Anyone read this? Original article can be found here. I love this X-Files shit.

***********************************************

Planes of 911 Exceeded Their Software Limits
Submitted by: Anonymous "
by Jim Heikkila
Saturday August 17, 2002

Two of the aircraft exceeded their software limits on 9/11.

The Boeing 757 and 767 are equipped with fully autonomous flight capability, they are the only two Boeing commuter aircraft capable of fully autonomous flight. They can be programmed to take off, fly to a destination and land, completely without a pilot at the controls.

They are intelligent planes, and have software limits pre set so that pilot error cannot cause passenger injury. Though they are physically capable of high g maneuvers, the software in their flight control systems prevents high g maneuvers from being performed via the cockpit controls. They are limited to approximately 1.5 g's, I repeat, one and one half g's. This is so that a pilot mistake cannot end up breaking grandma's neck.

No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature.

The plane that hit the Pentagon approached or reached its actual physical limits, military personnel have calculated that the Pentagon plane pulled between five and seven g's in its final turn.

The same is true for the second aircraft to impact the WTC.

There is only one way this can happen.

As well as fully autonomous flight capability, the 767 and 757 are the ONLY COMMUTER PLANES MADE BY BOEING THAT CAN BE FLOWN VIA REMOTE CONTROL. It is a feature that is standard to all of them, all 757's and 767's can do it. The purpose for this is if there is a problem with the pilots, Norad can fly the planes to safe destinations via remote. Only in this flight mode can those craft exceed their software limits and perform to their actual physical limits because a pre existing emergency situation is assumed if this mode of flight is used.

Terrorists in fact did not fly those planes, it is totally and completely impossible for those planes to have been flown in such a manner from the cockpit. Those are commuter aircraft, not F-16's and their software knows it.

Another piece of critical evidence: the voice recorders came up blank.

The flight recorders that were recovered had tape that was undamaged inside, but it was blank. There is only one way this can happen on a 757 or 767. When the aircraft are commandeered via remote control, the microphones that go to the cockpit voice recorder are re routed to the people doing the remote controlling, so that the recording of what happened in the cockpit gets made in a presumably safer place. But due to a glitch in the system on a 757/767, rather than shutting off when the mic is redirected the voice recorder keeps running. The voice recorders use what is called a continuous loop tape, which automatically re passes itself past the erase and record heads once every half hour, so after a half hour of running with the microphones redirected, the tape will be blank. Just like the recovered tapes were. Yet more proof that no pilot flew those planes in the last half hour.

Eight of the hijackers who were on those planes called up complaining that they were still alive. I'd bet you never heard about our foreign minister flying to Morocco and issuing an official apology to the accused, did you? No, terrorists did not fly those planes, plastic knives and box cutters were in fact too ridiculous to be true. Any of the remaining accused have certainly been sought out and killed by now.

Our information IS controlled

The cell phone calls from the aircraft could not have happened. I am a National Security Agency trained Electronic Warfare specialist, and am qualified to say this. My official title: MOS33Q10, Electronic Warfare Intercept Strategic Signal Processing/Storage Systems Specialist, a highly skilled MOS which requires advanced knowledge of many communications methods and circuits to the most minute level. I am officially qualified to place severe doubt that ordinary cell phone calls were ever made from the aircraft.

It was impossible for that to have happened, especially in a rural area for a number of reasons.

When you make a cell phone call, the first thing that happens is that your cell phone needs to contact a transponder. Your cell phone has a max transmit power of five watts, three watts is actually the norm. If an aircraft is going five hundred miles an hour, your cell phone will not be able to 1. Contact a tower, 2. Tell the tower who you are, and who your provider is, 3. Tell the tower what mode it wants to communicate with, and 4. Establish that it is in a roaming area before it passes out of a five watt range. This procedure, called an electronic handshake, takes approximately 45 seconds for a cell phone to complete upon initial power up in a roaming area because neither the cell phone or cell transponder knows where that phone is and what mode it uses when it is turned on. At 500 miles an hour, the aircraft will travel three times the range of a cell phone's five watt transmitter before this handshaking can occur. Though it is sometimes possible to connect during takeoff and landing, under the situation that was claimed the calls were impossible. The calls from the airplane were faked, no if's or buts.

I hope I made sense, if you have questions I will respond if possible. If I do not respond, please research this out yourself, search the boeing site, search the DARPA site, search were you have not searched before. Some of the information is classified and leaked by individuals, and it is also being scoured from the net. I have all of the original documents on my computer to safeguard against this.

Please do not ignore this, because only Norad has the flight codes for those aircraft, we did 911 to ourselves. Hitler had the Reichstag, we have 911. If 911 proves to not be enough to make the US citizenry set aside its rights for safety, the people who did 911 most certainly have access to nuclear material. 911 must be exposed for what it was before that material is used. "

---
100 pounds of shit in a 25 pound sack.

