A Little Known Fact About the 9/11 Planes

I LOVED Anthony's "This is an Orange" and now, here's another fantastic piece from him.
Please forward far and wide in order to wake up more!!
And let's THANK Salem-News.com. ;O)

Email Salem-News.com:
Newsroom: newsroom@salem-news.com
http://salem-news.com/pages/Contact_Salem-News.php


Views of flight 175 Courtesy: bollyn.com

Mar-18-2010 14:21
A Little Known Fact About the 9/11 Planes
Anthony Lawson for Salem-News.com

Another seriously undeniable flaw in the 'official' 9/11 story.
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/march182010/911-planes-al.php

(BANGKOK) - Extract: ...it would be a remarkable irony, and quite possibly a unique circumstance in the annals of American jurisprudence, if the assumptions used as reasons for launching wars against two sovereign nations, as well as the more generalised 'War on Terror' would not stand up as evidence in either a criminal prosecution or a civil damages suit in an American court of law.

It is not a theory but a fact—one that is well known within the 9/11 truth movement—that the 9/11 Commission failed to ensure that at least one of the appropriate government agencies: the NTSB, the FBI or the FAA was commissioned to positively identify the aircraft which were allegedly involved in the murders of nearly 3,000 people, on September 11, 2001.

One does not need to be a Harvard Law School graduate to know that the first and most important requirement in any murder investigation is to determine the cause of death, which often leads to a requirement to identify, and trace to its origins, a murder weapon, or, in the case of 9/11: weapons. And there can be no doubt that each of the four planes which were allegedly hijacked on the morning 9/11 was posited as being a murder weapon, by the U.S. administration and the 9/11 Commission, yet there is absolutely nothing which firmly connects the four allegedly-hijacked planes to any of the 9/11 crash sites.

In fact it is not fanciful to suggest that if a lawyer, even of a far lower calibre than that of an Alan Dershowitz, were engaged to defend the airport security companies that allegedly allowed 19 box-cutter-carrying Arabs to get onto those planes, he would immediately call for the dismissal of such an action on the grounds that the planes which allegedly hit the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the one which crashed near Shanksville had never been forensically identified as the planes which, allegedly, had been hijacked that morning.

And such a motion could not possibly be denied, as I will explain.

The planes in question were alleged to have been: American Airlines flight 11 (Tail Number: N334AA), North Tower; United Airlines flight 175 (N612UA), South Tower; American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA), the Pentagon, and United Airlines flight 93 (N591UA), which supposedly crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. But the truth is that they could well have been different planes that had arrived on the scenes from quite different locations, because the crash debris recovered from those four crash sites has never been forensically linked to the planes that allegedly took off from Logan International, Boston; Dulles International, Washington and Newark International, New Jersey, and which were, allegedly, hijacked shortly thereafter. Therefore they cannot possibly be linked, without a reasonable doubt, to breaches of security at those airports.

So, it would be a remarkable irony, and quite possibly a unique circumstance in the annals of American jurisprudence, if the assumptions used as reasons for launching wars against two sovereign nations, as well as the more generalised 'War on Terror' would not stand up as evidence in either a criminal prosecution or a civil damages suit in an American court of law.

Air-crash investigations in the United States are normally carried out by the NTSB's air accident investigation division, and there are several documentary television series featuring this government agency's painstaking approach when investigating the causes of air crashes. During many such investigations, serial numbers from recovered parts are cross checked with the airline-in-question's purchase and maintenance records, to try and identify the reason for an accident, when it is suspected that mechanical failure may have been the cause.

However the NTSB has confirmed that—apparently for the first time from its inception, in 1967, since when it has investigated more than 124,000 other aviation accidents—it took no part in investigating any of the air crashes which occurred on September 11, 2001. So the world has been asked to take it on faith and hearsay that the four planes involved were normal scheduled flights which were hijacked by Arab terrorists, some of whom, are, allegedly, still alive.

Even more disturbing is the fact that documentation exists, and is available on the Internet, which indicates that the FBI, backed up by a separate letter from the Justice Department has refused to release any information, under the Freedom of Information Act, about any debris recovered from the crash sites, including the serial number of the "Black Box" Cockpit Flight Data Recorder allegedly found near the alleged crash site of United Airlines Flight 93. It may be recalled that a transcript taken from this recorder formed the basis for several TV dramas and one Academy-Award winning feature film.

