THE
ENEMY IS INSIDE THE GATES
10/24/2001 6:18:35 PM Pacific Daylight Time
THE
ENEMY IS INSIDE THE GATES
by Colonel Donn de Grand Pré (US Army - Ret.)
A dedicated group of
experienced civilian and military pilots,
including combat fighter pilots and commercial
airline
captains, just finished a marathon 72 hours of
non-stop
briefings and debate over the current crisis
evolving from
the use of commercial aircraft as cruise missiles
against
the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 11
September.
The so-called terrorist
attack was in fact a superbly executed
military operation against the United States,
requiring the
utmost professional military skill in command,
communications and control. It was flawless in
timing, in
the choice of selected aircraft to be used as
guided
missiles, and in the coordinated delivery of those
missiles
to their pre-selected targets.
As a tactical military
exercise against two significant
targets (world financial center and the citadel of
world
strategic military planning), the attack, from a
psychological impact on the American public,
equaled the
Japanese "surprise" attack on Pearl
Harbor 7 Dec
1941.
The over-riding question: If
we are at war, who is the enemy?
The group determined that the
enemy is within the gates, that
he has infiltrated into the highest policy-making
positions
at the Federal level, and has absolute control,
not only of
the purse strings, but of the troop build-up and
deployment
of our military forces, including active, reserve
and
National Guard units.
PRELUDE TO PANIC
The 9-11 activity and
horrific destruction of US property and
lives was intentionally meant to trigger a
psychological
and patriotic reaction on the part of the US
citizens,
which is paving the way for "combined UN
activity" (using the fig leaf of NATO) for
striking
key targets in both the Middle East/ South Asia
and the
Balkans. The goal continues to be ultimate destruction of
all national sovereignty and establishment of a
global
government.
The trigger for the 9-11
activity was the imminent and
unstoppable world-wide financial collapse, which
can only
be prevented (temporarily) by a major war, perhaps
to become known as WW III. To bring it off (one more
time),
martial law will probably be imposed in the United
States.
In each of the major wars of
the 20th century, the financial
manipulators (located in the City of London and
New York
City) had placed the US (and much of the Western
world) in
a monetary expansion mode, followed by an
ever-tightening
vice of a gigantic credit squeeze.
We now have two ongoing
and tightly controlled simultaneous events
(emanating from
the two symbolic targets of 911: 1) Alan
Greenspan, Fed chairman, promising to flood the
market with up to $200
billion in FRNs and to further lower interest
rates, thus
bringing about hyperinflation and dollar
devaluation.
Much of these multi billions
in largesse will be dumped into the
coffers of Wall Street, Defense, bankrupt
airlines,
insurance companies and into the willing arms of
debt-ridden third-world countries in the form of
debt
repudiation (forgiveness). Call it bribery, in
order to get
these often reluctant nations to join our coalition of
"freedom fighters" in "the war
against
terrorism".
2) Paul Wolfowitz, deputy
Defense secretary, promised that the
US will launch "sustained military strikes
against
those behind the terrorist attacks on New York and
Washington". He said that the "military
retaliation would continue until the roots of
terrorism are
destroyed."
This bit of saber rattling
was seconded by select NATO allies
(especially Britain), and by our chief ally in the
Middle
East, the Butcher of Beirut, Ariel Sharon, while
Secretary
of Defense Don Rumsfeld, with the blessings of
Pres. Bush
11, is activating thousands of national guard and
reservists, not only to guard the vulnerable
airports, but
to do fly-overs of our Nation's capital in F16s
from the
North Dakota Air Guard. Other National Guard units
are
being jockeyed into potential combat "hot
spots"
throughout the Middle East/South Asia and the
Balkans.
WHO IS THE ENEMY?
Following is a summary of the
near-unanimous views of the
assembled military and civilian pilots concerning
certain
critical factors relating to the WTC/Pentagon hit
of 9-11:
Troubling questions arose about the alleged
pilot-hijackers
of the four aircraft, who were supposedly trained
on Cessna
aircraft over the past year at fields in Florida
and
Oklahoma. One General officer remarked, "I
seriously
question whether these novices could have located
a target
dead-on 200 miles removed from takeoff point...--
much less
controlled the flight and mastered the intricacies
of 11FR
(instrument flight rules) -- and all accomplished
in 45
minutes."
The extremely skillful
maneuvering of the three aircraft at
near mach speeds, each unerringly hitting their
targets, was superb. As one Air Force officer -- a veteran
of over
100 sorties over North Vietnam -- explained,
"Those
birds (commercial airliners) either had a crack
fighter
pilot in the left seat, or they were being
maneuvered by
remote control."
Another pilot warned that
"we had better consider whether
electro-magnetic pulse or radio frequency weapons
were used
from a command and control platform hovering over
the
Eastern Seaboard... I'm talkin' AWACS."
Another comment: "If
there was an AWACS on station over
the targeted area, did it have a Global Hawk
capability? I
mean, could it convert the commercial jets to
robotic
flying missiles?
A hotly debated question: Who
would be in command of such an
Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS)? Were
they
Chinese -- Russians -- Saudis -- Israelis -- NATO
? All of
these countries possess AWACS-type aircraft. All
(except
the Saudis) have the capability to utilize
electro-magnetic
pulsing (EMP) to knock out on-board flight
controls and
communications of targeted aircraft, and then, to
fly them
by remote control.
