The Bush administration is responsible for 9/11

have you ever operated an aircraft in the positive controlled airspace (PCA) or had any exposure to air traffic control?

I think you are blowing a whole lot of smoke with no clue what the fuck you are saying. I have flown in the PCA, and have extensive knowledge of how the F.A.A. does business, as well as how NORAD does business. I have over 30 years of commercial flight experience, and intensive experience with the air traffic control system and how it works, and I absolutely refute the bullshit and misinformation you put out here because you have not one iota of a clue what you are saying.

let's get something clear here. ATC doesn't need your goddamned transponder to track your airplane. It's a nice thing to get the data block, and see a track header as well as flight level and speed data, but they can use secondary radar to track any airplane in the national airspace. The FPS-116 and ASR-64 radar networks, as well as other ATC radar, have virtually every single inch of airspace above FL-180 in constant surveillance, with the exception of radar maintenance windows and outages. your assertion that ATC didn't know where these planes were after the transponders (primary beacon radar) had been turned off, is both absurd and unfounded.

you also fail to realize that the pilots were indeed forbidden from using 'full military power' and the 'excuse' for that later was to be that they couldn't assure that tankers could be scrambled in time to fuel them at the end of their fuel endurance. this later was proven to be absolute bullshit.

next on my list, is that the pentagon had intentionally 'moved' many interceptor squadrons into positions far from the eastern seabord, and made the intercept times so lengthy that it also made using FULL MILITARY POWER an absolute necessity. not one of these interceptors went to afterburners that day, and that is a fact. it's an absurd fact.

lastly, ANY DEVIATION FROM YOUR ASSIGNED ALTITUDE AND FLIGHT PLAN immediately gets the TRACON supervisor on the horn to NORAD, and I mean, they don't even have the luxury of debating whether they should make the call, but they have only one option. Get on the line and tell NORAD there is a problem in progress. your assertion that our entire F.A.A. enroute system 'was incompetent' on Sept 11, 2001, is not valid. Those people on those scopes in the TRACONS are absolutely professionals and not garden variety fuckers from the street. They know when ANY AIRPLANE DEVIATES THAT GROSSLY FROM THEIR ASSIGNED ALTITUDE AND FLIGHT PLAN THAT THERE IS SOMETHING GOING ON, and they would have told NORAD about it IMMEDIATELY.

so, don't pump this "my government didn't do it" bullshit at us. You have not a clue what the fuck you are talking about, you have no idea how the air traffic control system or the federal aviation regulations work, and hence you are 'disqualified' from stating anything on this forum about what ATC did or didn't do.

you're also talking to a military veteran pilot here. I do know what the fuck I am talking about, and I do know that the cascade malfunction you propose happened on that day is not a possibility, never has been one, and never will have been one, without specific orders not to take action.

you've just been trumped by 30 plus years of flight experience at high altitudes in heavy airplanes, and you now are both relegated to go find something else to do, but you need to go pick up the F.A.A. regulations, and go to 911truth.org and look at the intensive timeline of what took place that day that exists.

our government was indeed involved. and that is treason, goddamned you!!!!!

let's get off this adversarial page for a moment and let me explain to you what takes place in a cockpit of an airliner when something goes so very 'wrong' in-flight, that the pilot cannot talk to ATC on the assigned frequency.

first, you, the lay-person, non pilot, have no clue what procedures and regulations exist for exactly this contingency. though I have not often agreed with the absolute verbiage in some of the regulations and procedures, over time, I have come to view them as, for the most part, very 'logical' in that they do indeed try to make the ATC system and enroute air traffic control issues in the PCA, much more 'safe' due to there not being too very many holes in what is supposed to happen in 'emergencies' aloft. are there instances not covered by procedures and regulations? you bet. but for the most part, the F.A.A. regulations are so very comprehensive and thorough, time tested and proven, that with minor exceptions, the assumption that so many 'holes' in them existed on Sept 11, 2001, is absolutely 'goofy' from a pilot, military, and engineering point of view. It couldn't happen unless everyone had brain freeze for several minutes and got catatonic and stupid simultaneously. not likely.

