RSS

9/11 Airplanes: Skyjacked by Hackers?

09 Sep

James Corbett resides in Japan and is the author of the Corbett Report.  I interview him on radio almost every Wednesday night for about 40 minutes.  That interview is rebroadcast at about 4:23 PM (Eastern) on the Financial Survival radio show on American Voice Radio.

James is a brilliant man and author of the following video “How To Steal an Airplane”.  This video explores the possibility that the airplanes flown into the Twin Towers and Pentagon on September 11th, A.D. 2001 had been hijacked by computer hackers outside the planes, rather than Muslims within the planes armed with box cutters.  The video is well-done, insightful and persuasive.

video   00:14:45

 
25 Comments

Posted by on September 9, 2015 in 911, Conspiracy theories, Technology, Video

 

Tags: ,

25 responses to “9/11 Airplanes: Skyjacked by Hackers?

  1. Cory

    September 9, 2015 at 9:01 AM

    Field Mconnell of ABLE DANGER has said that the Boeing Uninteruptable Auto Pilot was used to take control of the aircraft on both 9/11 and Flight 370. Take a look… http://www.abeldanger.net/

     
  2. jody

    September 9, 2015 at 12:04 PM

    I heard awhile ago the theory that the planes were not hijacked but
    were remotely controlled. I do not remember hearing anything about any of the passengers or their families on either of the planes that flew into to towers or the one that allegedly hit the pentagon .WE heard a lot about the passengers of flight 93 in spite of the fact there was no airplane wreckage at the alleged crash site in Pennsylvania .

     
    • Mark Twang

      September 9, 2015 at 2:39 PM

      jody,
      @ I do not remember hearing anything about any of the passengers or their families on either of the planes that flew into to towers……………………………………………………………………….”
      Yes & I thought that same thing. Then there are videos saying & allegedly proving that NO planes hit the towers. There IS one thing I am convinced of & that is, there were implosive building “tools” devices installed for the towers to collapse. I wonder how this was done & not detected? Maybe the workers were there to fix some “plumbing problems”. jody, did you see the “All Hail The Power of Jesus’ Name video on the “Babylon thread? If not, check it out.

       
  3. Henry

    September 9, 2015 at 3:15 PM

    The go-to source about the 9/11 planes is the documentary September Clues, which came out in 2008 and is available to watch for free on the internet. This film and its follow-up September Clues Addendum analyze archived news footage from the day of 9/11 to prove the planes we were shown hitting the twin towers were actually fictitious photoshopped computer images.

    For example, different shots of the same plane at the same time depict inconsistent flight paths. The first few frames after one of the planes hits a tower show the resulting hole is conspicuously less wide than the wingspan of the plane – then this error is magically (and rather sloppily) corrected seconds later. Also, various artifacts of the technology known as “video layering” used to add the planes to the footage are in evidence. And many other apparently minor mistakes that expose the fraud.

    The films don’t go into physics problems, but mostly-hollow aluminum objects going 500 mph (which these Boeing airliners can’t come close to doing at sea level) don’t simply disappear into concrete and steel. But that’s a different subject.

    September Clues

    September Clues Addendum

    by Simon Shack. Watch them for free on the internet.

     
    • Mark Twang

      September 9, 2015 at 5:52 PM

      Henry,
      @ The go-to source about the 9/11 planes is the documentary September Clues, which came out in 2008 and is available to watch for free on the internet.
      Henry, as you & your Brothers say, the mental gymnastics of those who promote the doctrines of men are amusing to watch. This method of course is avoided like the plague by the liars, frauds, propagandist and similar “stumbling-blocks to the brethren” who prefer a pitch built on fancy graphics and scary music.”
      Henry, are these You Tube Videos? Are they built on fancy graphics and scary music”? If not, will you be so kind as to provide a link?

       
    • Mark Twang

      September 9, 2015 at 8:23 PM

      Re: This method.
      You, Henry said,on the Who/What is end times Babylon thread, the METHOD Roger uses to prove anything is more authoritative and is avoided like the plague by the liars, frauds, propagandist and similar “stumbling-blocks to the brethren” who prefer a pitch built on fancy graphics and scary music.”
      You went on to say the liars, frauds, propagandist use You Tube and similar “stumbling-blocks to the brethren” who prefer a pitch built on fancy graphics and scary music.” Henry, WHY are YOU now recommending people do what you said only the liars, frauds, propagandists do?
      Anyone can “read all about it” on the, “Who/What is end times Babylon thread”.

       
    • Toland

      September 9, 2015 at 9:14 PM

      I downloaded these films after you last recommended them. What makes them watchable for me is the absence of a narrator talking at you. Perhaps you noticed there is no voiceover in these vids, only on-screen text as needed? The evidence can speak for itself.

