|
Claims that the planes were flown into their targets by computer
Jim Hoffman and the Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice are among those who have said the Flight Management Computer Systems
on board Flights 11, 175 and 77 could have been loaded with a preset route that guided the planes to their targets.Boeing
has confirmed that this is possible.Hoffman claims that this is a more likely scenario than the mainstream account of the
hijackings of Flights 11, 175 and 77, and also of how Flight 77 performed the unusual spiral dive it made on its approach
to the Pentagon - a maneuver described as "hardly a problem for a 757" by website 911Review.com.He notes Flight
93 appears to be an exception, citing the high distribution of phone calls from Flight 93 compared to the other three flights.
Some theories suggest that, rather than having preset routes entered into the planes' on-board computers, the planes were
flown by remote control[citation needed]. The controllers of the planes may have been on the ground or, as in the "doomsday
plane" theory, in another aircraft. This theory argues that a blurry white object seen in the sky in videos of the World
Trade Center, was a plane containing the remote controller of Flights 11 and 175, and that an aircraft that flew away from
the Pentagon after that impact contained the remote controller of Flight 77.The aircraft at the Pentagon was later identified
as a E-4B National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) plane, a militarised version of a Boeing 747-200, taking part in the
Global Guardian exercise.
Claims relating to the hijackers
The BBC and the Daily Telegraph reported on September 23 that some of the people named as the hijackers by the FBI were
actually "alive and well".One of them was Waleed al-Shehri, who they said they had found in Casablanca, Morocco.
Abdulaziz Al Omari, Saeed Alghamdi, and Khalid al-Midhar, three other hijackers, were all said to be living in the Middle
East. On September 19, the FDIC distributed a "special alert" which listed al-Mihdhar as alive (the Justice Department
later said this was a typographical error). These reports have led to claims that the names of the hijackers may be incorrect,
or that the hijacking scenarios outlined in the 9/11 Commission Report may not be the truth.
All of the reports have since been acknowledged as cases of mistaken identity by the publications involved and by other
news organisations such as the New York Times. The BBC said that confusion may have arisen because the FBI names were common
Arabic and Islamic names.In 2002, Saudi Arabia asserted that the names of the hijackers were correct.
Attention has also been given to news reports that might indicate that the named hijackers were not typical Islamic extremists,
nor typical suicide terrorists[citation needed]. For example, Mohammad Atta reportedly ate pork, drank alcohol, gambled in
casinos and went to strip clubs.
Claims relating to the cell phone calls
Mathematician A.K. Dewdney, based on a study conducted in Canada in 2003, suggested that the chance of successful connections
for the number of cell phone calls made from the planes used in the 9/11 attacks "can only be described as infinitesimal".Based
on this, economist Michel Chossudovsky suggests that at least part of the 9/11 Commission Report chapter on the cell phone
conversations, is fabricated.According to the 9/11 Commission Report, 13 passengers from Flight 93 made a total of over 30
calls to both family and emergency personnel (twenty two confirmed air phone calls, two confirmed cell phone and eight undetermined).
There were reportedly three phone calls from Flight 11, five from Flight 175, and three calls from Flight 77 which American
Airlines later confirmed did not have airphones fitted; only two calls from these flights were recorded, placed by flight
attendants Madeleine Sweeney and Betty Ong on Flight 11. Various anomalies have been claimed relating to the nature of the
phone call transcripts.
Claims relating to the World Trade Center plane impacts
Some researchers have made the claim that no hijacked airliners hit the World Trade Center towers ('No Boeing Theories'
or 'No Plane Theories'). Supporters of this claim are known as "no-planers." According to "no-planers,"
live television, video and photographs that purport to show Boeing airliners on September 11th all had airplane images composited
into them. Many prominent members of the 9/11 Truth Movement have given critical attention to these claims.
The "no plane theory," promoted by internet-only videos like 911 Taboo, asserts that this shot of the second
impact, taken from a news helicopter, depicts a video composite of a Boeing 767 accidentally appearing from behind a layer
mask.
The "no plane theory," promoted by internet-only videos like 911 Taboo, asserts that this shot of the second
impact, taken from a news helicopter, depicts a video composite of a Boeing 767 accidentally appearing from behind a layer
mask.
Morgan Reynolds, former Labor Department chief economist, who admits that he is the "black sheep" of the 9/11
Truth Movement,believes that the Boeing planes of Flights 11 and 175 could not have impacted the Towers. He has proposed that
digital compositing was used to depict the plane crashes in both news reports and subsequent amateur video.
|