I also want to tell you for the record that my military pilot experience in jamming aircraft also mandated that I have intensive knowledge of radar and IFF (transponders) and radio propagation, theory, countermeasures, effective ranges versus altitudes, shortcomings of radio and radar, and lastly, how to utilize the system when some of these things are not functioning, either onboard my aircraft, or on the ground. Clearly, when something quits working, you don't just pull over to a cloud somewhere and have maintenance beam themselves up to fix it. You must both know the procedures, and you must also know the 'plan b' alternatives that exist so that you don't compromise your life, your passenger's lives, or the lives of un-knowing and hitherto unaware people on the ground you just may drop in on if you don't do your job upstairs. nobody is operating any airplane in the PCA without knowing what these procedures are. you drill for it in simulators. you are queried about it by check pilots. you must know what the hell is going on to fly up there, believe it or not!

so, you're not talking to the average bear with no idea what the fuck the procedures are, what is supposed to take place, or what is in place to ensure that things happen in a specific sequence and order. this stuff has been drilled and drilled and re-drilled in countless ORE's (operational readiness exercises) and thousands of hours of high altitude cockpit time, with 'real' emergencies interspersed in there. I'm not pulling crap out of my un-knowing, totally oblivious ass like you are. I do indeed know what the fuck I am talking about. I do not buy the 'everything broke down all at once' theory you are putting forth in your bullshit. it's not possible. statistically, practically, feasibly, rationally.

when an aircrew has an 'inflight' emergency whereupon they cannot convey that to ATC via the radio, for whatever the reason, one of the two cockpit crew then will use the 'transponder' to tell ATC what is going on, with a 'beacon code' for a specific type of emergency aloft.

For any 'unspecified' emergency, you squawk or dial up on the transponder 'a specific emergency cod' (4096 codes possible on the box) and when the enhanced data block on the controller's radar screen starts to flash and the audio alert starts to go off in his or her headset, they know something is going on and you have an inflight emergency. At this moment in time, several controllers in more than one TRACON probably will see your emergency declaration, via your transponder, if you used it.

in the event that the transponder is turned off or not received by ATC, they nonetheless can still track you in that airplane, with only a few exceptions. those being, you are not flying in heavy precipitation (storm) and are not at low altitude below the radar's coverage cone. secondarily, other discrete beacon codes exist that you can squawk that inform ATC of the precise nature of the emergency beyond the initial '7700' notification you may or may not have time to dial in as you are working to keep your plane aloft and your passengers safe and comfortable. I won't get into those here because, although not classified, they
need not be disseminated to the general public.

needless to say, the way you handle your airplane tells ATC what is going on, as well. if you have a communications malfunction, as in your radio equipment is not working, you maneuver your airplane in a specific pattern, and utilize the transponder, if still working, to alert them of the fact you have no radio (voice) capability. you do not have to use a transponder to tell ATC everything, the controller will be looking at your skin paint (non radar beacon echo) and watching what that does, trying to figure out what is going on from that. He or she may not know your altitude anymore, or your precise speed, but they can see your flight direction and flight geometry to see if you are telling them you have lost your radios. If they get none of that, your transponder is off, and you are maneuvering radically, though they do not automatically count this as a hijacking, they do in-fact know you have lost control of your aircraft, and then they begin to alert nearby aircraft and their crews, if in visual flight conditions, to the fact they have a plane in their vicinity that could violate their airspace, or be a possible collision hazard, and to look for them, if possible, or be on the lookout for them. At the same time, this controller is talking to the TRACON supervisor, who can instantaneously be at that radar position, or switch to that picture, and 'share' that radar controller's video, and communications with him or her. This happens as a pre-drilled procedural operation, not some "oh, I guess I better go tell my boss" idea on the part of the controller. The ATC system doesn't work 'ad hoc' without procedures. Lots of things exist, procedurally, to make sure nobody gets caught with their pants down. This is precisely why I don't and will not buy the argument that this shit went on for so many minutes with pandemonium happening on the ground. The system isn't built or structured that way, the people who work in it are not your average 'village idiots', not to be able to vouch for every single controller or pilot, but most are not, and lastly, anyone who operates an airplane or a radar console knows 'exactly' what the fuck they're supposed to do in specific instances. There could never have been this 'everyone malfunctioned together and didn't take the correct action' bullshit without direct interference or someone promulgating interference in some fashion beforehand. To put out in your writings things you have no clue about, is truly a disservice to people who operate airplanes and the controllers who help them do that, and therefore I object to you stating things that you have no clue about. What you propose took place 'accidentally' that day is not possible, for it means everyone in the aircraft and the TRACON'S would have had to have simultaneously malfunctioned on a scale nobody has ever heard of, and that is simply not a possibility.

