Aidan Monaghan: Missing 911 Black Box Numbers

The article below points to another bit of evidence (or the lack of it) suggesting that no large passenger planes (or any planes at all) crashed anywhere in the US on 9/11/01, certainly not in NYC, the Pentagon or Shankesville, PA. One can add this to the growing body of the lack of evidence that any planes were employed by that day's terrorists (none of whom were Muslim).

For example: not one bit of independently verified wreckage has been produced; none of the alleged hijackers' names were on the passenger lists; the physics of planes crashing through buildings, leaving an outline of their shape and then disappearing without a trace is simply impossible, and much more.

The two best articles I'm aware of on the subject are Gerard Holmgren,'s "Manufactured Terrorism – The Truth About Sept 11," (2004, revised 2006). www.911closeup.com/index.shtml?ID=51; (suitable for 9/11-101 --see below) and Morgan Reynolds, "We Have Some Holes in the Plane Stories," (March 2006). http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=we_have_holes (also come to think of it, suitable for 9/11-101)

My own essay summarizing their findings can be found at: http://desip.igc.org/NoPlanesOn911.html#note2

Warning/Disclaimer: If the evidence suggesting controlled demolition of the WTC towers and the lack of evidence of a large passenger plane crashing at the Pentagon and in PA can be said to be 9/11 -101, the No Planes Theory is post graduate level research due to the effectiveness of the fake videos of the plane crashing into the second tower at the WTC.

It's difficult to get past the bemused incredulity of most people, even so called 911 Truth people, on the subject. Nor is it clear that the truth will ever come out, vide JFK, RFK, MLK and so on. Many of us know the truth, or perhaps more accurately, No Planers like myself have looked closely at the evidence and are perfectly comfortable with our truth, but since there is virtually no prospect of accountability, we all remain effectively imprisoned deep inside of the official story, despite the widespread awareness of the power of computer generated imagery (CGI) and the long and deep history by now of the ruthless viciousness of the Bush-Cheney regime.
Ronald
***

9/11 Aircraft 'Black Box' Serial Numbers Mysteriously Absent
http://911blogger.com/node/14081


by Aidan Monaghan

Of all major U.S. airline crashes within the U.S. investigated and published by the National Transportation Safety Board during the past 20 years, the 9/11 'black boxes' are virtually the only ones without listed serial numbers.

NTSB American Airlines flight 77 flight data recorder report, not noting a device serial number:

http://www.911myths.com/AAL77_fdr.pdf

NTSB United Airlines flight 93 flight data recorder report, not noting a device serial number:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc04.pdf

The United States government alleges that 4 registered Boeing commercial passenger aircraft were used in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, yet has failed to produce any physical evidence collected from the 3 9/11 crash scenes positively tied to these federally registered United and American airlines aircraft. Despite the release of abundant information regarding the 9/11 flights and the aircraft reportedly used, specific information that would confirm official allegations regarding the identity of these aircraft has been mysteriously withheld or denied upon request.

The federally registered aircraft reportedly used during the 9/11 attacks:

- American Airlines flight 11 (N334AA), United Airlines flight 175 (N612UA), American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA) and United Airlines flight 93 (N591UA).

With flight data recorder serial number data that is virtually always provided within NTSB reports of major U.S. commercial airline crashes that occur within U.S. territory, one can trace an installed device to a particular registered aircraft through manufacturer or Federal Aviation Administration records.

The following e-mail was provided by a Susan Stevenson of the NTSB on 12/26/2007, in response to a 12/16/2007 public correspondence e-mail inquiry:

"Yes. NTSB investigators rarely encounter a scenario when the identification of an accident aircraft is not apparent. But during those occasions, investigators will record serial numbers of major components, and then contact the manufacturer of those components in an attempt to determine what aircraft the component was installed upon."

A 11/26/2007 Freedom of Information Act request of the Federal Aviation Administration for the last known serial numbers of the flight data recorders and other components contained by the aircraft said to have been used during the 9/11 attacks, was unlawfully denied.

Background:

http://www.911blogger.com/node/13149

A 1/3/2008 e-mail reply from a Loren Cochran, a FOIA specialist with the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, regarding the FAA FOIA denial reads as follows:

[Read more; http://911blogger.com/node/14081 ]

Video: It was a missile, not a "plane" which hit the South Tower

Sam has a good point. You might want to run and catch these videos while they're still hot. It's actually 3 nine minute plus videos. The first two are the explosive ones. (The third, mostly on the Pentagon I didn't find very helpful although there are some good shots of the lack of plane wreckage at Shanksville.)

The second video shows that it was a missile that struck the South Tower, the second hit, the one where we were shown a "plane" which is very nicely exposed here as a CGI image. Critics will say that it's not clear that it's a missile. It could be something quite harmless. That's true. It's evidence, not proof. But I would ask them: would they rather be on the side of the prosecutor or the defense trying Bush and Cheney for treason with this evidence? The video also shows how the puppetmasters realizing their mistake, erased evidence of the missile with later copies of the same video, but to do that, they also had to erase the Jersey coastline.

