Why Was American Flight 11 Flying To Washington On 9/11

An Independent Investigation

Introduction

I have long suspected for a number of years, after extensive research, that American Airlines “Flight 11”, which was the “officially” named aircraft to have crashed into the North Tower, was not the aircraft that crashed. official evidence suggests Flight 11 was still airborne and flying towards the Washington DC. Evidence indicates that a cover-up at the highest level was deployed to obfuscate the fact Flight 11 was still airborne.

In this article, I will present compelling evidence which needs to be carefully considered, which will help reveal what really happened to Flight 11, to dispel the fictitious narrative that has been told to the American people. The victims and families deserve the truth.

To begin, I will briefly refresh ourselves with the official narrative of what happened to Flight 11.

The official narrative of American Airlines Flight 11

American Airlines Flight 11 (AAL 11) was a domestic passenger flight that was hijacked by five al-Qaeda members on September 11, 2001, as part of the September 11 attacks. Mohamed Atta deliberately crashed the plane into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City at 8:46 a.m., killing all 92 people aboard and an unknown number in the building's impact zone. The aircraft involved was a Boeing 767-223ER, registration number N334AA was flying American Airlines' daily scheduled morning transcontinental service from Logan International Airport in Boston to Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles. Fifteen minutes into the flight the hijackers injured at least three people, possibly killing one. The hijackers forcibly breached the cockpit, and overpowered the captain and first officer. It is claimed Mohamed Atta, an al-Qaeda member and licensed commercial pilot, took over the controls. Air-traffic controllers noticed the flight was in distress when the crew was no longer responding. Air-traffic controllers realised the flight had been hijacked when Mohamed Atta made announcements meant for the passengers which were inadvertently transmitted by mistake to Air Traffic Control. On board, flight attendants Amy Sweeney and Betty Ong contacted American Airlines, and provided information about the hijackers and injuries to passengers and crew.
Source: 9/11 Commission Report

In my previous articles covering AAL 11, I highlighted a number of discrepancies involving AAL 11’s take-off time, and also issues surrounding which gate it allegedly departed from, along with Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) data listing for the flight. In this article, I am picking up from the point just before the alleged crash, where I will question the veracity of the evidence surrounding AAL 11 being the named aircraft that crashed into the North Tower at 8:46 a.m.

AAL 11 did not crash, according to the absence of an activation of the Emergency Locator Transmission (ELT) at the time of the crash at 8:46 a.m.

Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELT) are transmitters that are carried aboard most general aviation aircraft in the U.S. In the event of an aircraft accident, these devices are designed to transmit a distress signal on 121.5 and 243.0 MHz frequencies. ELTs are mounted in the airplane, and designed to be triggered upon impact or may be manually activated using the remote switch and control panel indicator in the cockpit. Activation of the ELT triggers an audio alert, and 406-MHz ELTs transmit GPS position for search and rescue. Source: https://www.aopa.org/advocacy/aircraft/aircraft-operations/emergency-locator-transmitters

At 8:46 a.m., the precise time AAL 11 is alleged to have crashed into the North Tower, there was no ELT activated to indicate the aircraft had crashed, which should have been the case.

Yet, strangely, two and a half minutes earlier, David Bottiglia, an air traffic controller at the FAA's New York Center, received an important message from one of the airplanes in the airspace he was monitoring. At 8:44 a.m. the pilot of U.S. Airways Flight 583 told Bottiglia, "I just picked up an ELT on 121.5. It was brief, but it went off." (121.5 megahertz is an emergency frequency that ELTs are designed to transmit their distress signals on).

Another airplane in the New York Center's airspace also reported the same thing. The pilot of Delta Airlines Flight 2433 told Bottiglia "We picked up that ELT, too. But it's very faint."

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/16/national/transcript-of-united-airlines-flight-175.html

According to author Lynn Spencer, "several" facilities picked up the ELT signal around this time.

Source: Lynn Spencer, Touching History: The Untold Story of the Drama That Unfolded in the Skies Over America on 9/11. New York: Free Press, 2008, p. 50

Also, Peter McCloskey, a traffic management coordinator at the New York Center, later recalled that the ELT had gone off "in the vicinity of Lower Manhattan."

Source: Memorandum for the Record: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) New York Air Route Center Interview with Peter McCloskey." 9/11 Commission, October 1, 2003

Around the time AAL 11 crashed into the North Tower, a participant in an FAA teleconference stated,

"We got a report of an ELT in the area that (the radar track for Flight 11 was in)."

