Printable View
Former Cleveland Mayor Reported Flight 93 Landed at Cleveland Airport on 9/11 and Flight 175 in Vicinity. Cincinnati WCPO TV Cover-ups Why Account Removed From Web Site
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles...8131/37079.htm
wow, has anyone heard about this story?
and if so, how is it to be taken? is there anything to it, or is it a fake?
any other news on this in the states?
I don't believe anything that comes from arcticbeacon at first glance. I always try to verify what he says.
ok gold,
my being in germany, i'm not really up to date with the media in the states any more, so that's why i wanted to hear what you guys there made of the whole thing...
but if he really did come out with something along these lines...would be big shit, huh?
Of course it would... but now try to verify it... ;)
what's with this greg symanski guy....is he known to you all ?
what's his rep..
sorry...Szymanski
Some of his stuff is a little outlandish...
For a start the archive.org link Syzwhathisname put up is wrong: the link is actually
http://web.archive.org/web/200307100...l/story14.html
But he's right, it doesn't say anything about it being an AP Wire story.
I just got through reading the whole story. It fits is all I can say. I had heard about a plane switch at Cleveland many moons ago. If its true that a high ranking Congressman called him that is interesting. Somehow I think this is about to break open. There are some interesting stories concerning the Patholigist in Pennsylvania the one who was to be in charge of the autopsies. He will not do any interviews. What happened to the people on 93?
I have more.... I have become friends with John McCarthy (you can read about him on From The Wilderness here) http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/hall/Mac.html
This is a PM I had with him a few months back and he thinks alot of Greg Szymanski,Mike Ruppert and John Kaminski.I am not sure what to think about the plane switch. I have come to believe that this happened and that the passengers were led to believe they were going to continue on their flight to L.A. (Theory)In actuality they were placed on a flight to a very friendly Uzbekistan who disposes of the troublemakers/bombers in the Middle East.
Here was my questions / and his answers.
Aceace wrote:
I read many many authors/blogs etc and one of them is John Kaminski. I'm sure you have heard of him. He believes that Mike Ruppert is a shill for the Oil industry because he promotes the Peak Oil scenario. Obviously, Kaminski thinks the world has plenty of oil. I do not agree with this. The US reached peak in the early 70's and increased oil imports. Which caused the Arab oil embargo, gas crisis etc.
I guess my question is this: Was the oil crisis 1970's faked to protect and preserve Americas oil thereby using up the arab oil and other supplies ? Do you think Mike Ruppert is a shill for the oil companies ? Is there an oil crisis in your opinion ? I believe it is very real crisis and that there are efforts underway for population reduction worldwide. I guess I just don't know for sure and would like to hear someones opinion who knows more about the inner workings of Govt.
John McCarthy wrote:
Was the oil crisis in the seventies legitimate....no. I was in Houston in 1979. My neighbor was a pilot working for the oil industry. While flying resupplies to oil rigs south of Houston in 1973, he observed 'hundreds' of huge oil tankers 'lying low in the water' (full, so they were 'inbound') about 35 miles beyond the horizen, unseen from land or the casual flight along the coast. Houston, at that time, had about 60% of the nation's oil refining capacity. It sat idle as well.
The price of gas at the pump went from about .50 cents per gallon to $1.10 in a week. I was in Miami at the time, and remember the panic well. The price never went back down although it did remain around the dollar mark for quite a while. People adjusted, shrugged their collective shoulders and moved on to other things. But I think the latest crisis is causing a bit more concern.
Today the price of gas in Needles, California, is $3.05 per gallon, at the pump. When I left Los Angeles it was hovering around $2.48 per gallon at the pump. Hey, a great title for a book on this subject; AT THE PUMP!
Strangely enough, I visited Germany last November for three weeks. I am presently back in Germany since mid May, returning to Los Angeles next week. The price of gas at the pump, while higher than in the States, has fluctuated five cents per liter, or .20 cents per gallon during that time, but has returned to it's original price. Germany imports most of it's gasoline.
During the same time frame, gas at the pump in California has INCREASED by up to $1.10 per gallon, and we manufacture it there. Something is very wrong with this picture.
It would be interesting to know the price flutuation of gas at the pump, regardless of whether it is sold by the liter or the gallon, around the world during this same time frame! Perhaps the CIA's World Book has that information.....
Is there an oil crisis today....yes, but only because of the real and anticipated demand of China which has a tremendous appetite for oil which can only continue to grow exponentially!