      The filmmaker Simon Shack is a musician, among other things, in Italy. The music he included are his own compositions which you can download separately in mp3.

      These two September Clues films are something every conspiracy theorist, and those who wish to honestly debunk conspiracy theorists, need to see. Dishonest debunkers will of course keep slinging mud while failing to address the substance of Shack’s case for media fakery.

       
      • Mark Twang

        September 10, 2015 at 12:32 AM

        Toland.
        @ The music he included are his own compositions which you can download separately in mp3.

        Thanks Toland, for the info you provided. Is this music scary? wow. That was a dumb question. Do you think this music might be considered “scary” to anyone else, e.g. dishonest debunkers?

         
      • Henry

        September 10, 2015 at 1:24 AM

        I’m glad you found my recommendation worthwhile.

        Good point about the absence of voice-overs. As you say, it lets the evidence speak for itself. Someone with a propaganda agenda doesn’t forego an opportunity to use the prideful (and rapidly obsolescing) tricks of rhetorical persuasion. His silence does him credit.

        And I like that he composed his own score, awesome.

         
      • Les Moore

        September 10, 2015 at 3:15 AM

        Toland, Henry, Roger,
        @ Dishonest debunkers
        @ Someone with a propaganda agenda doesn’t forego an opportunity to use the prideful (and rapidly obsolescing) tricks of rhetorical persuasion. His silence does him credit.
        Oh but the joy of the insult seems as compelling as the art of the deal. Courtesy of, Donald Trump

         
    • henry

      September 11, 2015 at 12:02 AM

      “September Clues” is so mind blowing that I initially dismissed it as a an attempt to discredit the whole “truth movement”. Basically it said that all the footage that you have seen has come from the same source but different submitters. Each video clip seems to make sense by itself but they conflict with the other video clips. The aluminum nose cone of the plane cuts thru the steel structure of the tower without being deformed when it exited the building. In short, the 9/11 impacts were video events.

      Judy Wood’s theory about the ‘collapse’ of the towers is similarly mind blowing.

       
      • Henry

        September 11, 2015 at 1:28 AM

        I too dismissed the no-planes theory as preposterous at first, then I looked at the evidence. The case made by September Clues is such a slam-dunk that I haven’t seen anyone try to debunk it on the merits. Apparently the astroturfers running interference for the MSM figure they’re best off pretending Simon Shack’s films don’t even exist.

        Agreed about Judy Wood also, though her case is more scientific and thus not as instantly obvious.

         
      • henry

        September 11, 2015 at 9:42 AM

        Henry,

        Mary Todd Lincoln was put in an asylum for the insane several months after seeing a manipulated composite photograph of herself with a ghostly image of her dead husband looking down at her. She had no idea that a photograph could be faked. Today we see, in commercials, talking babies, cars driving up the sides of buildings, and dancing animals so we know that video can be manipulated but when all the ‘smart’ people say that a video is real, people accept it without thinking.

         
      • Toland

        September 11, 2015 at 8:25 PM

        I like where the news helicopter camera zooms in on the twin towers from a distant, then immediately a terror plane enters the frame and crashes into a tower. But when you roll the film back a few seconds, when the camera was still on wide angle covering tens of miles, the plane is nowhere to seen.

        Media fakery clearly busted. Great job, Simon.

         
      • Lex Mercatoria

        September 23, 2015 at 10:09 PM

        Judy Wood doesn’t believe her own story and supports it with bogus imagery. Its purpose appears to be to reinforce in people’s minds the notion that the story the media told is basically true, that the imagery is a reflection of reality. In internet terms, she and the rest of her ilk are “trolling” the public.

         
    • Lex Mercatoria

      September 23, 2015 at 10:04 PM

      You beat me to it, Henry. The September Clues documentary is *the* source re the 9/11 hoax. In short, 9/11 is a mix of Photoshopped images, composite video, CGI and disposable, 3rd-rate actors posing as “witnesses,” “survivors,” and “victims’ families.” The “victims” are computer created personnages, the portraits of which are the products of face morphing “Mr. Potato Head” software with their names generated by a computer algorithm. No authentic imagery of whatever actually happened that day (no doubt an ordinary controlled demolition) has surfaced in the public.

      Furthermore, the Clues forum is a valuable resource for media fakery research. The world as depicted by the media is an artificial reality construct intended to replace reality as you would perceive and experience it, i.e., it’s all a “show”, especially what’s peddled as “news”. They don’t report on world events so much as they create “events” which only exist in the media. The media is charged with creating and managing our perceptions of reality and the only real difference between the images and stories peddled as “news” vs “entertainment” is those two labels.