Before it disappeared from radar screens, the track for AAL 11 had indicated the airplane was about 20 miles from New York's JFK International Airport.

Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/13484898/9-11-Air-Traffic-Control-Transcript

Many 9/11 researchers have tried to attribute the origin of the 8:44 a.m. ELT transmission to AAL 11, however this is called into serious question in the 9/11 Commission’s own unclassified document, when they interviewed experienced pilot Paul Thumser, who explained to the FBI interviewers, that an ELT cannot be manually activated by the pilot in a Boeing 767 aircraft, which AAL 11 was, thus indicating that the ELT could not have originated from AAL 11, due to the fact the pilot could not have manually activate the ELT.

See below, Paul Thumser’s interview transcript, in relation to the ELT.

Below, is Paul Thumser’s official FBI interview audio recording, with the segment discussing the early ELT reports on 9/11, and how an ELT cannot be manually activated from 767 aircrafts, along with ELT parameters.

The fact the ELT was not automatically activated at the time of the aircraft’s impact into the North Tower, strongly indicates that AAL 11 did not crash into the North Tower.

Additional, official documented evidence supports there was no ELT activated by AAL 11, which is logged in the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Aviation Accident Final Report, Accident Number: DCA01MA060.

Note in the document below, it is left blank where the ELT reporting information should have been recorded.

Source: National Transportation Safety Board, Aviation Accident Final Report, Accident Number: DCA01MA060.

There is more additional official evidence which substantiates the fact that AAL 11 did not crash into the North Tower, which indicates AAL 11 continued in flight, and flew past the North Tower.

AAL 11 Flew Past The North Tower

It is revealed in originally withheld official AAL 11 Dulles Control Center (DCC) radar data evidence, which was released under a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request by 9/11 Maps (Vincent Moreau) and John Farmer (via CIT/Pentacon), that AAL 11 flew past the North Tower according to the last known recorded Lat-Long coordinates from the radar returns. It also reveals that the radar return was captured at 8: 47 a.m., which is one minute after the crash time of 8:46 a.m. Also to note, AAL 11’s altitude is stipulated at 29,000ft, which indicates AAL 11 did not descend as we have been led to believe. See below, DCC radar data, highlighted.

Source: Dulles Control Center (DCC) Radar Coordinated

The last Lat-Long coordinates of AAL 11 captured on radar is 40.683 -74.05, which locates AAL 11, 2.79 miles past the North Tower. See below:

Further additional official evidence which has been mainly ignored which supports the fact AAL 11 continued flying over New Jersey and towards Washington DC, was captured in the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) communications recordings.

Below is the NORAD audio communication recording in relation to AAL 11 still airborne and flying towards the Washington DC area, including action taken to scramble fighter jets from Langley.

It appears from the FAA and NORAD communications recordings that AAL 11's last known coordinates were 40'38N 074'03W, which locates AAL 11 - 5.77 miles past the North Tower, and heading towards the Washington, DC area. Also confirmed is AAL 11’s tail number N334AA.

See below, AAL 11’s plotted Lat-Long coordinates as stated in the official NOARD recording.

The NORAD communications are damming evidence, and have never been adequately explained by the authorities, as to why AAL 11 was still airborne after it was reported as the aircraft that had crashed into the North Tower.

In the NORAD communications, it is clearly heard that Major Kevin Nasypany scrambled the fighter jets from Langley and directed to position them between the reportedly southbound AAL 11 and Washington DC.

Shortly after 9:24 a.m., out of concern over leaving New York's airspace unprotected, NEADS commanders decided to cancel the plan to pursue AAL 11 with the Otis fighters. Source: Staff Report Page 16.

Inconsistent official explanations for the damming NORAD communication evidence, that AAL 11 was still airborne

In the aftermath of 9/11, the scramble of Langley fighter jets has been described by the Defence Department as a response to the hijacking of American 77 (AAL 77) or United 93 (UAL 93), or a combination of the two. Yet the report of AAL 77 heading towards Washington, DC as the reason for the Langley Fighter Jets to be scrambled does not reflect what is captured in the NORAD conversations at NEADS or in taped conversations at FAA centers, on the chat logs compiled at NEADS and NORAD.

In reality at 9:24 a.m. when the fighter jets were scrambled from Langley, NEADS was not even aware that AAL 77 nor UAL 93 were hijacked. Why did the Defence Department lie about this?

