Seeking Researchers For 9/11 Radar Study

[David Cole]

I am looking for researchers to study newly acquired 9/11 radar records.

 

This team will consist of Air Traffic Controllers, Radar software technicians, Pilots and others with skills necessary to understand the FAA and NTSB records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

 

 PM me and tell me a bit about your interest and qualifications.

[Dennis Cimino]

when I was at Lockheed Martin in 2001, I was working on ATC radar equipment and know exactly what the capabilities are, I was doing the certification work on them.  as a pilot who's not been a controller but who's very familiar with radar systems, and radar data recording devices from 1974 onwards, I probably don't need too much coaching from an F.A.A. guy about the systems.  I am not discrediting your work, David, I am stating that anyone who makes the statement that no radar injection took place on Sept. 11th. hasn't done the hours of RADES 84 data analysis or looked at the radar sweep times from the data released by the government, before they made that statement.  I saw radar sweep interval aliasing in that data.  I also saw position slews of just under 26 seconds in the RADES 84 data versus other positional information in N644AA's FDR data record that the N.T.S.B. provided in 'raw' and also .csv decoded formats for us years ago.  I also know that when discussions about this aliasing were taking place, that the folks in Langley, VA both at C.I.A. and at the main H.Q., per their I.P. addresses, were looking at the discussions suddenly.  So they were pretty concerned with the fact that we had now proven their radar data was not 'live' stuff.  We also know that extensive false targets made it impossible for the interceptors to find their tankers that day because the simulated radar was kept running well beyond when all aircraft were down.  From military experience, I can tell you that all op orders are promulgated in such a way for exercises that they are HALTED in the event of any kind of real world shit going on.  On Sept 11th., this was not the case, the exercise video was allowed to continue to be piped to NEADS for an additional half hour before it ceased.  So I respectfully disagree that no radar injection happened that day.  There is significant factual proof to the contrary, and being that is unheard of prior to 9/11 or afterwards, I have to at least conclude that the radar injection was a major role player in the treason of the day.   And though I would be glad to look at F.A.A. stuff, I no longer trust it at all.  Does that mean I think it's irrelevant at this point?  In a way, not necessarily 'irrelevant' but it is a bit smelly that suddenly the F.A.A. has NEW stuff they can give us?  That we hadn't arlready gotten from them via F.O.I.A.'s sent them years ago?  It might have some validity to point to the desperation and the absolute necessity to buttress up their bullshit stories of 9/11, but listen, Mr. Cole, they have fabricated so much shit so far, let's put it this way, I for one cannot believe them any longer.  I did for a long time think at least some of the earlier stuff was pretty meaningful but it too was heavily monkeyed with.  Now, ten years later, clearly you can see my apprehension in spending a lot of time believing they have since changed their ways at F.A.A. and N.T.S.B. and quit releasing fabricated fake shit, right?  We can look at it, but personally I am not too very concerned with 'new' shit they have to offer for the reasons stated.  I've seen far too much evidence that shows the NEADS radar picture was delayed nearly 26 seconds, and the radar data released to us via F.O.I.A. requests was re-mastered via digital recording, hence, not reliably verifiable records of the air picture in the NEADs sector that day at all.  When I saw the aliasing in the data and knew what that meant, all dialogue with the provider of that data dried up immediately.  They never dreamt in their wildest nightmares that a radar video recorder (DIGITAL) expert would get his hands on that shit and see the aliasing.  I did, and I saw it.  And I told the world about it.  And I'll take a fucking polygraph test about it if need be, stating for the record that I know that stuff was pre-recorded and re-recorded more than once from playback prior recordings.  I cannot prove it but I immediately knew the E-4B's had that video data linked up to them, and then back down, prior to re-injection that day.  The entire show was run by those E-4Bs' that NORAD had in the air.

and that, Mr. Cole, is what I know.  I don't need to consult with an F.A.A. shill to advise me what their capability was on Sept. 11th., 2001. I was working on that shit at Lockheed Martin for their enroute centers when this went down.  I know exactly what it was. and it was not out of the question for the system to undergo injected radar video for NEADS.  So I have to state for the record I don't believe your F.A.A. guy's assertion to the contrary.  He either does not know, or is intentionally trying to deflect people away from the radar injection that did in fact play a major role that day.  We can prove it.  It happened.  To deny there was injected radar stuff going on does not fly.  It's been proven to not be true based on the information many of us know to absolutely controvert that claim that it didn't happen that day.