       
  4. Lando

    September 10, 2015 at 4:25 AM

    You really still think airplanes hit those towers on 911?
    get up with the play Alfred.

     
    • Lando

      September 10, 2015 at 4:26 AM

       
    • Adask

      September 10, 2015 at 5:14 AM

      I don’t know if airplanes hit those towers. I wasn’t there. I didn’t see the event. However, I’m inclined to believe that airplanes did hit the towers because they are may be scores of videos taken from a multitude of angles by a multitude of people that show the same event: the second tower being hit by an airplane. It’s conceivable that one or more of those videos might’ve been faked, but it’s virtually inconceivable that a multitude of videos were faked.

      More, there were a multitude of eye-witnesses who saw the “airplanes” and no one, to my knowledge, is claiming to have watched the towers at the right time but saw no airplanes.

      What I do know, or at least believe, is that it makes little difference whether the airplanes (real or illusory) hit or didn’t hit the towers because they could not have caused the towers to drop straight down. I am convinced that the dollars were imploded by the force of explosive planted within the towers long before the airplanes allegedly struck. The explosive were not illusory.

       
      • Lex Mercatoria

        September 23, 2015 at 10:20 PM

        Al,
        It would appear you assume these videos are recordings of an actual event taken by human beings wielding cameras. What “multitude” of eye witnesses do you speak of? The media stating there are many witnesses does not make it so. Perhaps you assume many “witnesses” exist because of the imagery you saw and the supporting stories told.

        As for the “explosives” I’d say you are accepting the imagery at face value. The “explosives” are indeed illusory because, as I stated in another post, no *authentic* imagery of whatever happened that day has surfaced in the public. Many of the images & videos are simply crops of each other, and there are few of them to begin with as opposed to the multitude there should be.

        No insights about a non-event can be gained from viewing fabricated videos, apart from the fact that said videos are fake.

         
  5. jody

    September 10, 2015 at 5:17 PM

    There are videos of firemen that day resting and stating there were explosive going off inside the buildings.I believe planes did hit the building , not piloted by arabs with box cutters . The power was turned off on a dozen floors of the towers ,and there was a group of Israelis working on the buildings , in the weeks leading up to the event. No power , no surveillance equiptment in operation . I took a lead abatement course for my business, about 50 miles north of NYC in 2005 ,and in the middle of the seminar , totally out of context the instructor looks across the room at me and says “: You know there was conspiracy about 9/11 ” I looked at him dumbfounded because I was still on board with the official story . Then his assistant says ” there still is ” Then the instructor goes on to tell me he was at the site and all the asbestos heat shielding had been removed from the steel columns. Dr Judy Wood Has the best explaination of how and why the towers were vaporized using ” Directed Free Energy ” In other words HAARP turned the buildings to dust . She has a 540 page book full of incontrovertible evidence and many interviews on the web discssing how the buildings would not have acted the way they did if brought down by the planes .. If you check the weather forecast for that day there was a hurricane headed up the east coast when it suddenly took a very unusual right hand turn away from NYC . HAARP could move a hurricane !

     
    • Fifee Tean Wheeler

      September 12, 2015 at 12:26 AM

      jody,
      @ I do not remember hearing anything about any of the passengers or their families on either of the planes that flew into to towers or the one that allegedly hit the pentagon

       
      • Fifee Tean Wheeler

        September 12, 2015 at 4:00 AM

        jody,
        @ “I do not remember hearing anything about any of the passengers or their families on either of the planes that flew into to towers or the one that allegedly hit the pentagon.”
        I believe I am correct when, originally, it was said by the news media, “those planes were filled with passengers, & flew several hundred miles away,BEFORE they did a 180 & returned to the twin towers. And as you, jody said, > “I do not remember hearing anything about any of the passengers or their families on either of the planes that flew into to towers or the one that allegedly hit the pentagon.” Strange, but I do not recall anything about any of the passengers or anything being said FROM the “surviving families” of those passengers eyethur. I wonder why? I did think one of two things. Those planes were either flown by remote control, OR, only pilots were on board.

         
  6. Truth Rules

    September 12, 2015 at 4:48 PM

    “The airplanes” were the side show,…redirect:

    Too Classified to Publish: Bush Nuclear Piracy Exposed
    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/05/20/too-classified-to-publish-bush-nuclear-piracy-exposed/

     
  7. Cathy Baldwin

    September 24, 2015 at 1:43 AM

    The Pentagon and field in Shanksville Penn. had no normal airplane debris. Unlike any airplane crash site ever documented, there were no realistic airplane debris evidence in either of these two locations.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s