Shortly after 9/11, a time-line provided by senior Defence Department officials to CNN will state, NORAD orders jets scrambled from Langley in order to “head to intercept” AAL 77. Source: CNN

Major General Larry Arnold, the CONR commander, will give a different explanation

Major General Arnold will tell the 9/11 Commission, “we launched the aircraft out of Langley to put them over top of Washington DC, not in response to AAL 77, but really to put them in a position in case UAL 93 were to head that way.”

Major Kevin Nasypany will tell the 9/11 Commission that the real reason the Langley jets are scrambled and directed toward Baltimore area is to position them between the reportedly southbound AAL 11 and Washington, DC, as a “barrier cap”.

It appears NORAD deliberately misled Congress and the 9/11 Commission by hiding the fact that the Langley scramble takes place in response to the report that AAL 11 is still airborne, and heading towards Washington, DC.

It appears both the Defence Department and Major General Arnold deliberately deflected attention away from the evidence to obfuscation the fact, AAL 11 was still airborne and flying to Washington, DC, which is the real reason why the Langley fighter jets were scrambled for AAL 11, and not for AAL 77 or UAL 93.

Interestingly, Major Nasypany’s account for the Langley fighter jets scramble to pursue AAL 11 is the most accurate account given and in alignment with the NOARD communication recordings, which Nasypany accurately conveyed to the 9/11 Commission. The 9/11 Commission did not actively pursue Nasypany’s information as they should have, and mainly ignored it, in favour of the vague and inconsistent accounts given by both the Defence Department and Major General Arnold. The question is WHY?

It was reported in a Guardian published in the UK, 2006

9/11 Tapes Expose Flaws In Military Chiefs' Testimony
[Thanks to Mathiew Estepho at MES for this Guardian Article]

”The United States’s military top brass may have deliberately misled the 9/11 Commission, painting a picture of a swift response to the unfolding terrorist attacks when, in reality, fighter jets spent crucial minutes pursuing a non-existent plane, it emerged on Wednesday.”

The article also went on to say:

”Meanwhile, contrary to what the commission was told, the military did not even hear about United flight 93 until after it had crashed.”

“Members and staff of the 9/11 commission believe the discrepancies may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead, and they discussed asking the justice department to consider criminal charges against senior members of the military”

”Major General Larry Arnold and Colonel Alan Scott told Kean’s panel that Norad started tracking United 93 at 9.16am. In fact, the plane was not hijacked until 12 minutes after that and, as the tapes grimly illustrate, it was 10.15am before technical specialist Sergeant Shelley Watson, a Norad employee, first heard the news from civilian air traffic control in Washington.”

”In the end, the 9/11 commission did not refer the Norad officials to the justice department but passed the matter to the inspector-generals of the Pentagon and transportation departments, who act as government watchdogs. Both departments said reports were forthcoming.”

The Guardian article also claimed

”The two fighter jets wasted part of the morning pursuing a ghost”

“NORAD chiefs believed that American flight 11 had fallen beneath their radar and was heading to the US capital, even though it had already crashed into the World Trade Centre.”

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/aug/03/september11.usa

Of course based on the veracity of all the “official evidence” presented in this article, this is completely untrue, and I suggest the “Phantom Plane” story is merely another cover-story, to cover-up the fact, as to why AAL 11 was still still airborne, and the “real” reason it was flying to Washington DC.

American 11, is still in the air and on its way to Washington…

At 9:21 a.m., Colin Scoggins, the military liaison at the Boston Air Traffic Control Center, called NEADS, said: "I just had a report that American 11 is still in the air and it's on its way towards--heading towards Washington. It was evidently another aircraft that hit the World Trade Center tower."

Source: 9/11 Commission, The 9/11 Commission Report, p. 26; Lynn Spencer, Touching History: The Untold Story of the Drama That Unfolded in the Skies Over America on 9/11. New York: Free Press, 2008, p. 137.