David Cole said:

I suggest you go find an ATC who was working on 9/11 and query him/her about the capabilities.

[Shallel Octavia]

Hello David,

 

It's great to have you with us and looking at the radar data, I think the physics of these crashes is even more compelling and should be of interest to you as a Physics Professor. It is a clear violation of F=ma for planes to not show significant deceleration while doing the work of penetrating these robust towers. 

 

Best,

Shallel

 

 

 

NEADS TECHNICIANS TOLD TO TURN OFF 'SIM SWITCHES'
The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 took place in airspace that was the responsibility of NEADS, based in Rome, New York. NEADS was therefore responsible for trying to coordinate the military's response to the hijackings. And yet, in the middle of it all, at 9:30 a.m. that morning a member of staff on the NEADS operations floor complained about simulated material that was appearing on the NEADS radar screens. He said: "You know what, let's get rid of this goddamn sim. Turn your sim switches off. Let's get rid of that crap." [1] Four minutes later, Technical Sergeant Jeffrey Richmond gave an instruction to the NEADS surveillance technicians, "All surveillance, turn off your sim switches." (A "sim switch" presumably allows a technician to either display or turn off any simulated material on their radar screen.) [2]

 

http://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2010/08/lets-get-rid-of-this-godd...

David Cole said:

Dennis, please take a look at the new files.  Send me an email, so I can provide you with a list of all 14,000 files.  You can then specify certain files.  Ultimately we will need a way to transfer many large files for you to review.

 

I agree that newer files are potentially subject to manipulation.  This is why I am focusing on the oldest ones.  Some were saved only hours after the events.

 

I am not doubting that there could be recorded data used by NEADS to confuse NEADS.  What I hear from the ATC experts is that these were not shared with the civilian side to confuse the civilian side.

 

When I listen to the audios and read the transcripts of the ATC communications I have yet to hear or see any reference to an inject, sim or phantom confusing them.  The scope views I have seen do not show any phantoms.  The datasets used to create the scope views don't include any.  Until I see one of these sims in the FAA files I must conclude that they were not injected.

 

Let's try to keep the discussion separated into the proper parts. NEADS and the games is one system and ATC is another system.  Am I correct?

 

The RADES data that you reviewed came out in 2007, correct?  So that dataset had sufficient time for manipulation.  I am not familiar with it, so cannot comment.  It sounds like since you were exposed to manipulated data now everything is suspect.  The new ones are perhaps different records, from different sources.  They did not come from the military side.

 

FAA is not pushing these files.  I went after a select few of them, but after much negotiation, decided to ask for the whole lot.  There wasn't time for the agency to manipulate to suit my requirements.   The set is massive, too many things would have to be covered if one part is changed.

 

Now I can see them, even at an early stage, covering their asses and leaving records out entirely.  But fabrication is much more complex, requiring fixing many records not just one here and there.

 

Take a look.  At least see if there is something that might be new and worth review.

[Dennis Cimino]

