A Critical Analysis of Remote Takeover of Planes on 9/11

Avionics Technician Exposes The Impossibilities of Remotely Taking-over a Commercial Aircraft

I suggest people take the time to read this important preface in full, before reading and studying the critical analysis paper which I have linked to at the end of this article.

Preface:

On September 8, 2024, the International Center for 9/11 Justice held an online symposium called ‘Aviation Impossibilities’. It was promoted as their presentation of “new, cutting-edge research” into what took place in the skies on 9/11. The symposium included speakers, Dr. Piers Robinson, Captain Dan Hanley, Ted Walter, Olivier Caron-Mason, Aidan Monaghan and Kevin Ryan.

Both members, Captain Dan Hanley and Aidan Monaghan, promote the theory that the planes on 9/11 were remotely controlled, and crashed into the targets. This appears to be the direction of travel and position of the International Center For 9/11 Justice, being as they have not covered any other areas of possibilities or evidence which myself and others have published over the past 12 years or more.

Aidan Monaghan’s presentation in particular was called: The 9/11 Flights: The Case for GPS-Guided Autopilot Control, which can viewed below: Note, if the video starts at the beginning, you can skip forward to the 2 hour 44 secs mark to start Aidan’s presentation, which is 30 minutes long.

The International Centre For 9/11 Justice appears to be endorsing this line of remotely guided controlled planes. A fellow researcher called 9/11 Revisionist (Norman) pointed-out to me some months back, that since my appearance on the Jerm Warfare Podcast, which was published in May 2024, the International Centre For 9/11 Justice had not been actively involved or interested in what happened to the planes on 9/11.

9/11 Revisionist has been keeping a close-eye on the International Center’s activities, and suggests that a “re-pivoting” has happened, whereby they have changed their focus and attention to explore the 9/11 plane issues. 9/11 Revisionist also believes their “re-pivoting” was a result of the evidence I was revealing of what happened to the 4 planes, and also the technologies involved, which caused the Center’s re-pivoting focus to become more of a “damaged limitation control” exercise, to regain control over the 9/11 planes narrative, and to refocus away from all the evidence I was revealing about the planes, which was gaining considerable traction.

9/11 Revisionist also believes, that the perception management involves Dr. Piers Robinson, who is an expert in propaganda studies, and on the board of directors of the International Center For 9/11 Justice. I was informed by 9/11 Revisionist that Dr. Piers was following both myself (9/11 Planes Research) and 9/11 Revisionist’s Substack blogs. Note, neither myself (9/11 Planes Research) or 9/11 Revisionist have been invited or contacted by the Center regarding the evidence we have been publishing in relation to 9/11, and also the 9/11 planes.

In a recent “new” paper published at the International Centre For 9/11 Justice, it argues the case for “remoted controlled hijackings” of the four planes by one remote team on 9/11. This is further evidence, showing their endorsement of the “remote controlled” plane theory.

Source: https://ic911.org/news/new-paper-argues-succession-of-9-11-hijackings-indicates-control-of-airplanes-by-one-remote-team/

It appears the Center is neither interested in exploring any other avenues in relation to the 9/11 planes. They do not cover other key evidence which I have documented such as the official telemetry data of the planes on 9/11.

1. Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS), showing that United 175 and United 93 were still airborne after the crashes.

2. There was no Emergency Locator Transmissions for any of the the four planes on 9/11.

3. DCC radar data released under Freedom of Information Act shows that American 77 was still airborne and flying over Missouri and Kansas after the alleged crash at the Pentagon.

4. American 11 was still airborne according to NORAD communication recordings, and flying to Washington DC, after it had allegedly crashed, and was identified by tail number.

See below, a preview of my interview with Jerm Warfare, where I outline these points above.

Full interview here: https://rumble.com/v646fsm-jerm-warfare-talks-to-911-planes-research.html

I have also released “un-released” Dulles Airport CCTV, showing a number of passengers and crew at Dulles Airport on 9/11.

Interestingly, none of my evidence seems worthy of coverage by the International Center For 9/11 Justice. Considering Dr Piers Robinson was following my Substack, there was not even contact or an invite for me to present ALL my evidence, considering the Center considers itself interested in the 9/11 planes area of studies.

Below, I am sharing an analysis of why the “remote controlled” planes theory is impossible and invalid. It is a comprehensive analysis, which was conducted in 2007. So people need to ask themselves WHY the International Center For 9/11 Justice are pursuing a theory which has been thoroughly and comprehensively proven to be impossible? Why have they rehashed the remote controlled planes theory? Has this been done to steer people away from the “real” evidence showing what happened to planes on 9/11, and also the technology deployed on 9/11? I will let the reader decide on the real intentions behind the International Center For 9/11 Justice motives, for there exclusion of all the evidence I have brought to light involving the four “alleged” plane crashes on 9/11.

See below: Remote Takeover on 9/11: A Critical Analysis (Essay Paper Introduction)

I'm an Aviation Maintenance Technician/Avionics Technician for a major US airline. I've been in this industry for 11 years and working on airliners for 7 of those. I have extensive experience on both aircraft types used on 9/11, doing both routine maintenance(767 overhaul for two and a half years) as well as non-routine maintenance, ie troubleshooting and repair. I've worked on pretty much every system on the 757/767.

My main areas of experience are the Electrical System, Autoflight System, Navigation System, Communications System, Indicating and Warning Systems. I also have a good bit of modification experience installing such systems as: Predictive Windshear, Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning, Inertial Reference System, Fuel Tank Transient Suppression(known as the TWA 800 mod), Passenger Entertainment, post-911 Secure Cockpit Door Modifications, as well as dozens of smaller modifications usually brought on by FAA Airworthiness Directives. Most of these modifications require a major wiring rework and installation of new wiring and equipment.

I believe my avionics background, specifically my 767 experience, qualifies me to talk about what it takes to turn a 757/767 into a drone and the major difficulties of doing so.

The analysis is a 25 page detailed essay paper, covers many scenarios and elements, as to why it is impossible to remotely take over control an aircraft.

To read the 25 page paper in full, you can download it from the link below:

https://web.archive.org/web/20151023025901/http://www.911myths.com/images/5/5b/Remote_Takeover.pdf

Thank you for reading and caring!