Untitled Document
FAA records for four years listed both 9/11 United jetliners as still
on the 'active' list. Now planes only 'deregistered' in September after snoopy
researchers questioned FAA officials a month earlier.
Two of the 9/11 airliners were never ‘deregistered’ and
remained on the ‘active’ flight list until Sept. 28. 2005, the classification
officially changing only a month after two inquisitive flight researchers made
repeated calls to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), inquiring about
the strange irregularity.
The two planes in question were Flight 93 and Flight 175, both owned and operated
by United Airlines and, according to the official story, both destroyed on 9/11,
one in Shanksville, Penn., and the other crashing into the South Tower of the
WTC.
Usually a normal procedure after an airliner is destroyed, why it took United
more than four years to ‘deregister’ the airplanes and fill out
the official FAA paperwork remains a mystery and never has been fully explained
by the FAA, United or the government.
In fact, in stark contrast, a check of FAA records shows the two other American
Airline flights, Flight 11 and 77, both were ‘deregistered’ and
classified as ‘destroyed’ only months after 9/11 on Jan. 14, 2002.
Why the late filing by United?
“My brother and I both wrote the FAA in August about this situation and
asked why the planes were not deregistered. The FAA said that an owner does
not need to deregister an aircraft,” said one of the researchers named
Roger, who preferred only to use his first name. “Ironically, a couple
of months after I wrote the FAA, the planes were deregistered. What's up with
that?
“Although the planes are deregistered, they are not listed as cause destroyed
but rather as cause cancelled. The American airplanes are clearly listed as
cause destroyed but not so the United planes.
“There is a guy who was saying on a web posting that he knew one of the
United planes was still in service in Chicago. I know nothing of how he would
know this or who he was but I think he was the same guy who brought this stuff
to our attention and he's clearly right about the planes still being registered.
“Two planes destroyed and two planes still flying? Are you familiar with
the Cleveland airport mystery? So did Flight 93 land at Cleveland with 200 passengers
on board?”
A recent check of FAA records proves the flight researcher’s statements
correct as Flight 93 identified as N591UA and Flight 175 as N612UA, both were
taken off the active FAA list in September with a reason given as ‘cancelled’
not ‘destroyed.’
The FAA again was contacted this week, giving the same answers given to the
two researchers back in August regarding the late deregistration. And in regards
to listing both United flights as ‘cancelled not destroyed,’ FAA
officials also gave no further explanation.
Besides the FAA deregistration issue, solid evidence has also come forward
that two of the 9/11 flights, Flight 11 and 77, never even existed at all, according
to Bureau of Traffic Safety (BTS) records.
According to BTS statistics, both 11 and 77 officially never took-off on 9/11.
The meticulous data kept on every airliner taking-off at every airport in the
country also showed no elapsed run-way time, wheels-off time and taxi-out time,
not to mention several other categories left blank on 9/11 concerning the two
flights.
Although Flights 11 and 77 have the above data meticulously logged on 9/10,
it was suspiciously absent on 9/11, even when every other plane that took of
that day had been recorded and logged by the BTS.
Why the discrepancy? No one has ever given an official explanation for the
BTS missing flight data, even though it is well known that airports are extremely
concerned about recording accurate BTS data for each and every flight in and
out of its airport for liability purposes.
More importantly critics contend this is another clear indication Flight 11
and 77 were only ‘phantom flights,” adding even further doubt to
the credibility of the official government story concerning 9/11.
Besides the FAA and BTS irregularities, the official flight lists from all
four flights have been a serious bone of contention for 9/11 critics, who call
attention to the glaring errors and conflicting passenger numbers on many of
the flight lists released, many coming from unverified sources.
On Flight 11, for example, American Airlines released two different lists containing
77 and 75 names the day after 9/11, but the Washington Post published 89 names
the same day while the Boston Daily published 89 names with conflicting names,
however. Remember, complicating matters worse, Fox News all along was still
claiming that only 81 names were confirmed a week later.
Through out the years, not only have the numbers conflicted but so have the
names on the lists. Gerald Holmgren, a 9/11 researcher who has spent much time
and effort researching the flight irregularities found one of the most glaring
errors never explained by the airlines or the government.
Holmgren, whose compilation of 9/11 flight data can be found at http://indymedia.all2all.org/news/2004/05/84711.php,
uncovered that four of the alleged passengers on American Airlines Flight 11
with the last names of Ward, Weems, Roux and Jalbert also mysteriously and unexplainable
were also listed as passengers on Flight 175 that struck the South Tower.
Holmgren in his 2004 article had this to say:
“What a mess! This crime - the murder of approximately 3000 people,
and the excuse for two wars and alarming attacks on civil liberties - and presumably
more to come - is supposed to have been properly investigated and documented?
Why should we be expected to believe who the hijackers were, when the spin doctors
can't even do a credible fabrication job of a list of innocent victims?
“It's previously been demanded by many skeptics that we need
to see a verifiable official passenger list which actually contains the names
of the alleged hijackers. We can now take the implications of that further and
point to the absence of any passenger list documentation for AA11 which stands
up to scrutiny as a credible document. We have nothing which could support the
existence of any of the alleged passengers on the alleged flight.”