sounds like a good plan.  but you were mislead by the fact that NEADS video was stricly kept on the military side, it wasn't separated that day.  the data that was being piped into the NEADS pipeline on Sept. 11th. went system wide, not just segregated from one side versus the other.  that's why I am a bit skeptical that someone is trying to say that the stuff was exclusively on the military side of the fence.  that is not the case.  if you take a look at 'INTERCEPTED' (41 minutes) and watch that, you might see how this was not the case that only military was seeing the injection.  but yes I will look at the stuff.  but my warning still stands that at this stage of the game after seeing the stuff I had seen already, and listened to, in official released under F.O.I.A. crap from not only the N.T.S.B. but the F.A.A. as well, that I truly do have a hard time believing them anymore.  For good reason.  In a way it was a learning curve initially but over time, it got pretty clear that the F.A.A. and N.T.S.B. weren't honest with us and providing data that was in-fact, not altered.  To go further, the N.T.S.B. fell very heavily on it's sword with TWA-800, and from that point forward, could not be trusted...nor could the F.A.A., or to go one step further, ANY government agency of any kind.  They have a pattern of pushing disinformation and heavily altered stuff and truly I would be lying to you if I told you that I won't expect more of the same to occur now.  I think you are doing a good thing by wanting to analyze it, but some of the data requires extensive technical examination beyond using the RADES 84 software tools.  Case in point, the audio stuff requires Dynamic Signal Analyzing or DSA capability or FFT analysis to look at the spectral content of the noise in the voice recordings.  There are many many ways to ascertain the validity of the data...beyond just watching the video or listening to the audio.  Deeper analysis of the audio and radar sweep interval timing data requires much harder work to do but usually proves the stuff is fake.  In today's world the average person doesn't realize that, for instance, the raw file from the memory of the FDR shows information about engine start sequences via power interruptions that pull down the essential aircraft bus, forcing the reboot of the FDR due to insufficient line voltage for brief transients the engine starts cause.  That is not seen in the decode, strictly in the analysis of the raw data file itself.  So that point I was making is that looking at a three dimensional object from head on without side and back and underside or rear views, you don't see all the information there.  But I will help you go thru some of it.  We just need to find a way to get it posted in a place it can't be tampered with further, if necessary we may have to rely on copying it and snail mailing it if need be.  But I have no doubt that any 'new' stuff they are releasing is strictly an attempt to patch holes in their story.  They've demonstrated that in the past, and I have no reason to believe that cat has changed his stripes there at F.A.A. and N.T.S.B. land.  They're known data fabricators, truly.    So, anyway, I didn't mean to get so long in the tooth here but truthfully we may find something in the older stuff that's verified to be truly older, that has more relevance than the most likely 'heavily hacked' or 'fabricated' stuff they've just 'found' if you get my drift.  They're incompetent, but hiding behind that kind of tardiness is a bit much ten years later.  I cannot trust them...and have seen enough of their monkey business to know they are far from honest information brokers.  Truly they are not.
David Cole said:

Dennis, please take a look at the new files.  Send me an email, so I can provide you with a list of all 14,000 files.  You can then specify certain files.  Ultimately we will need a way to transfer many large files for you to review.

 

I agree that newer files are potentially subject to manipulation.  This is why I am focusing on the oldest ones.  Some were saved only hours after the events.

 

I am not doubting that there could be recorded data used by NEADS to confuse NEADS.  What I hear from the ATC experts is that these were not shared with the civilian side to confuse the civilian side.

 

When I listen to the audios and read the transcripts of the ATC communications I have yet to hear or see any reference to an inject, sim or phantom confusing them.  The scope views I have seen do not show any phantoms.  The datasets used to create the scope views don't include any.  Until I see one of these sims in the FAA files I must conclude that they were not injected.

 

Let's try to keep the discussion separated into the proper parts. NEADS and the games is one system and ATC is another system.  Am I correct?

 

The RADES data that you reviewed came out in 2007, correct?  So that dataset had sufficient time for manipulation.  I am not familiar with it, so cannot comment.  It sounds like since you were exposed to manipulated data now everything is suspect.  The new ones are perhaps different records, from different sources.  They did not come from the military side.

 

FAA is not pushing these files.  I went after a select few of them, but after much negotiation, decided to ask for the whole lot.  There wasn't time for the agency to manipulate to suit my requirements.   The set is massive, too many things would have to be covered if one part is changed.

 

Now I can see them, even at an early stage, covering their asses and leaving records out entirely.  But fabrication is much more complex, requiring fixing many records not just one here and there.

 

Take a look.  At least see if there is something that might be new and worth review.

[David Cole]

Shallel Octavia said:

Hello David,

 

It's great to have you with us and looking at the radar data, I think the physics of these crashes is even more compelling and should be of interest to you as a Physics Professor. It is a clear violation of F=ma for planes to not show significant deceleration while doing the work of penetrating these robust towers. 