Don't forget that the Reptillions are controlling our government, there are dozens of towers in Alaska emitting ELF waves to dull us into submission, Art Bell is our saviour, and the earth is Hollow, with two holes in it that lead to Agrathia.

Oh, and the moon landing WAS faked.

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.

I, too, love this shit, and I've read variants of this one elsewhere.

Although a lot of the evidence was obviously planted (Arabic flight manuals at the airport; Atta's passport miraculously found intact two blocks from Ground Zero; a poorly-shot video of a guy who doesn't look anything like bin Laden 'fessing up to the whole thing), it's pretty far-fetched to suggest someone other than Muslim nutters were responsible. The authorities would be too worried about being found out to do something like that themselves.

If you want sinister theories, I reckon a more plausible one is that, as with Pearl Harbor, the government knew it was going to happen and just chose not to prevent it.

As a side note, it's funny how the meaning of "conspiracy" seems to have changed after the Kennedy assassination. I thought a conspiracy was just a bunch of people plotting together - so if we take the view that a gang of foreign terrorists were behind it, that's a conspiracy theory too.

I would suggest to Mr. Heikkila that aluminum foil makes a lovely hat, and it screens out the government's mind control rays.

Well, half of what's on the net is pure crap, and half of the remainder is forged. So one of his sources of information carries 25% credibility with me. Which still puts it somewhere above "classified and leaked by individuals."

---
"You'll burn for this. Burn in jail!"

And furthermore, how come nobody is addressing this conspiracy:

---
"You'll burn for this. Burn in jail!"

quote:

---

Don't forget that the Reptillions are controlling our government, there are dozens of towers in Alaska emitting ELF waves to dull us into submission, Art Bell is our saviour, and the earth is Hollow, with two holes in it that lead to Agrathia.

Oh, and the moon landing WAS faked.

---

I could only get a bit of the way through that waste of screen before I had to give up. 1.5G limit?! That would prevent just about any emergency maneuvers. Regardless, the 757 and 767 do not have computers capable of limiting the plane's maneuvering capability (ground avoidance systems only alert the pilot--they don't actually control the plane). Unlike the 777, which is Boeing's only "fly by wire" plane, 757s and 767s are still controlled through mechanical means--cables and pulleys. "Autopilot" merely means that the plane's altitude, heading, and speed may be controlled through an onboard control panel. There's nothing built into such systems that allows remote control. At any rate, 757s and 767s autopilot systems are not robust enough to execute high-g maneuvers.

Even though the 777 has extensive autonomous systems (the computer can fly the plane to a destination, land, or perform emergency maneuvers, but it cannot make the plane take off), the pilot can still override those systems at any time. Airbus planes, on the other hand, do not allow the pilot to override their autonomous collision avoidance systems and they are limited to 2.5G manual maneuvers. None of the planes involved in 9/11 were 777s or Airbus planes, anyway, of course.

In short, the author of that drivel doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

---
"And Wirthling isn't worth the paper he isn't printed on."

There *are* some undocumented "conspiracy" thoughts that I'd like to put forth. Refute them if you wish, but they still bug the CRAP outta me.

First off, and I know this has been addressed, but the planes hit the TOP of the building, but the whole building(s) fell.
Secondly, the manner in which the buildings fell is more consistent of a demolition crew skillfully detonating them so they fall straight down into themselves than an object of great speed slamming into them. You'd kinda expect them to topple, but as far as I could tell, they fell straight down, in a manner which is even more perfect than a demolished building. This is further made freaky by the fact that not just one fell like this, but three.
Third, and relating to two, and in ways to one, a THIRD building, which was NOT hit by planes at all fell, just the same way as the two towers. This fucking bothered me from the moment I first saw it (even while the panick of being drafted and seeing nuclear war was echoing through my mind). Okay, understandably, perhaps the flames "melted" (actually, SHATTERED it, since steel shatters) the steel framework. Perhaps it went all the way down and caused enough structural destruction (heh) that the buildings fell. This still doesn't explain the VERY even falling of all three buildings (until, of course, the top hit the ground and fell forward, mainly because there wasn't equal mass to hold it up on all sides, two sides were blown out, and one much more than the other. Not even a very gifted destruction expert can keep a big hole from making a building topple at the end).

Oh well, refute as you will.

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.

That's right, the third building, I forgot all about that one, dammit. Was it even mentioned after 9/11?

The way the buildings fell WAS a bit fucking absurd, but then to suggest that thousands of people were working in a building packed with explosives is a bit much. Although (I'm just typing as I think here) there WASN'T an explosion, at least not one visible from the cameras, and I haven't heard any witnesses say so, is there a way to bring down a building, uh, quietly?