By no means finally, but just as disturbing, the core of a jet engine, which can been seen in several 9/11 videos falling out of the northern face of the WTC's South Tower, and which hit a building on its way down, and was photographed and videoed—in the presence of FBI personnel and at least one FBI vehicle—where it came to rest at the junction of Church and Murray streets, was later photographed, prior to its burial in a land fill on Staten Island. So much for what murder investigators are usually so concerned about: The chain of custody and preservation of important evidence, pending its identification.

The events of 9/11 had consequences far beyond the destruction of life and property in the United States; they were the reasons for the launching of three wars. Yet it is obvious that a leader writer of an influential newspaper, the Washington Post, could not spare the time to look into such a serious matter—one that people with far fewer resources than he or she has access to have managed to do—before launching a scathing attack on a member of the Japanese parliament and the world-wide 9/11 truth movement, in general.

Just because the 9/11 Commission did not do its job properly is no excuse for newspaper writers not to do theirs. Unless, of course, newspapers such as the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times are playing a conscious role in a conspiracy to prevent the truth about these events from surfacing. In which case their editors and owners would almost certainly be guilty of misprision of felony.

I would like to stress that the identity of the planes is not the only reason why the 9/11 Commission's findings should be regarded as invalid, and its members found guilty, at the very least, of gross oversights in the collection of the evidence which was used in the writing of its Final Report. Even a cursory look at the visual evidence of the collapsing World Trade Center's Twin Towers and WTC 7 should have instilled grave doubts about the findings of some of the experts from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST.

But, for my money, the real smoking guns were, and still are, the four aircraft that were used as weapons on that terrible day, and for them not to have been identified breaks every rule in any book which seeks to teach the art of solving crimes.

============================================

Anthony Lawson is a retired international-prize-winning commercials director, cameraman, ad-agency creative director and voice over. He used to be known for shooting humorous commercials, but doesn't find much to laugh about, with the way the world is going, these days.

After recovering from the shock of seeing the Twin Towers collapse, on subsequent showings, I developed a strong feeling that what I was seeing and what I was being told were quite different things. For two such buildings to collapse, in the manner they did, solely because they had been hit by large aircraft, did not make sense. The collapses were too uniform. If aircraft impacts were the cause, at least one of the buildings should have fallen over. I subsequently made a video called "WTC7 -- This is an Orange" to express my concern that the public was not being told the truth about 9/11.
==============================

9/11 Truth Australia

Superb article

"the NTSB has confirmed that—apparently for the first time from its inception, in 1967, since when it has investigated more than 124,000 other aviation accidents—it took no part in investigating any of the air crashes which occurred on September 11, 2001. So the world has been asked to take it on faith and hearsay"

95% of Flight 93?

Wasn't 95% of Fight 93 recovered? And from all that we still don't have a positive ID on this plane? Not one part with a serial number or tail number? They either have it or never released any of the evidence. A sad, sad, fact indeed.

peace all

dtg
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear."
-- Douglas MacArthur

I think "THEY" say 95% Recovered

which could be very easy since it all went into the ready-made hole in the ground. (BS)

Engine

I guess the engine mentioned in the article (from the north tower) is still buried on Staten Island?

And this is actually a real, serious blow to those

planehuggers at the Pentagon!

If AA77 crashed in there as they claim, it was SO EASY to identify the aircraft!!!!!
But they never did.

Perhaps that's the reason why this post didn't make it to the front NEWS but sits on Blog page only.

Also, other posts get "...'s blog / 12 comments / 12 new comments / Read more" display but this one has got no "NEW" display i.e. " Aus911Truth's blog / 4 comments / Read more" ...

Thanks, at least they approved it though, after a long wait.
Longer than some newly posted articles, I noticed cause I kept looking.
=================================
9/11 Truth Australia
http://aus911truth.blogspot.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Aus911Truth
September 11th was an Inside Job!
http://www.youtube.com/aftertruth
SOLUTION
http://aus911truth.blogspot.com/2009/11/solution.html

Yup.

Yup.

NTSB

Is it strictly true that the NTSB played no part in the investigation of the plane impacts, or is it more correct to say that their investigation was controlled by the FBI, as expected given that the crashes were all crimes? Clearly if controlled by the FBI their hands would be tied and any criticism of the investigation should be sheeted home to the FBI rather than the NTSB.

For example:
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/02/ntsb-turns-austin-cr...