 

Best,

Shallel

 

 

 

NEADS TECHNICIANS TOLD TO TURN OFF 'SIM SWITCHES'
The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 took place in airspace that was the responsibility of NEADS, based in Rome, New York. NEADS was therefore responsible for trying to coordinate the military's response to the hijackings. And yet, in the middle of it all, at 9:30 a.m. that morning a member of staff on the NEADS operations floor complained about simulated material that was appearing on the NEADS radar screens. He said: "You know what, let's get rid of this goddamn sim. Turn your sim switches off. Let's get rid of that crap." [1] Four minutes later, Technical Sergeant Jeffrey Richmond gave an instruction to the NEADS surveillance technicians, "All surveillance, turn off your sim switches." (A "sim switch" presumably allows a technician to either display or turn off any simulated material on their radar screen.) [2]

 

http://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2010/08/lets-get-rid-of-this-godd...

 

Quote:

I think the physics of these crashes is even more compelling and should be of interest to you as a Physics Professor.

You think I am a professor?  Not even close.  I am a layman.

As for the NEADS side, I am not speaking about this, except in passing.  I am focused on the civilian side.  Let's keep this separated.  Please start a new thread for that can of worms.  Nowhere in my records have I seen any mention of SIMS.

 

[Shallel Octavia]

Sorry.. had you confused with David Chandler... Nevermind

Carry on....

[Dennis Cimino]

actually they have a whole bunch of civil servants who's sole purpose in life is to do exactly what they are told to cover up and obfuscate what took place that day as best as they can.  TREASON is a crime that is punishable by death, and they all very well know this, those in power who aided and abetted in it.  they have deep pockets too, they get the lion's share of the money the ignoramus' ship them.   as for NEADS at ATC being separate, they are not and have not been.  the radar pipeline is joined.  it has been for a long time.  much of the long range ATC radars are in fact not F.A.A. assets at all, they are military SHARED assets.  so the misconception you have is that NEADS infers strictly military when there is no such thing any longer.  the radar tracking capability of the U.S. has been a joint venture for many many years.  there are, on paper, thin demarcation lines but they share hardware.  whoever told you that the F.A.A. and the military stuff was segregated and separate was being very, uh, disingenuously not correct.  but never make the assumption they had no time to monkey with this stuff.  they have had ten years chronologically and whole departments in the Pentagon, the N.T.S.B.,and within the F.A.A. strictly to do this.  the assumption that these guys are segregated is a very bad one to make.  there's no real segregation.  though the NEADS title infers an Air Defense Sector, which it is, it is not like the F.A.A. and the military are on different dimensions in space and time.  they coexist in the same room, inside the same video switches and wire bundles.  it's been that way for a very long time. 

David Cole said:

Dennis, please take a look at the new files.  Send me an email, so I can provide you with a list of all 14,000 files.  You can then specify certain files.  Ultimately we will need a way to transfer many large files for you to review.

 

I agree that newer files are potentially subject to manipulation.  This is why I am focusing on the oldest ones.  Some were saved only hours after the events.

 

I am not doubting that there could be recorded data used by NEADS to confuse NEADS.  What I hear from the ATC experts is that these were not shared with the civilian side to confuse the civilian side.

 

When I listen to the audios and read the transcripts of the ATC communications I have yet to hear or see any reference to an inject, sim or phantom confusing them.  The scope views I have seen do not show any phantoms.  The datasets used to create the scope views don't include any.  Until I see one of these sims in the FAA files I must conclude that they were not injected.

 

Let's try to keep the discussion separated into the proper parts. NEADS and the games is one system and ATC is another system.  Am I correct?

 

The RADES data that you reviewed came out in 2007, correct?  So that dataset had sufficient time for manipulation.  I am not familiar with it, so cannot comment.  It sounds like since you were exposed to manipulated data now everything is suspect.  The new ones are perhaps different records, from different sources.  They did not come from the military side.

 

FAA is not pushing these files.  I went after a select few of them, but after much negotiation, decided to ask for the whole lot.  There wasn't time for the agency to manipulate to suit my requirements.   The set is massive, too many things would have to be covered if one part is changed.

 

Now I can see them, even at an early stage, covering their asses and leaving records out entirely.  But fabrication is much more complex, requiring fixing many records not just one here and there.

 

Take a look.  At least see if there is something that might be new and worth review.

[Psy]

This is quite like WIkileaks, isn't it?

 

 

[Shallel Octavia]

Yes but more intergalactic; hope you're enjoying yourself!

Like minds think great.

 

Could you link us to your work on the sway of the tower?