---
Dad was flammable

The way the buildings fell was not absurd at all. The planes did not hit the TOP(s) of the buildings. They hit far enough down that this could happen: The fire destroyed the structure, and the top umpteen stories collapsed on the rest, smashing it like a hammer. It was calculated and quite straightforward. Demolition experts have commented publicly about it, and I've mentioned it to DX, though he doesn't seem interested.

I suppose it's possible that explosives could have been planted in the WTC, in addition to the speeding jumbo jets loaded with fuel, but why bother? The jets made terrific bombs all by themselves.

As for other buildings that were damaged, one that even collapsed: When you knock down two 110 story buildings, you expect some structural damage to surrounding structures.

Nothing to see here, folks. If you think the likes of Colin Powell and GW Bush would plot to knock down the WTC and blow up the Pentagon, then I've got some exclusive Loch Ness Monster pics to sell you. Those guys are into blowing up other countries' civilian targets, not ours.

Yes, certain facts are going unmentioned, but they have to do with how US policy has made certain enemies around the world. There's a conspiracy of sorts, but it has more to do with journalistic servility and cowardice than secret NORAD technology.

---
What others say about boorite!

Just for clarity: The reason that they didn't topple over sideways is that it was not the impact of the jets that knocked down the buildings. This should be obvious, since the buildings took a while to fall down. What happened was that the fire melted the steel girders, and the top of the building fell in on the rest.

If you doubt that fire can melt a steel girder, let me tell you that I've seen it happen with an ordinary garage fire. A friend of mine was restoring a Ford Galaxy, and he got it running one day and wanted to let it run awhile, and so he went off to mow the lawn. When he checked back, the car was on fire. In short order, it melted the big steel support beam in the garage ceiling.

My bike was parked in that garage. The alloy wheels were totally gone without a trace. So were the handlebars. There was something left of the frame.

Fire, dude. It's awesome. Ask any firefighter.

Which brings me to a point: Firefighters having died en masse in the WTC disaster, the entire nation's firefighting apparatus has paid more than a little attention to the events of 9/11, and we haven't heard any conspiracy theories from them. Are they all in on it? Or do they just not understand fire?

---
What others say about boorite!

quote:

---

Although a lot of the evidence was obviously planted (Arabic flight manuals at the airport; Atta's passport miraculously found intact two blocks from Ground Zero; a poorly-shot video of a guy who doesn't look anything like bin Laden 'fessing up to the whole thing)

---

Meh.
Still would have been bending the steel to one side, causing a difference in weight dispersal.
And what makes you think the firefighters even knew about any "conspiracy"? I'm not saying there is one. I'm just saying that something doesn't feel right.

And that third building is still unexplained to me.

I'm sorry, but I've seen botched up building destructions that fell to the side, and they were much more stable (wider and lower).

I don't know if it fits in anywhere, but the Oklahoma bombing didn't knock down the whole building, but it blew a HUGE chunk out of it. Granted, this is likely inapplicable to the new situation, but I thought it might be something to include.

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.

And as much as I despised Gore, I don't care for Bush a whole lot either.
Anyway, I don't think HE would have jumped in front of the plane. He would have had his agents do it for him. X)

And the thing that always confuses me is people saying the president wouldn't do this, or the president wouldn't do that. The president isn't GOD. The president is a figurehead. People working under the president do this and that.

So hrmph.
I bored with theories.
I wanna watch "The Truth Behind 911" again. Tat movie was a riot.

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.

quote:

---

Meh.
Still would have been bending the steel to one side, causing a difference in weight dispersal.

---

quote:

---

Still would have been bending the steel to one side, causing a difference in weight dispersal.

---

Ya know, there's something fishy to me about the "dropping of the atomic bomb" on Hiroshima. I mean, we've seen what special effects can do and the Japanese are very proficient at making disaster movies, as we all know. I've seen dozens of fireworks ignited and none of them resembled the type of explosions that supposedly occurred in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Isn't it possible that the Japanese faked this "atomic explosion" because they knew they were going to lose and had to save face when surrendering? They also knew that appearing to suffer such a calamity would get them a great deal of sympathy. It worked, too. See how far they've come thanks to the help of the American government that helped rebuild their country? No doubt, the U.S. took credit for the "atomic bomb" because they wanted to scare the Russkis. I don't think "atomic bombs" even exist, because, I mean, come on--atoms are very tiny and these supposed explosions they cause are HUGE. That just doesn't seem right to me.

Gee, this is fun.

---
"And Wirthling isn't worth the paper he isn't printed on."

