2003-12-12 01:37:29 UTC
part 1 -
AUTOMATIC PILOT AND 9.11
10/08/2002 - THE PORTUGAL NEWS
September 11 - An expert-s opinion
A group of military and civilian US pilots, under the chairmanship of
Colonel Donn de Grand, after deliberating non-stop for 72 hours, has
concluded that the flight crews of the four passenger airliners,
involved in the September 11th tragedy, had no control over their
In a detailed press communiquх the inquiry stated: ?The
so-called terrorist attack was in fact a superbly executed military
operation carried out against the USA, requiring the utmost
professional military skill in command, communications and control. It
was flawless in timing, in the choice of selected aircraft to be used
as guided missiles and in the coordinated delivery of those missiles
to their pre-selected targets.¬
The report seriously questions whether or not the suspect hijackers,
supposedly trained on Cessna light aircraft, could have located a
target dead-on 200 miles from take off point. It further throws into
doubt their ability to master the intricacies of the instrument flight
rules (IFR) in the 45 minutes from take off to the point of impact.
Colonel de Grand said that it would be impossible for novices to have
taken control of the four aircraft and orchestrated such a terrible
act requiring military precision of the highest order.
A member of the inquiry team, a US Air Force officer who flew over 100
sorties during the Vietnam war, told the press conference: ?Those
birds (commercial airliners) either had a crack fighter pilot in the
left seat, or they were being maneuvered by remote control.¬
In evidence given to the enquiry, Captain Kent Hill (retd.) of the US
Air Force, and friend of Chic Burlingame, the pilot of the plane that
crashed into the Pentagon, stated that the US had on several occasions
flown an unmanned aircraft, similar in size to a Boeing 737, across
the Pacific from Edwards Air Force base in California to South
Australia. According to Hill it had flown on a pre programmed flight
path under the control of a pilot in an outside station.
Hill also quoted Bob Ayling, former British Airways boss, in an
interview given to the London Economist on September 20th, 2001.
Ayling admitted that it was now possible to control an aircraft in
flight from either the ground or in the air. This was confirmed by
expert witnesses at the inquiry who testified that airliners could be
controlled by electro-magnetic pulse or radio frequency
instrumentation from command and control platforms based either in the
air or at ground level.
All members of the inquiry team agreed that even if guns were held to
their heads none of them would fly a plane into a building. Their
reaction would be to ditch the plane into a river or a field, thereby
safeguarding the lives of those on the ground.
A further question raised by the inquiry was why none of the pilots
concerned had alerted ground control. It stated that all pilots are
trained to punch a four-digit code into the flight control-s
transponder to warn ground control crews of a hijacking - but this did
During the press conference Captain Hill maintained that the four
airliners must have been choreographed by an Airborne Warning and
Control System (AWACS). This system can engage several aircraft
simultaneously by knocking out their on-board flight controls. He said
that all the evidence points to the fact that the pilots and their
crews had not taken any evasive action to resist the supposed
hijackers. They had not attempted any sudden changes in flight path or
nose-dive procedures - which led him to believe that they had no
control over their aircraft.
THE NEWS, in an attempt to further substantiate the potential veracity
of these findings, spoke to an Algarve-based airline pilot, who has
more than 20 years of experience in flying passenger planes, to seek
his views. Captain Colin McHattie, currently flying with Cathay
Pacific, agreed with the independent commission-s findings. However,
he explained that while it is possible to fly a plane from the ground,
the installation of the necessary equipment is a time-consuming
process, and needs extensive planning. THE NEWS will publish a full
interview with Captain McHattie in next week-s edition.
The FBI also came in for criticism for the various pieces of
contradictory evidence it has published regarding the suspects.
Questions are now being asked as to how incorrect information was
given out regarding the ID cards of the suspects, and the seat numbers
they supposedly occupied after boarding the flights.
None of the suspects named by the FBI appeared on any of the official
passenger lists. A further point was how the FBI had managed to
retrieve the passport of one of the suspects amid the molten and
twisted remains of thousands of tons of steel and rubble brought about
by the Twin Towers collapse.
Dr. Paul Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury, and
presently Senior Research Fellow at Stamford University, has lent his
support to the independent inquiry findings. He also claims that Osama
Bin Laden was not responsible for September 11th. The doctor has
challenged President Bush to make public the so-called ?irrefutable
evidence¬ incriminating Bin Laden.
Colonel Donn de Grand said that if President Bush is lying it would
not be the first time that the American people had been mislead by its
government. He cited the recently published official government
archives describing President Roosevelt-s duplicity in deceiving
Americans about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, which triggered
the US entry into WWll.
He also highlighted the role of the country-s government in misleading
its citizens in respect of the Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba, and the
events that brought about the Spanish American war in the late 19th,
century. ?Whilst considering who committed this act of war on
September 11th,¬ he said, ?albeit Russia, China, an Islamic country or
NATO, we must also consider that the enemy may well be within the
?Not for the first time the American public might be being mislead, by
those with ulterior motives, into lending its support to a war, this
time against Iraq, that has no bearing whatsoever on the interests of
the people of the USA.¬
So far the mainstream American news media has failed to publish or
broadcast any details regarding the independent inquiry. Similarly,
the White House, whilst having received a copy of the report, has
remained silent on its findings.