During discussions on this subject back in 1979, my neighbor informed me that a program had been in effect in America for many years whereby the oil companies were offered the incentive of tax free costs of drilling for oil and selling that same oil IF they left a cetain percent of the oil at the site, reserves you might say, and an incentive to go on to other sites for drilling and extraction. That oil is still there, untapped. I don't know if the percentage for tax incentives was ever greater than 30% left in the wells. Therefore, any legitimate worldwide oil crisis could be addressed.
A solution to address such a crisis would be to prompt China to invade Taiwan creating an excuse to defend another 'democracy' and BOMB China, thereby deminishing the requirement for all that oil to fill all those cars. That is not my solution, mind you, but the mentality of those who pull the strings. Thats what happened to Japan before WWII. We cut off their oil because they would not get out of China. Not because they invaded China, but because they would not leave. The same mentality prevails today. ANY excuse for a war! Basta ya!
Is Mike Ruppert a shill for the oil companies....nah.
Mike attacks anyone who he sees to be profiteering off the backs of Ameicans. That is his raison d'etre. He portrays that image. You should see what he wrote about AIG, the insurance giant. I believe he still has that series of articles archived on his site, http://www.fromthewilderness.com He digs like a dog after a bone and won't let go. Mike is not perfect and has his ways about him that sometimes rub folks the wrong way. But, if you get the chance to read Crossing the Rubicon, I think you will have to agree he does his research to back up his conclusions. Many folks have taken pot shots at Mike. That goes with the territory. Especially the targets of his works. But they use anonymous sources to castigate him. He is in demand and speaks all over the world. I guess everybody has to be someplace, eh? People do disagree with Mike's conclusions on Peak Oil, but no one has yet to say his research is faulty.
He was kind enough to mention me twice in his book. That was a surprise. He hadn't told me in advance. Someone on one of the forums asked someone else if I was the same John McCarthy in Mike's book as I had been posting on that forum at the time.
I guess one could construe Mike's comments as complimentary....
Strangely enough, John Kaminski has told me that he would like to write an article or a book about me, when he has 'time'.....but so did Greg Szymanski....I guess the Polish folks like what I have to say, eh? Greg lives in Ventura, just a short drive up the coast, and we are going to get together after I return to LA. He has already left messages for me to call him when I get back. His web site is "The Arctic Beacon". http://www.arcticbeacon.com
Bests,
John
That Cleveland airport mystery has always intrigued me, but I never looked into it. It does kind of fit the bumble planes theory where all the passengers were loaded onto '93 somewhere, maybe it was in Cleveland.
Interesting.
The Cleveland Airport Mystery has been discussed for a long time. Szymanski often "reveals" new information that has come out long before but seems to forget to source the original reference...
Here's a link to the source of the 'original' compilation resource re. Cleveland Mystery, as far as I know, which credits Team8+ with the research: http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modul...p?storyid=1008
I don't know... there are certainly a lot of unanswered questions here...
MY THEORY: In order for the Govt theory to work and for them to attack first afghan then iraq all of the Plane passengers had to die, no one could stop any of the first 3 hits because they were drone planes. The Passengers on 11,175 and 77 were all flown to Cleveland and all were transferred to 93 The Pennsylvania crash (93) might have contained all the passengers from 11,175,77 that would give them the fragmented unidentifiable bodies where dna could be obtained from each and every person the 93 crash site. I am still studying this, I am currently looking up the size/capacity of 93 and how many total victims combined from all 4 flights. The passenger list should hold some clues also checking into who's collected those Govt checks to not sue the airlines.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
The official story is all centered around It was reported that all 3 planes had been hijacked
This theory seems believable because of the fact that the pentagon was not hit by a 747, but what appears to be a small aircraft. Also, some sites suggest that the planes that hit the WTC were not 747's. The best reason as to why planes would need to be switched would problably be that they had to use remote control planes because hitting the WTC is difficult, and hitting the pentagon is a nearly impossible shot.
OK, but do we really believe that 93 actually went down in pennsylvania? where literally nothing was left to be found other than a funny looking whole in the ground without plane debris.... just have a hard time with that whole 93/pennsylvania thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by aceace
Hey Ace, that is the bumble plane theory exactly. The passengers on each of the flights were kept low somehow to ensure that they could all fit on one plane. Then each of the real planes were told over the radio that there was some "terrorist threat" and they should turn off their transponders and land at an airport somewhere, possibly Cleveland.Quote:
Originally Posted by aceace
Since the transponders were turned off, the real flights could be easily switched with the drones, a la Operation Northwoods, and sent on their way. The passengers are all herded onto a plane and blown up or shot down over Pennsylvania.