Check out some more of Lawson's talent

For those of you who enjoyed Lawson's This is an Orange, you will almost definitely enjoy this piece of Lawson's film making talent.

This is a commercial I directed for the Sunday Times, in the great days of Harold Evans, who has rightly been called Britain's greatest post-war editor. No newspaper, before or since, has achieved such greatness, but with his eye firmly on what mattered, with regard to incisively honest reporting and investigative journalism, Mr Evans, now Sir Harold, was not averse to approving commercials which showed a definite lighter side to his stewardship. This one was chosen for inclusion in an exhibition called Ten Years of Great British Advertising, put on at the Victoria and Albert Museum in South Kensington, London. It also won a string of British and international awards.

Its a copy n paste job, but

Its a copy n paste job, but somewhat relevant. Take it for what its worth.

VERY STRANGE 9.11 AIRCRAFT REGISTRATIONS

Posted By: RMNewsMailbag
Date: Wednesday, 5-Jul-2006 15:38:55 Here are some very strange findings regarding the paper-fate of the four aircraft that went "missing" on 9/11. The following info is copied directly from www.planecrashinfo.com . You're free to verify the data yourself if you want to do the homework. I did...

11 Sep 2001 New York City, New York

United Air Lines
Boeing B-767-222
N612UA 65/65
11 Sep 2001 New York City, New York

American Airlines
Boeing 767-223ER
N334AA 92/92
11 Sep 2001 Arlington, Virginia.

American Airlines
Boeing B-757-223
N644AA 64/64
11 Sep 2001 Shanksville, Pennsylvania

United Air Lines
Boeing B-757-222
N591UA 44/44

It shows the four flights of 9/11, including tail numbers and crash information on the links. The information below is copied directly from the Federal Aviation Administration's N-number registry

The first plane listed is American Airlines Flight 11, tail number N334AA,
which crashed into the WTC North Tower. Note reason for cancellation, and
cancel date.

FAA Registry
N-Number Inquiry Results

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

N334AA is Deregistered

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description
Serial Number 22332 Type Registration
Corporation Manufacturer Name BOEING Certificate Issue Date
01/06/2000 Model 767-223 Mode S Code 50722254 Year
Manufacturer 1987 Cancel Date 01/14/2002 Reason for
Cancellation Destroyed Exported To

Next is American Flight 77, tail number N644AA, which hit the Pentagon.
Please note the same details, reason for cancellation and cancellation date.

FAA Registry
N-Number Inquiry Results

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

N644AA is Deregistered

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description
Serial Number 24602 Type Registration
Corporation Manufacturer Name BOEING Certificate Issue Date
05/08/1991 Model 757-223 Mode S Code 52072030 Year
Manufacturer 1991 Cancel Date 01/14/2002 Reason for
Cancellation Destroyed Exported To

Next is United Flight 175, tail number N612UA, which hit the South Tower
of the WTC. Please note the same details.

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description
Serial Number 21873 Type Registration
Corporation Manufacturer Name BOEING Certificate Issue Date
01/18/1984 Model 767-222 Mode S Code 51773757 Year
Manufacturer 1983 Cancel Date 09/28/2005 Reason for
Cancellation Cancelled Exported To

Hmmm. What? Cancelled registration on 9/28/05? Not destroyed and
deregisterd in early 2002? What about the last flight, United Flight 93,
tail number N591UA, the one that allegedly crashed near Shanksville,
Pennsylvania.

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1

Aircraft Description
Serial Number 28142 Type Registration
Corporation Manufacturer Name BOEING Certificate Issue Date
07/01/1996 Model 757-222 Mode S Code 51721341 Year
Manufacturer 1996 Cancel Date 09/28/2005 Reason for
Cancellation Cancelled Exported To

Huh? Cancelled? On the same date in 2005? Not destroyed and cancelled
in early 2002?

How can American Airlines flights show the planes destroyed and the registration cancelled, while both United flights show the planes as simply being cancelled without explanation 4 years after they allegedly were destroyed? Why?

What the heck is going on here? These are public records, accessible by everyone until their purge date is reached. That is Nov. 11, 2006 for both United flights. There is no purge date listed for the two American Airlines flights.

Why would a company keep two aircraft that had been destroyed on its active lineup for four years, and then simply list the registration as "Cancelled"?
Even the most ardent coincidence theorist is going to have to think hard to come up with some rationale for this one.

Please pass this information on to anyone that you think might be able to use it.