Other notable moments from the first two videos were when the producers showed us how the CGI images of a plane were managed. They got video of the Twin Towers from a mile or two from the North taken from a helicopter, and into that video they later inserted the CGI image of a plane going into the South Tower. Also nicely shown in the two videos are the use of a blank screen at a moment when the bad guys noticed that a critical image had to be hidden.

Viewers will note that these videos are fodder for the tiny but hopefully growing No Planes subsection of 911 Truth.
Ronald
http://desip.igc.org
***



http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/108.html


Sam wrote:
The light is shining on this. Shine more light if you wish, by "spreading the light".
Maybe you should view this soon, as it may disappear.
Sam


Brasscheck TV: Explosive new 9/11 evidence

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/108.html


Brasscheck TV
Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 3:55 AM
To: Sam

Sam,

Three days ago, the 40th anniversary
of the cold-blooded ambush and massacre
of crew members of the USS Liberty by
the Israeli military went unnoticed and
unreported.

It's a testiment to the power of media
manipulation...making "inconvienient"
facts disappear.

Sometimes, instead of making facts
disappear media manipulation requires
creating images of things that never
happened.

Shocking and convincing new evidence of
video image manipulation of what was
supposed to be "live" footage on 9/11:

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/108.html

- Brasscheck

P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV videos
and e-mails with your friends and colleagues.
That's how we grow. Thanks.

Brasscheck TV
2380 California St.
San Francisco, CA 94115


Check out Sam Butler's commissioned web site http://www.ideasfree.org
Sam Butler's permanent e-mail address is samjcr@pobox.com

Brasscheck TV: Clues to 911 as an inside job

This short video is well worth watching. It's more circumstantial evidence that there were early, incredibly early attempts to spin the story towards what would become the official story.

This evidence is likely to be most interesting to those already convinced that the official story cannot be true. It may also be helpful if not decisive for those still looking for answers to many unanswered questions. For those firmly entrenched into the official version -- well, they're used to explaining much stronger stuff away.

After you watch the video you may be interested to see below that Google (which has apparent CIA connections) quickly removed this popular video from their video site and apparently didn't allow YouTube to host this video.

Item: See my No Planes article for my quibble about Brasscheck's claim below about the supposed air defense stand down. If there were no planes, there was no need for a stand down. And if there was controlled demolition there was no need for planes to crash into the buildings. The planes story was just a distraction.

Ronald
http://desip.igc.org
PS. For those interested in more very informative videos like this one, check out the brasscheck site below.



The 9/11 Solution: The big clue everyone missed
www.brasschecktv.com


9 min 43 sec - Jan 27, 2007
Average rating: (18 ratings)
Description: A very specific and measurable program to manipulate public opinion began within minutes of the September 11 attacks. Many "myths" about what happened on 9/11 were presented as facts by the US mass media long before anyone could have possibly had the information or done the research to verify them. This indicates that in addition to arranging for air defense to fail on 9/11, the conspirators also took care to prepare cover stories well in advance of the attacks and had the means to have these cover stories aired on the major networks while perceptions of the situation were still fluid. This video is based on news footage that appeared within just a few hours (and sometimes just a few minutes) of the initial attacks. Most of these clips were aired once never to be seen again. They offer support to the hypothesis that the 9/11 attacks were very specifically anticipated by elements within US intelligence and the military.


Want to see more cool videos?
Go to video.google.com/

Think you have an even cooler video?
Add it at video.google.com/videouploadform

If you're having trouble watching the video, try copying the following URL into your browser:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3074561005024763960&pr=goog-sl



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The 9/11 Solution

The big clue everyone missed

How the key 9/11 myths were implanted


Two major 9/11 anomalies have been thoroughly documented, specifically:

1) The stand down of US air defense on the morning of 9/11 that permitted commercial jet aircraft to fly erratically and in restricted air space without challenge

2) Overwhelming physical evidence that World Trade Center buildings #1, #2, and #7 were brought down by controlled demolition

A third significant anomaly has not been discussed, let alone acknowledged: the reporting by the major US TV news networks in the first few hours immediately after the attacks.

Specifically:

1. MSNBC presented an elaborately detailed story about the lifestyle and anti-US philosophy of Osama bin Laden - while both towers were still burning and long before Bin Laden had been accused by anyone.

2. Fox News featured a "man in the street" eye witness who explained in strangely formal language the science behind why the towers collapsed when most engineers and firemen were utterly baffled and in shock by what had just taken place.

3. CBS featured a Bush administration insider (and not identified as such) as a guest who actively worked to dissuade Dan Rather (and viewers) from speculating that there must have been explosive charges placed in the buildings for them to have collapsed the way they did.

How was it that these stories - based on no fact, no research and no inquirry - appeared in full blown form so quickly on US news networks and then became part of the core myths of what happened on 9/11?

Were these stories prepared in advance?

There's an old intelligence saying that "once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, but three times is enemy action."

Because most of these clips ran only once and were not repeated after they'd done their job, it made it difficult, if not impossible, for viewers to analyze them critically.

Now, thanks to the magic of video tape and a few people who immediately started taping the news after the attacks, we have this important evidence that at the very least these attacks appear to have been anticipated and prepared for by forces that have the ability to exert strong influence over the output of the newsrooms of major US news networks.

See the complete catalog of
free Brasscheck TV videos