At 9:30 a.m., which is the time documented in the “TOP SECRET” - Air Threat Conference Call document, it cites AAL 11 as being confirmed as the aircraft which is still airborne and heading to Washington DC. See below:

Confirmation that AAL 11 flew past the North Tower is contained in Memorandum For The Record document reference number MFR-040220035, Page 2. See below:

Further additional official evidence supports that an aircraft was flying six miles “East” of the White House. The aircraft was thought to have perhaps originated from Boston, indicating the suspicion that it was AAL 11. After all, NOARD seemed aware, as to where AAL 11 was heading (Washington DC), and as I confirmed in my previous article, the aircraft was identified via its tail number N344AA also. See below:
[Thanks to Jane Cena for this additional information below]

NYC Box 3 Neads-Conr-Norad FDR - Transcript - Neads Channel 2 MCC Upside 006 [Page 35 of 93]. https://www.scribd.com/document/14142047/NYC-Box-3-Neads-conr-norad-Fdr-Transcript-Neads-Channel-2-Mcc-Upside-006

The aircraft identified that flew six miles East of the White House is most likely the aircraft observed by Steve Chaconas, which he observed flying in from the East of the Potomac River, in the direction where the White House is situated. See video below: [Video Excerpt Courtesy of CIT Investigation Team].

In addition, it was initially speculated by press outlets such as the Los Angeles Times that the aircraft reported to have hit the Pentagon was possibly a flight "bound from Boston to Los Angeles," and only AAL 11 (or UAL 175) fits that description. It also tallies with Chaconas's and NORAD's accounts.

"In addition, a major airline said a plane, bound from Boston to Los Angeles, had gone down at a location it did not immediately disclose. Authorities would not say whether this was the aircraft that hit the Pentagon."

Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20010911214820/https://www.latimes.com/templates/misc/printstory.jsp?slug=la%2D091101leadall

[Above Paragraph Information Credited to Researcher Jane Cena]

Was the aircraft AAL 11, coming into land at Reagan National Airport that Chaconas observed?

This has to be seriously considered, as it was no way American 77. Also, it was not the C-130, which is often implied in the mainstream media, because Chaconas described it as a “commercial aircraft”, which is different to a C-130 aircraft.

Even though it is implied that the aircraft seemed involved with the Pentagon event, it is highly unlikely that was the case. It is likely the aircraft landed at Reagan National Airport, which is what Steve first thought, however with the explosion at the Pentagon, it perhaps drew him to imply incorrectly that the aircraft he observed was involved in the Pentagon explosion?

Reagan National Airport is only 1 mile away from the Pentagon.

It is logical that the aircraft Steve observed would have to make a loop to come into land at Reagan National Airport.

This could also explain why there were several discrepancies in the loop witnessed by Dulles Controllers?

Dulles Airport Controllers on the "Loop" of Flight 77
https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/dulles-airport-controllers-on-the

Analysis of the Dulles Airport Controllers Accounts of Flight 77's Flight Path "Loop"
https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/analysis-of-the-dulles-airport-controllers

The question is, WHY was American 11 heading towards Washington DC?

Now that I have outlined a substantial amount of “official” evidence to support AAL 11 identified as heading towards Washington DC, and still airborne after the alleged crash at the North Tower, it is now time to explore the “real” reason why AAL 11 was flying to Washington DC, and also passing so close to the White House.

Why did the Secret Service report a plane had crashed into the White House and was in flames on 9/11?

At approximately 9:46 a.m. on September 11, the District of Columbia Fire Department (DCFD) dispatched a number of engines and trucks to the White House in response to a report made by the Secret Service (the agency that protects the president and the White House), that a plane had crashed into the White House. According to the report, the building was on fire, and some or all of it had collapsed. Because the call from the Secret Service reportedly said a structural collapse had occurred, the DCFD's "cave-in task force" was sent to the White House along with the other units. When the DCFD arrived on the scene, it quickly became apparent that no such incident had taken place and they were promptly ordered to leave.

Source: Washington City Paper | Howard Witt, September 21st, 2001
https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/261939/this-is-only-a-test/

While it could be claimed that this was merely the result of confusion because an unprecedented crisis unfolding, there is an alternative explanation to explain it.

Was the Secret Service conducting a training exercise on the morning of 9/11?

The incident at the White House on 9/11, is virtually unknown, and no “official” explanation has ever been provided as to why the Secret Service made such an obvious false report.

There is an explanation which could account for the false report by the Secret Service.

Was the Secret Service running a training exercise based around the scenario of a plane being crashed into the White House, and its report to the emergency services made as part of this exercise?

On the morning of 9/11, other government agencies were conducting exercises, and so the Secret Service could have been running an exercise, in order to coordinate their activities with other agencies activities. Moreover, it is known that the Secret Service had conducted several exercises before 9/11 using scenarios of a terrorist attack, simulating a plane crashing into the White House. So, when it reported a plane crash at the White House on 9/11, it may have been responding to a simulated incident that regularly featured in its exercises?