Operation Northwoods describes painting up a jet to look like a commercial flyer, and switching the planes with drones mid flight, so its not so far fetched. Because of Operation Northwoods, we have to strongly consider the possibility that this is what happened on 9/11. It explains why transponders were turned off, as well as the scenic routes and extremely sharp turns all planes took en route to their destinations.
If you wanna read about the bumble planes, here is a link:
http://www.public-action.com/911/bumble.html
Hey PG, flight 77 disappeared from radar up in W. Virginia I believe, so whatever hit the Pentagon wasn't 77, period. I suspect only 11 and 175 were switched with drones, and something was launched much closer to the Pentagon about 30 minutes later when the official story claims 77 suddenly appeared back on radar.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilosophyGenius
Also, whatever hit the Pentagon came in on that impossible angle to ensure it wasn't taken out by the anti-aircraft system installed at the Pentagon.
Thats a tough one, but witnesses do claim to have seen a plane that day followed by an explosion of some sort. Witnesses also claim to have seen a second plane in the area which may have been responsible for detonating a bomb, shooting them down, or remote controlling them into the ground.Quote:
Originally Posted by amman254
One of the witnesses say the plane went straight up and then went into a nose dive, I bet this was actually remote control, then as it was coming down a bomb was detonated to ensure there were no distinguishing characteristics left. The hole in the ground may have been pre-existing, dug for this specific purpose.
ok bigguy, witnesses claim to have seen...about as many different things as there were on witnesses that day in pennsylvnia. we've discussed this almost into the ground at a german forum i visit, and basically, still no general consensus.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
one thing about your suggestion..."if" the plane was brought to explosion above ground, or still in the air, they would have been recovering parts, pieces, and bodies, all the way from there to hell and back, and not just have that neat empty "little" hole, that was easy for them to fence off within a couple of miles, and not let any photographers in. this would not have been the case if a 757 had crashed in there, or had been blown up in the air.
to the link from global free press, that was posted earlier, here is another one, that is not just a time line...
http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modul...hp?storyid=323
Wasn't the debris scattered for miles around the crash site? I thought that was one of the anomolies of the crash scene that suggested the plane was shot down or blown up.Quote:
Originally Posted by amman254
I really don't know, the flight 93 crash is the one I know the least about.
Thanks for the link BTW, I'm checking it out now...
That is some interesting stuff. I can't help but think that if we could figure out the Cleveland thing, we could finally conclude once and for all whether the planes were switched or not.
I'm theorizing that the plane with 200 passengers that landed because of a bomb threat, MAY HAVE BEEN THE WRONG PLANE!!! Maybe the FAA or whoever screwed up and radioed the wrong plane, told them to turn off their transponder and land in Cleveland.
Regarding what hit the pentagon, chech out this video if you havn't seen it:Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
http://yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5649
Problably not a "missle" like most people say it was.
As for the anti-aircraft system in the Pentagon, my understanding is that it was that it was turned off that day. Could be wrong though.
I know,it wouldn't surprise me the anti-aircraft system would be turned off since Norad didn't bother showing up for work that day either.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilosophyGenius
I've seen that Pentagon video before, its really well done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
heh bigguy, here's a nice compilation on flight 93...
http://www.team8plus.org/forum_viewtopic.php?6.1212
and a question, can you speak german? i'm in a forum in germany where some good discussions have been taking place for several years, but it is obviously 98% in german.
No, unfortunately I can barely speak English!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by amman254
LOL...right on!Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy
Here's an interesting story about flt. 175
http://www.team8plus.org/content.php?article.17
Going back to the earlier debate, there is no way a missle or small plane can penetrate an advanced missle defense system by just coming in from a certain angle. If it comes from the sky, it will get shot down, unless of course it has some special technology on it. The only way to get passed a missle defense system is by coming from an extremly low alttitude, which obviously the plane did not.
Flight 77, or whatever was supposed to be flight 77, did come in at an extremely low altitude. Supposedly it was flying at about 500 MPH a few feet off the ground.Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilosophyGenius
Obviously I'm not an expert in this technology but I woul have imagined that the SAM would have hit the plane long before it lowered it's altittude. Just an assumption.Quote:
Originally Posted by somebigguy