From the archive, originally posted by: [ spectre ]

http://blog.wired.com/defense/files/cia_report.pdf

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/08/spooks-vs-psych.html

Spooks vs. Psychics: Who Predicted 9/11 Better?
By Sharon Weinberger  /  August 22, 2007

“Yesterday, we learned about the newly released CIA inspector general
report slamming the spook agency for not foreseeing the Al Qaeda
threat and 9/11.  Now, Gary Bekkum at Starstream Research questions
whether the CIA actually had the information it needed to foresee
9/11, and just didn’t realize it. How’s that? Well, the intel
community’s psychics may have predicted it back in 1986. Who knew?

Gary has been vigorously pursuing the spy-psychic connection for a
while–(known formally as Remote Viewing)–and has spent a lot of time
sifting through declassified documents relating to the intelligence
program; he recently put up some of the declassified raw reports that
he says may indicate foreknowledge of 9/11. I’ve pasted some excerpts
below.

It’s a basic question, if you think about it: who was better able to
predict the devastation of 9/11? Was it the top analysts in the
intelligence community, who had at their fingertips (or should’ve had)
some of the best intelligence collected by technical means and human
sources, or psychics (who, incidentally, were also in the employ of
the intelligence community at the time)?”


http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/08/22/911source21.jpg

http://www.starstreamresearch.com/psychic_spy_9_11.htm

CIA STAR GATE / SUN STREAK PSYCHIC SPY 911-IMAGES FROM 1986

We have compiled images from a CIA-released STAR GATE document of
remote viewer aka psychic-spy sources tasked to warn of a major
terrorist incident in New York City. At the time the once SECRET
sessions were recorded, the implicit target was assumed to be the
Liberty Celebration.

Our interpretation is that the viewers attention was drawn some
fifteen years into the future, to the events of September 11th, 2001,
and as a result they reported images from both New York City and
Washington, D.C. The psychic spy remote viewers were given envelopes
describing the target (terrorist attack) and instructed not to open
the envelopes. The instructions — what we consider to be the input to
the ‘black box’ mechanics of remote viewing — included keywords like
“hostile terrorist activities” and “reported.” Furthermore, they are
instructed “so that we may have the opportunity to thwart any hostile
terrorist activities” and are given a general location, near the
Statue of Liberty. It is also important to understand that this input
request was hidden within the envelopes and was not to be read by the
viewers: “They were instructed not to open their envelopes nor share
data with each other.”

The report from psychic spy remote viewer SOURCE 21 from June 20, 1986
and June 23, 1986.

On the first session of June 20th, 1986,  Source 21 appears to have
made contact with key aspects of the 9/11 attacks. The viewer’s
attention is drawn towards America from the east, suggesting the
origin of the terrorists homelands. The arrival of the terrorists
brings “burning and loud noises.”

It then appears that we are thrust into the future, following the
failure of Flight 93 to crash into the U.S. Capitol Building.

“President George W. Bush will lead the worldwide initiative with the
playing of the national anthem on December 11 at a White House event
at 8:46 a.m. (EST). This event will be web cast live on the White
House web site.”

I have struck out in red “analytical overlay” which is erroneous data
injected by a viewer interpreting raw psychic intelligence within the
context of their personal understanding of the images, as opposed to
the actual target.

“We are privileged to have with us today the families of many of the
heroes on September the 11th, including the family of Jeremy Glick of
Flight 93. His courage and self-sacrifice may have saved the White
House. It is right and fitting that it is here we pay our respects.”

The second session then takes Source 21 back to the intended target
site of a terrorist attack against NYC.

The site is described as “massive grey smooth” and “stepped.”

At this point Source 21 locks into the target event: “Newspaper
headlines have something to do with a collapse of a building — a lot
of people hurt or injured … perhaps something to do with an
aircraft … there is a perception of a large object falling —
heading toward the building … I sense the object may cause
structural damage as it crashes through the building. All of this
takes place sometime in the future.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing

http://www.starstreamresearch.com/pr02.htm

CIA FILES and 9/11

Remote Viewers Predicted 9/11 Style Attack Against Washington
Did Military Remote Viewers identify a 9/11 pilot?

(PRWEB) August 21, 2005

911 hijacker Ziad Jarrah may have been identified in the 1980’S by
military remote viewers.

A CIA Star Gate document, based upon input from four military sources,
reveals that a pilot with a name similar to “Jerry, Gerard, or
Geraldo” will “…fly to Washington D.C. with the mission of crashing
into the US Capitol Building.”

The date of the document appears to be prior to the 12th of December,
1983.