NORAD is known to have conducted exercises involving Hijacked plane scenarios before 9/11. ABC News reported such drills that NORAD had practised. See below:

At least three exercises in the three years before 9/11 that included the scenario of terrorists hijacking or stealing an aircraft with the intention of crashing it into the White House. These command post exercises, all called "Falcon Indian," were held in January 1999, June 1999, and June 2000. They all involved a scenario in which a Learjet, loaded with explosives, was under the control of terrorists who intended to crash the plane into the White House.

Source: chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.archives.gov/files/declassification/iscap/pdf/2013-002-doc8.pdf

Another element is, the Secret Service appears to have been preparing for the possibility of the White House collapsing well before it reported the building had come down. Specifically, at around 9:07 a.m., according to a Secret Service time-line, the agency's Technical Security Division (TSD) contacted the "structural collapse team" at Fort Belvoir, an Army base about 20 miles south of Washington, and told it "that the Secret Service may have a need for [its] assets and [the team's personnel] should report to their duty station."

Source: https://www.scribd.com/doc/30764772/Monaghan-FOIA-USSS-Memos-and-Timelines

The question has to be asked; Why was a "Structural Collapse Team" contacted when no collapse had happened at the White House, and there was no indication at the time, that one was going to happen?

Was the Military District of Washington (MDW) Engineer Company participating in a Secret Service exercise and it was contacted in preparation for a simulated plane crash, which, in the simulation, would cause some or all of the White House to collapse?

The MDW Engineer Company was placed on "alert" and on "30-minute stand-by" for the White House. Later (on 9/11), they were released to go to the Pentagon to help respond to the attack, and its personnel arrived at the Department of Defense headquarters early that afternoon.

Source: https://www.scribd.com/doc/30764772/Monaghan-FOIA-USSS-Memos-and-Timelines

One of the most revealing elements that AAL 11 was most likely involved in a “real-world” hijacking exercise scenario was Major Kevin Nasypany, the NEADS mission crew commander’s reaction to the alleged first plane crash into the North Tower.

Major Nasypany had helped design the day’s exercise, where Major Nasypany believed the reported hijacking is part of his exercise, and he actually says out loud, “The hijack’s not supposed to be for another hour.” Source: [VANITY FAIR, 8/1/2006] https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2006/08/norad200608

Interestingly, another hour (9:46 a.m.) would be the time when the White House Secret Service reported a plane had crashed into the building and the District of Columbia Fire Department (DCFD) were dispatched with a number of engines and trucks to the White House in response to a report made by the Secret Service, that a plane had crashed into the White House.

Even Major General Larry Arnold, who is at Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, also later says that when he first hears of the hijacking, in the minutes after NEADS is alerted to it, “The first thing that went through my mind was, is this part of the exercise? “Is this some kind of a screw-up?” Source: [ABC NEWS, 9/11/2002, 9/11 COMMISSION, 5/23/2003

Conclusion

The overwhelming evidence I have presented in my part one and two articles, indicates that AAL 11’s business flying to Washington DC on 9/11 and not crashing into the North Tower, was in fact to fly near the White House, as part of a training drill, where the scenario was to play out of a plane crashing into the White House, whereby the Secret Service would report it as so, to test responses, and in the process dispatch of the fire department and building collapse units.

This information and report involving the Secret Service reporting that a plane had crashed into the building has been covered up at the highest level, to protect the real reason AAL 11 was still airborne and heading to Washington DC. The attempt to mix-up the NOARD report that it was AAL 11, with AAL 77 and UAL 93, was deliberate misdirection. The fact AAL 11 was identified via its tail number N344AA could not be swept under the carpet, so it was conveniently ignored.

Based on the evidence, AAL 11 most likely landed at Reagan National Airport, which was witnessed by Steve Chanconas, who observed the aircraft flying in from the East of the Potomac River, which is confirmed in the report by NORAD, of an aircraft six miles East from the White House.

Finally, I would like to remind people of my evidence of United 93 landing at Reagan National Airport at 10:28 a.m. Furthermore, the evidence I have presented in the two articles also indicates that American 11 also landed at Reagan National Airport.

I will leave this question to the readers; Is this WHY Reagan National Airport stayed closed for three weeks after 9/11? Did they have some aircrafts to hide?

Thanks for reading & caring!