before I sign off, 'full military power' has to be approved, the pilot does not have the discretion to arbitrarily break the goddamned sound barrier over populated areas, without approval, first being due to the damage from the shock waves they create when they do it, and secondarily, because this means they have to have some reasonable assurance that a tanker is going to be aloft in time to fill them up before they have to make an emergency landing on a highway somewhere, or airport. NORAD's pilots were 'forbidden' from using 'full military power' that day. Why? This is not an assertion, it is a 'fact' supported by hard proof. You making the statement that nobody had to tell them anything, is also a bunch of bullshit. As an interceptor pilot, though you can do a lot of things, you also cannot take action without approval on many many things while you are doing your job, and this includes shooting down airplanes. By the way, 'shooting down' those airliners was not the only action those pilots could take, had they been allowed to catch them. There are several ways they could have interfered with those planes and deviated them, short of shooting them down, thwarting the hijackers. Lastly, had they gotten permission, they could indeed have shot them down. Given the potential loss of life on the ground, this would have been a logical, very 'last ditch' option, not option number one. do you understand that?

now that you're a little bit more educated, you need to not assume you know jack shit unless you've either 'been there and done that', as I have, or have some idea of what the fuck you are talking about, as most people do not. I'm not intimating you are a blithering idiot, I am asserting you are woefully 'ignorant' of reality and the procedures and processes that have existed for many many years, and because of that, you know not what you are talking about with regard to NORAD and what it did or did not do. Reading some book is not enough to give you this kind of knowledge, it can only be had by EXPERIENCE!!!

I have infinitely more knowledge and yes, EXPERIENCE, about the ATC system, flying airplanes in the PCA, and procedures that exist for exactly the kinds of occurrences and contingencies that would have happened on Sept 11, 2001. Don't you ever tell me otherwise, unless you first strap on a fast, large airplane and fly it for several thousand hours first. Put on a military uniform as well, so you know how that chain of command thing works, too.

enough said. This was no accident what took place on Sept. 11, 2001. It had to have been crafted and engineered to happen the way it did that day. A whole lot of people in our government had to have been involved in it to take place like that. A lot of people in government were not involved. But a core group of conspirators and operators at very high levels of our government and our military had to have been involved in what took place that day, it could not have happened without collusion and cooperation. period!

nobody is ever going to tell me that the entire goddamned air defense system of North America went 'tits up' on Sept. 11, 2001, and allowed this to just happen, unless they can match my experience level and intensive knowledge of the radar and ATC system, and procedures. not you, or anyone else. I have too many years of real, earned, cockpit and engineering experience for you or anyone else to challenge the veracity of what I have stated as possible in this blog. I did not get it from reading some book, or blog, or crap I found on the internet. I got it thru years of blood, sweat, and tears experience and more hours in airplane cockpits than you have doing virtually everything else except perhaps sleeping. there are some of us out there who not only fly airplanes, we are highly technical, and ex-military, with operational combat experience. it took years to get that.

one more thing: those airplanes were maneuvered in ways that, according to ATC controller statements, based on what they saw on their scopes, virtually would have 'assured' they exceeded MMO (operating speeds) and therefore most likely would have 'broken' their aircraft and rendered them 'unable' to make it to their intended targets. You don't hotrod an airliner like it's made of one solid piece of titanium. It is not. It cannot withstand the aerodynamic loads of high speed, high angle of bank turns, without either 'stalling' these airplanes and losing control of them in 'accellerated stalls' (the wing quits flying) or causing structural malformations and breakages in the horizontal stabilizer, wings, or rudders or control surfaces of these class of aircraft. Exceeding mach numbers beyond .8 or so on the mach meter (airspeed indicator) in these airplanes has serious, serious consequences. More often than not, total structural failure and loss of the aircraft occurs. To the lay person, 'in flight breakup' occurs. these airplanes were never designed to be abused by inexperienced, relatively untrained crews, and not
be rendered 'destroyed' by them accidentally. to have flown them the way they were flown that day, it's an absolute 'certainty' that engines would have been ripped from pylons on the wings, or other failures would have occurred. recovering control of a 'stalled' airliner which is plummeting at several thousand feet per minute vertically, at high altitudes, is very very intense business, and not for a neophyte aviator with minimal experience in anything except a Cessna 172, as most of them allegedly had. The degree of skill required to do this kind of flying, far exceeded both the level of skill the alleged aviators had, as well as the structural integrity of the airplanes themselves. period.

and, having tested flight data recorders for durability, for the record, let me also state that it is virtually not possible for the crash protected memory modules of these boxes to be completely, utterly destroyed, except by perhaps an event rivaling a crash, where the temperatures encounted exceeded 1100 degrees centigrade for more than 12 hours, as they must withstand to be certified for commercial aicraft use. never did any temperatures in the WTC or elswhere on Sept. 11, at crash sites, ever get there. you might not find the orange outer coating of the box, but the memory module will be there, somewhere, intact, with their internal data more or less recoverable and readable. according to the government, some of these boxes either 'ceased to exist' or 'were found and had no useful information on them' which is also quite preposterous. malfunctions aside, this is very very fishy.

