed by Rob Balsamo, Co-Founder, Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Wayne reveals his observations of a remote guidance test on a Boeing 757 in which technology was used to control the aircraft remotely, while also being able to "Lockout" the Flight Crew from overriding the autopilot system in order to regain control of the airplane. The following interview discusses the details of this test which was performed prior to September 11, 2001, the violations of FAA regulations and the possibilities using such technology.

Right Click and save target as... (46 min runtime, 21.1mb download)



Didn't Popular Mechanics

claim (apparently based on an interview with a Boeing worker) that such remote control was NOT possible on commercial aircraft?

So who's lying, Popular Mechanics or Wayne Anderson? ;-)

Popular Mechanics Was Already Caught Lying About 9/11

Adam, Popular Mechanics also said, "Why couldn't ATC find the hijacked flights? When the hijackers turned off the planes' transponders, which broadcast identifying signals, ATC had to search 4500 identical radar blips crisscrossing some of the country's busiest air corridors. And NORAD's sophisticated radar? It ringed the continent, looking outward for threats, not inward. "It was like a doughnut," Martin says [Major Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD]. "There was no coverage in the middle." Pre-9/11, flights originating in the States were not seen as threats and NORAD wasn't prepared to track them."

In 2004 The 9/11 Commission Report said on page 18, "NORAD would receive tracking information for the hijacked aircraft either from joint use radar or from the relevant FAA air traffic control facility. Every attempt would be made to have the hijacked aircraft squawk 7500 to help NORAD track it."

The 9/11 Commission Report confirms what the GAO said in 1994, "NORAD defines air sovereignty as providing surveillance and control of the territorial airspace, which includes:

1. intercepting and destroying uncontrollable air objects;

2. tracking hijacked aircraft;

3. assisting aircraft in distress;

4. escorting Communist civil aircraft; and

5. intercepting suspect aircraft, including counterdrug operations and peacetime military intercepts."

So the answer to your question is: Popular Mechanics is lying!

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC


Until today I thought Popular Mechanics was telling the truth about everything. ;-)

Oh come on ...

you don't really believe Popular Mechanics would lie, do you?

More Supporting Evidence

Just one guy telling a story is not enough. He did mention an engineer by name, David Price I think? Let's see if this guy surfaces. I was a bit concerned when Wayne Anderson mentioned this guy that could corroborate his story and immediately warned that the guy might not support his story because of some sort of career struggle. I'm not sure what he said because the host was talking over him.

very interesting

this is some guy saying something on the internet, so while it may be true, it's not much use by itself at this point. If he swears out an affidavit or provides a deposition under oath as part of some legal proceeding, that might add some weight to it. If additional witnesses swear to this, that would add additional weight. And if some verifiable documentation can be provided, that would be good.

The real test of the value of this info is if it leads to full disclosure of criminal action, such as hard evidence that this lockout/takeover system was used to control the 9/11 aircraft. For now, it's just some guy saying stuff on the internet, which may or may not be true. For everyone else, it's hearsay.

geezer1776 had some interesting questions and comments http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?s=0f8217bd79ad2ea0ce682ee15...

Remote control unnecessary ...

In 2001, auto-pilot functionality was such that commercial airliners like the Boeing 767 could take off and land unassisted ... in other words, aircraft like those that struck the twin towers could easily have been flying on auto-pilot with pre-programmed GPS navigation.