Support 911Blogger

Two new articles at the Journal of 9/11 Studies

Professor Graeme MacQueen and I are pleased to announce two new, peer reviewed articles that have been published at the Journal of 9/11 Studies.

The first is from German journalist Paul Schreyer and is titled Anomalies of the air defense on 9/11.

This paper identifies six major, simultaneous anomalies that occurred on September 11, 2001 with regard to the national air defenses. Here is an excerpt:

“The official explanation for the detour is that air traffic controllers at Langley had sort of a standard flight plan, sending all jets generally to the east and that this standardized eastern heading somehow replaced the original NORAD scramble order. But this seems to be a dubious claim. Because how could that have happened? The pilots knew the original scramble order. They knew which direction NEADS wanted them to fly. And then they somehow forgot? But, same as with the Otis scramble, there seems only little chance to dig deeper because ‘Giant Killer’, the responsible control facility, deleted all its tapes from the communication on 9/11."

The second article is from licensed structural engineer Ronald H. Brookman and is titled A Discussion of “Analysis of Structural Response of WTC 7 to Fire and Sequential Failures Leading to Collapse.”

This paper discusses a recent article published in the Journal of Structural Engineering, authored by a team including several of the primary NIST WTC report authors. Brookman’s discussion reviews how the NIST authors continue to ignore facts related to the construction of WTC 7 in their computer models, and how the basic information needed to verify those computer models remains unavailable to independent researchers. Here is an excerpt:

“The destruction of WTC 7 on September 11, 2001 and the final NCSTAR reports issued in 2008 raise many questions in addition to those outlined here, but one thing is certain: Thousands of hours of computer simulation are no substitute for a forensic investigation based on published national standards and well-established principles of scientific inquiry. “

Good, but you missed a big point

Paul Schreyer:
"According to author Lynn Spencer the Secret Service called Andrews to request fighters at shortly after 9:30. 18 But allegedly only at 10:38, a whole hour after the crash into the nearby Pentagon, the first Andrews fighters were starting, unarmed, on their way. 19 This huge delay has never been conclusively explained."

There was already a scrambling-request much earlier, shortly after 09:04 by the FAA.

"FAA Headquarters Calls Andrews Tower - According to the 9/11 Commission, “The FAA tower” at Andrews is then “contacted by personnel at FAA headquarters” who are “on an open line with senior agents from the president’s detail,” and is informed that the Secret Service wants fighters airborne. Karen Pontius at FAA headquarters tells Steve Marra, an air traffic controller at the Andrews control tower, “to launch F-16s to cap the airspace over Washington.”

But the request was failed by Andrew air base itself!

Message Passed to DCANG - Marra then relays Pontius’s message to the 113th Wing of the DC Air National Guard, which is based at Andrews. [9/11 Commission, 7/28/2003 pdf file; 9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 465] Marra apparently passes the message to Major Daniel Caine, the 113th Wing’s supervisor of flying, when Caine phones the control tower (see (Between 9:05 a.m. and 9:32 a.m.) September 11, 2001). Caine will later recall that the tower controller (i.e. Marra) tells him “that they just received the scramble order.” But Caine will also tell the 9/11 Commission that the Andrews tower “would not have been in the loop for any Secret Service orders to scramble aircraft.” [Filson, 2003, pp. 76; 9/11 Commission, 3/8/2004 pdf file]

At least Caine phoned shortly afterwards the white house, secret service, to ask, if they need "help", which was declined by the secret service!

Caine had asked: "Do you have any additional information? Are you guys going to need some help?" and Beauchamp replied, "No, but I'll call you back if that changes."
Filson, 2003, pp. 76
9/11 Commission, 3/8/2004
Spencer, 2008, pp. 124

This whole anecdote indicates, that the secret service did not want to have scrambled fighters, but the FAA. The interview of Mister Steenhagen supports that interpretation! I offered a blog-entry into this topic:

Foreknowledge of two more hijacked planes around 09:03 heading towards D.C.

those skilled in the art

Between Pinocchio Sunders new phenomenon walking girders, disappearing shear studs, wrong date stamps, lost unrecorded or just plain 'cut-up with scissors' tapes of other critical moments, the ongoing tragedy compiles.
How can this be. That aircraft are sent the wrong way. That seats are empty when phone calls are to be made, or filled and silent still, the giant killers remain?

In the LS DYNA models, constructed on screens with data-sets bent all to hell and the connivance of government overlooking, we have lines of the lie Interconnected, creating the impossible standing design of denial. spider lines 110 stories high with bolts, as required. conductivity. or not. Fires out or burning at grossly inflated temperatures for unobserved amounts of time. Or not. depending [creatioNIST modeling we can call it]
If we extrapolated the entire 911 conspiracy large onto, or into multiple 3-D screen modeling format, we have intricate lines of interconnected anomaly infesting the whole. Building science. Ownership. Washington interactions. Eyewitness suppression. Aircraft behaviour. Pre-attack warnings..Zelikow. all the names and parts set up digitally holding themselves together in the narrative wherein the critical moments are, oops....... the tape is lost. The fire was out, the door closed. Uncle Donald was out of the office. States secrets privilege enacted. Anthrax posted.
In among it PTECH and override. Dermatology and fortuitous rewrites of other critical regulations. back door access to otherwise protected spaces. Exercises. spikes in EPA and algorithmic traces, RIP Barry Jennings. manipulated data points in the web construct called OCT.

but we also have Lance Armstrong.

How many people knew ? For how long ? A conspiracy spanning a decade . Within a sport Involving hundreds of the most ambitious and honed athletes Armstrong created a new phenomena of 7 consecutive racing wins now LIES busted for a conspiracy requiring doctors, couriers, team mates, authority systems, the science and planning of blood enhancement, refrigeration. Media ? How many knew and for how long to keep this secret from the world and how many were bought out along the ride.

This concerns 911 because, as with LIBOR, Armstrong, [in UK] BBC pedophile Savile, and the Hillsborough tragedy, we have four very recent and clearly defined conspiracies involving dozens if not hundreds of insiders that have been managed BY the authority systems for decades now coming to light. After years of 'conspiracy theory' denials, suddenly, a trigger, a 'critical initiation' moment in the collapse of narrative occurs. And.....lo and behold, the 'conspiracy theorists' are found right. Forced by 'family members' who never gave up the fight.
It could be called the speed of deceit. [108 feet in 2.25 seconds]
These papers as presented are further example of the anomalies existent in the construct, Of investigative research by keen minds showing the outright construct of the LIE for any wishing to read them.

Wonderful work.

Beautifully Stated Remo


thank you.


Yes,it seems pretty obvious

Yes,it seems pretty obvious to me that the Otis holding pattern occurred before 9:03 and was made necessary only because the pilots violated protocol and flew supersonic. The pilots weren't suppose to know there was a "hijacking in the system" but they had been tipped off by Boston Center's ATC supervisor (Bueno) who called Otis tower.
Had the pilots followed protocol and flown no faster than max Subsonic straight from Otis to NYC (they were originally vectored there) they would have arrived just in time for the people recovering from the shock of the second impact to look up and think,"they just missed".
The Otis pilots left the holding pattern on their own. Why? Because they saw the impact of Flight 175.