And the attack on Pearl Harbor is fishy, too. If you stare really really closely at archived footage for a long time, you start seeing "USA" printed on the sides of the "Japanese" aircraft. And we're supposed to believe that a bunch of nearsighted, bucktoothed Japs in their chintzy rackjobber toy aircraft could sink a whole US fleet? Please! FDR was behind the whole thing. He did it so Congress would line up lockstep behind his program of lima bean subsidies. Lima beans are the key, I tell you.

---
What others say about boorite!

Sorry. I get carried away, playing devil's advocate.

Sometimes I actually start believing shit, mainly because of my refusal to believe what's presented to me all my life.

I think it all started when I found out about Santa.

No, seriously. My lack of trust in established belief stems from early childhood disillusionment. My faith was further beaten down by finding all the pagan roots of many religions, learning how little relative saftey this country has (as opposed to what I thought as a kid), and all the lies I was told all through high school taught as truths. The worst is when a teacher actually teaches an urban legend as true. It taught me that even teachers aren't infallable, and they can be led astray.

It really sucks living in a world of lies.

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.

Well, at least there is one thing we can all believe in--I suck.

---
"And Wirthling isn't worth the paper he isn't printed on."

I hear you, DX. Conspiracy theories are actually an expected result of the info fog we have in the US media. We know something isn't being said, that something is missing, and so we fill in the blanks with all kinds of whatnot. Which winds up making the whole picture even foggier.

The cool thing is that the major scandals and conspiracies are right out in the open. Take Washington's insistence on immunity from prosecution for war crimes. So do we need secret evidence to say Washington considers itself above international law? I don't think so.

---
What others say about boorite!

I saw one of those nifty Discovery channel specials on blowing up buildings. The one they were taking down was pretty hefty, but nowhere near the size of the world trade center. They spent months getting this thing ready. First they gutted the entire building and got rid of everything that wasn't nailed down. Then they started getting rid of things that were nailed down. They actually used a crane to lift a Bobcat with a big ass jackhammer on the front up into the structure where they used it to strategically take out load bearing walls. They also had all the steel cables strung all over the place to make sure all the forces went where they wanted and didn't shoot out the side of the building. Then when they started stringing the explosives, they spent days doing it. Each charge was set into place, then they'd build a big plywood box around it so that it wouldn't get damaged by debris. The charges were set up to go off at slight intervals instead of all at once and they didn't want any of the later ones getting fucked up by the earlier ones blowing up.

So as best I can tell, it takes a ridiculous amount of know-how to get a building to fall down when and where you want it, not to mention lots of manpower, time and money.

I'd wager that the terrorists probably didn't even know what the hell was going to happen. Obviously lots of people were going to buy it and chaos would erupt, but just imagine their buddies sitting around watching the news the same as us. They were probably all jumping around laughing and giving each other high fives, and then the building actually fell down. They probably shit their pants with glee. 'We only thought there was going to be a big hole! Score!'

---
100 pounds of shit in a 25 pound sack.

A lot of people were saying they must have known to hit the WTC towers just low enough so that the weight of the top would collapse the whole thing like a house of cards. You're right that demolishing a building takes scrupulous planning-- but that's doing it the right way, without quite so much smoke and fire and collateral damage.

I do think the terrorists had certain grievances besides just hating American culture or whatever, but the thought of anyone high-fiving over a catastrophe like this is just sickening.

---
What others say about boorite!

If Bush was prepared to do that, he doesn't count as remotely evil in my book.

He'd sacrifice his own life in order to prevent a massacre which, as you accept, pushed his approval ratings skyward and gave him an excuse to do whatever his backers want? Why would he do this? I'm no historian, but I have great difficulty thinking of a single instance ever where a government has been so altruistic. If Dubya would have done this, then as heads of government go, he's a total saint. In fact, forget that - few people would be willing to sacrifice so much for strangers. We saw some of these few in the NYFD on the day. I suspect you would be unwilling to elevate Dubya to the same moral plane.

I don't see why you have to be overly cynical or paranoid to accept that the government may have known this was going to happen. There's enough historical precedence to suggest it's at least feasible. Meanwhile, I'd say that you have to be pretty naive to accept that the passport of the lead hijacker could possibly have survived.

Mind you, the theories about the buildings falling the wrong way are getting a bit desperate.

Oh, I don't regularly read The Guardian, but that was an interesting article.

Well, prepare to be sickened by the UK government, then, because that's exactly what they were doing. I'm sure you're not unfamiliar with Jo Moore...

Y'know, Jesus was born in that area, and he was a carpenter. Who better to know how to bring down a building than someone who put one up?
IT WAS ALL JESUS' FAULT!

We all know that the Vatican is the superchurch predicted in the bible!
And Whil Weaton, Wesley Crusher himself, is the anticrhist!
And of course, eveyone and his mother knows when the world will end, even them Mayans knew!

Heh, funny. They didn't know they were all gonna die, did they?

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.