 

Cheers!

[Dennis Cimino]

PissyLeaks as I call them is a Julian 'Rothschilds' Assmange gig, where virtually nothing he has leaked has in any way dare point a finger towards Israel.  Assmange has flung lots of dung far and wide, but if anyone thought he was truly a national security threat to the turds in power, (CIA) that they wouldn't have managed an 'unfortunate accident' for him by now, or a 'Obumma' drone strike by now?  virtually all of the dung flung by mossad boy Assmange has miraculously kept Israel out of the shit storm.  Most people might find that, uh, rather odd. :)
Psy said:

This is quite like WIkileaks, isn't it?

 

 

[Dennis Cimino]

actually it would make sense that the towers would sway after impact, at least a small amount as they were flexible enough to move in the wind as they would have to be, so the assumption is that the imparted inertial mass of the 100 plus tons of airplane and fuel would make them at least do a couple iterations back and forth before they went back to a rest state?  nobody really mentions the fact they felt the building sway, post crash, in either tower.  I have a hard time buying the plane strikes wouldn't have done more than made a big bang.  a nice low frequency wiggle to and fro would have ensued long enough to make people feel that and remember it.  I felt the Sears Tower sway in the wind in Chicago, and didn't like that feeling much.  Same with the stratosphere in vegas when the roller coaster twirled around on the top just above the bar and made the building shimmy.  so we know newton's laws were still working in those two cases.  the short duration impact moment at a height so far from the 'fulcrum' point (ground level or thereabouts) should have made those buildings do a wiggle back and forth, if not a twisting motion as well due to the offcenter hits they sustained.  if anyone sees a single word from any of the people who got out to that effect, please post that here.  but my guess is that at the very least, the buildings would have gone back and forth twice maybe and settled down again... anyway, as the planes seemed not to interract with the buildings much on impact but just sawed thru them like the buildings were made of silly putty, maybe nobody but the poor schmo's who were in those areas felt much of anything.  Maybe Jim can ask William Rodriguez if he heard anything about that swaying business, he was way low in the building where the relative motion from the fulcrum point was not so great, but 80 floors up was another matter altogether.  should have done some swaying...lots of force was transferred from a hurtling airplane to a stationary building.  where did all that inertia go to?  buildings don't just disssipate force like that without some form of low frequency resonance reaction going on.

Shallel Octavia said:

Yes but more intergalactic; hope you're enjoying yourself!

Like minds think great.

 

Could you link us to your work on the sway of the tower?

 

Cheers!

[Psy]

The difference matte study of tower sway is in Chapter 9.The tower certainly sways, but the question is when, exactly does it begin to sway.

 

9/11 - The Great American Psy-Opera.

[Dennis Cimino]

yeah, timing was everything that day (NOT!) for the stupid bastards who pulled this off whilst humming 'Hava Nagila' to themselves in those nice big tacamo chairs in the E-4B's that day.  You'd think that they'd realize that seismic data was going ot show that explosions went off in the lower levels before any planes struck, and that people in the upper floors would be able to feel those reverberations all the way up in the upper floors before the pyrotechnics began up higher with the collisions, and then later, the demolition charges, whatever they were.  but someone f'ed up with Bldg 7's triggering, and being they desperately needed to destroy evidence in vaults there, as well as bury evidence of a gold heist in progress there.  you'd think these turd blossoms would have done a dry run first, with charges disconnected from the initiation electronics, just to make sure their radio control paths were clear and working from the detonation initiation points.  unfortunately the Israeli's can't do anything right...taking them off the short list for 'master race' and putting them on a list of 'master baiters' perhaps, baiters of wars, baiters of financial woe, baiters of suffering and incredibly banal acts of incredible hubris and greed.  they're masters allright, but certainly in a rather ignoble and arcane way!  In any case the whole timing sctick was f'ed up beyond all belief, even the stupid BBC slut couldn't get her video cue'd right to announce the yet to have happened, Building 7 demolition.  Those inbred piles of human HOUSE of WINDSOR waste in London sure blew it that day!

 

Psy said:

The difference matte study of tower sway is in Chapter 9.The tower certainly sways, but the question is when, exactly does it begin to sway.

 

9/11 - The Great American Psy-Opera.