One of the Air Force officers
explained that we had already
flown a robot plane the size of a Boeing 737
across the
Pacific to Australia -- unmanned -- from Edwards
AF13 in
California to a successful landing on an Aussie
base in
South Australia. It flies along a pre-programmed
flight
path, but is "monitored" (controlled
remotely) by
a pilot from an outside station.
He explained that the London
Economist (20 Sep 2001) published
comments from the former CEO of British Airways,
Robert Ayling, who stated that an aircraft could be
commandeered
from the ground or air and controlled remotely in
the event
of a hijack.
COMMERCIAL JETS AS GUIDED
MISSILES
An AP story, dateline
Brussels - 7 Oct 01 -- "At
Washington's request, NATO will soon deploy
surveillance
aircraft for anti-terrorist operations in the
United States
in response to the attacks on New York and
Washington, NATO
officials said Sunday, an unprecedented use of
foreign
military forces to defend the U.S. homeland."
The assembled group of pilots
debated why we would ask for
foreign forces to fly AWACS over our sovereign
territory
when we have a fleet of 33 of them, of which 28
are
stationed in Oklahoma. The debate also centered on
whether
such NATO surveillance aircraft were already here
prior to
11 September.
Could one of them have
commandeered the four airliners?
There seems to be wide discrepancies between what the Federal
government is proclaiming -- and their media
moguls
reporting -- as opposed to the calm and reasoned
and
rational views of those men who fly the planes and
defend
the nation against all enemies, foreign and
domestic.
This writer has been a
general aviation pilot since 1946, and I installed an FAA-approved airstrip here on my
farm in
1980. Two local pilots periodically joined me for
short
hops; one, a Madison County lawyer, a graduate of
the Air
Force Academy, who flew for the Air Force before
coming
home to practice law.
The other, Kent Hill, who
lives with his wife, Carol, on a
farm close to mine, is an American Airlines
captain
assigned to the European route. He was a lifelong
friend of
"Chic" Burlingame, They were graduates
of the
Naval Academy and flew F-4 Phantoms in Vietnam.
Both left
the Navy 28 years ago and joined American
Airlines. Both
planned to retire in 2002. Chic was the captain of
AA
flight 77, a Boeing 757, which departed Washington
Dulles
for Los Angeles at 8: 10 am on I I September, with
58
passengers and a crew of 6. Flight 77 crashed into
the
Pentagon at 9:41 am.
[NOTE-I was absolutely
stunned when I read the name "Chic"
Burlingame as the pilot of the plane that struck
the Pentagon.
The Burlingames have been close friends of our
family
for many years, and "Chic's" brother
Brad was a classmate of mine
in earlier years. In fact, my mother had (in
recent years) been
called by their mother to pray for the father
"Chic" senior, who was
dying then of cancer. My mother did much
ministering
to the couple (both now deceased.) It is sobering
to
realize that both they and "Chic" have
been in my
family's home in past years. Please pray for the Burlingames
at this tragic time.-Pam Schuffert]
"We were totally trained on the old type of
hijack,"
Capt Hill said, "where you treat the hijacker
cordially, punch a 4-digit code into your
transponder to
alert ground control you're being hijacked, and
then get
him where he wants to go, set the plane safely on
the
ground and let them deal with it on the ground.
However,
this is a totally new situation... Not one of the
planes
alerted ground control that they were being
hijacked."
How come?
"The fact is, all the
transponders were turned off on the
doomed flights virtually at the same time."
Look at
their departure times -- two from Logan (Boston),
one from
Newark, another from Dulles (Washington DC) -- all
between
8 am and 8:15.
"Shortly after climb-out
to flight level, their
transponders are de-activated.. (they are no
longer a blip
on the radar screens). This is something that
really needs
to be looked into. The only reason we turn them
off is so
they don't interfere with ground systems when we
land."
(Note: Transponders identify
a particular aircraft in flight
on the radar screens of FAA flight controllers
located
throughout the country. Various codes are punched
into the
transponder, one displaying, "I am being
hijacked.")
Although there is much talk
among the various flight crews,
Hill says they are not privy to any of the
investigations
into the events of 11 September. "We're in
the dark
-- very much so ... They're playing it pretty
tight to the vest."
He is convinced none of the
pilots had control of their
aircraft when they were flown into the World Trade
Center
and the Pentagon. The question then becomes, who
was really
in control?
"Even if I had a gun at
my head, I'd never fly a plane
into a building. I'd try to put it in anywhere --
a field
or a river --and I'd be scaring the hell out of
them (the
hijackers) by flying upside down first," Hill
said.
In fact, the pilot has the
best weapon in his hand when
threatened with imminent death by a hijacker,
namely, the
airplane.
Another airline pilot stated.
"On hearing a major scuffle
in the cabin, the pilot should have inverted the
aircraft
and the hijackers end up with broken necks."
That none of the four pilots
executed such a maneuver points
toward the fact that none of them had control of
their
aircraft, but had been overridden by an outside
force,
which was flying them by remote control.
As an old and not so bold
pilot, I became more convinced that
the four commercial jets were choreographed by a
"conductor" from a central source,
namely an
airborne warning and control system (AWACS). They
have the
electronic capability to engage several aircraft
simultaneously, knock out their on-board flight
controls by
EMP (electro-magnetic pulsing) and assume command
and
remote control of these targeted aircraft.
As we consider all the
options -- and enemies -- who performed
this act of war, whether from China, Russia,
Israel, an
Islamic country, or from NATO, we must also
consider that
the enemy may be within the gates.
If so, then we are dealing
with high treason.
|