oh, your assertion of in-flight cellular phone conversations also is quite 'hillarious', having tried that on a number of occasions, to no avail. If they weren't using the onboard flite phone equipment (pay for play) phones, the chances of anyone successfully talking to anyone from a cellular phone from an airliner, in my professional opinion, based upon scientific evidence as well, is virtually 'zero' from any altitude higher than a couple thousand feet, and in slow flight, due to the radiation patterns of both the ground based cellular equipment (receive patterns rather limited in the vertical plane) and the very low radiated power of the phones themselves. therefore, those calls not placed via the onboard equipment, were either totally 'bogus' or 'intentionally generated by special equipment by unknown persons intending them to be perceived as real calls' by anyone. As an engineer as well as pilot, I want to state for the record, that this is such an absurd idea that handheld consumer cell phones placed any of those calls for more than a few seconds that day, based on real laws of physics. To assert otherwise is a bunch of bullshit.

in other words, no stewardess or passenger could have ever used a hand held portable cellular phone that day with any degree of success. It is not possible. If you calculate the frequency of known cellular phones, minimum discernible sensitivities, signal path losses of those, and those of the ground based equipment and the phones themselves, and the antenna gain figures of the cellular antennas on the handsets and the towers, this is a virtual 'impossibility' from every conceivable scientific angle. thoses calls had to be intentionally falsely created and broadcast, and that infers a whole lot of conspiracy took place on Sept. 11, 2001, to do exactly that. our goverment has the capability to do exactly this. The 'military' term for this is 'meaconing' or "the intentional broadcast or re-broadcast of false information to achieve a military objective..", as it's put in the military ops manuals. It encompases everything from altering radar signals and re-broadcasting them, all the way to communications jamming and deception. It's done by the military normally during military operations, but the Bush administration seems to have now blurred that line between the NSA, the military, and the Constitution in ways that suggest that any 'military' capability can and will be used against the civilian population of this nation, at will, without oversight of any kind. Voice synthesis of human speech to exactly emulate any person on this earth exists in the military inventory, and there is no doubt in my mind that it was used on Sept. 11, 2001, to deceive the public. No doubt at all.

shooting holes in your; "oh, it was a bunch of accidents happening" assertion, isn't being done here to make a fool out of you, you've done that pretty damned well yourself. what I am doing here is making sure, for the record, that the assumption that 'incompetence' is the sole reason Sept. 11, 2001 happened, is put to bed, once and for all. nobody is going to ever convince me it was anything but coordinated, conspiratorial action that allowed it.

ATC personnel, and pilots,for that matter, are not bumbling idiots, who get to arbitrarily do whatever they choose. rules, regulations, procedures exist to enhance safety, and ensure that pandemonium doesn't reign in situations where extreme calm and competency must prevail. though I am not a fan of civil servants, and some pilots, I want to say right here and now that you are not your average everyday village idiot doing those jobs, for a reason. you have to get certifications beyond the average citizen's competency level to do these jobs, and you must constantly re-certify and re-certify and re-certify. everyone is a professional, in spite of what you might believe. it is the only way air travel can be as safe as it has been for so very very many years. it didn't happen by accident. it was by design. pilots don't have to have the level of technical knowledge I have, but my military experience and job demanded it. I didn't get it out of a box of goddamned cracker jacks!

I think you need to get a whole lot of real world experience before you get to refute me on these facts I have presented herein. I demand it, actually.

if you want challenge me, you better get a lot of man years of flight/ATC/technical experience and operational military experience to do that. otherwise, don't be putting out bullshit you have not one clue about on here. you know not what you are talking about.

and lastly, don't be telling me that the ATC system and F.A.A. regulations I have used to stay alive for about 40 years, suddenly were 'faulty' or 'not up to it' because they weren't. they work, and have worked. On Sept 11, 2001, something altogether different was going on, and it had to be intentionally done. I stand by that. there are exceptions to most rules, but too many of them had to happen that day, and I am not buying that for a second, and for you to hawk that crap on here is just wrong. don't do it!

Sorry, love, but if they let it happen, they just as good as MADE it happen.

Premeditated murder is always a conspiracy--those who destroy evidence at the crime scene, resist investigating the murder, then tamper with said murder investigation, make themselves, at the very least, assecories after the fact to murder.

Impeachment. Accountabiility. A better world.

Col. Jenny Sparks