There are two copies of the same document in the CIA Star Gate
collection. The Star Gate collection covers more than twenty years of
government sponsored research into anomalous mental phenomena (AMP)
used by the military for intelligence collection. Remote viewing
involves using human sources as psychic spies to acquire intelligence
using their minds.

The two documents of interest (they are nearly identical, except that
one is marked “confidential”) appear to be from December of 1983. Paul
H. Smith’s “Reading the Enemy’s Mind” tells of special INSCOM remote
viewing sessions, held during a RAPT training program at the Monroe
Institute in early December, 1983. These sessions were future oriented
and tasked the viewers to locate future terrorist attacks in the
Washington, D.C. area. [1]

The CIA documents are of interest primarily for two reasons:

There is the prediction of an event:

An aircraft will “…fly to Washington, D.C. with the mission of
crashing into the US Capitol building…”

There is possible identification of the pilot:

The pilot, “…not in the country as of 12 Dec 83, foreign, perhaps
Iranian, speaks English and perhaps French… Name may be or sound
like Jerry, Gerard, or Geraldo…”

The remaining information, as presented in this document, appears at
first glance to be seriously wrong. Starstream has discovered that
removal of contextual overlay reveals interesting correlations to 911
events, including the identification of New York and New Jersey.

The art of remote viewing is far from being an exact science. There is
a signal to noise ratio involved, and errors are to be expected. There
is the extraordinary distance in spacetime from 1983 to 2001. More
importantly, the original data presented by the “four different
sources” is not available. What is presented in the available document
appears to be an analytical summary and interpretation of raw data
provided by the viewers. The methodology used by the viewers is not
known.

Keywords and concepts from the original document can be mapped to the
assumed target event of the failed attack against Washington on
9-11-2001. The terrorist pilot of United Flight 93 was Ziad Jarrah
(also sometimes spelled Jarrahi), a name that might be considered to
“…sound like Jerry Gerard, or Geraldo.” Jarrah, a foreigner from
Lebanon, was not Iranian, however at least one passenger identified
the terrorists on Flight 93 as possibly Iranian. Jarrah was of Middle
Eastern origin and spoke both English and French.

It should be noted that according to the document “This information
was produced unofficially and is unconfirmed.” This suggests that
Monroe Institute sessions may have been involved.

[1] Paul H. Smith’s “Reading the Enemy’s Mind”:

Smith writes that he was among the second group of INSCOM people to
get RAPT’ed sometime around Dec. 2, 1983. See page 143.

Thursday Dec. 8th, 1983 Future 15

Smith writes:

“…we were to try to perceive events occurring over the next two
years.”

INSCOM RAPT Gateway Experience Precognition Session, ~ Dec 9th, 1983

Page 150-151 tells the story of a special future oriented remote
viewing group session at the Monroe Institute.

Smith mentions being tasked against a specific target:

“Will there be a terrorist attack against government facilities in the
Washington, D.C. area in next few months?”

“Where will the next terrorist attack take place?”

“When will the next attack take place?”

Papers with the impressions were handed in, and according to Smith
“…we never heard about it to my recollection.”

http://www.starstreamresearch.com/ciarv911.htm

STARSTREAM REPORT
SSR-2005-08-25-CIA-STARGATERV911

NOTE:

We assume for this particular exercise that remote viewing of distant
targets, as practiced by the CIA and military intelligence agencies,
is a real and viable method of intelligence collection.


http://www.starstreamresearch.com/Flight93.jpg

Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 7:10 PM

DRAFT COPY PRELIMINARY RESULTS

ORIGINAL CIA DOCUMENTS:

CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1900470003-9
CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1200070002-1

Following 9/11, an internal CIA report concluded that there had been
“No examination of the potential for terrorists to use aircraft as
weapons, as distinguished from traditional hijackings.”


http://www.starstreamresearch.com/IC%20911%20failure.JPG

Introduction

There are two copies of the same document found in the CIA STAR GATE
Collection. This collection consists of recently released declassified
material covering more than twenty years of government sponsored
anomalous mental phenomena (AMP) used for information collection (RV –
Remote Viewing) and material perturbation (RP – Remote Perturbation).
The document appears to be from 1983, as there is a notation that the
target subject (pilot) is “not in the country as of 12 Dec 83.”

This document is of interest primary for two reasons:

The prediction of an EVENT:

An “aircraft”, will “…fly to Washington, D.C. with the mission of
crashing into the US Capitol building…”

The possible identification of the PILOT:

The pilot, “…not in the country as of 12 Dec 83, foreign, perhaps
Iranian, speaks English and perhaps French…name may be or sound like
Jerry, Gerard, or Geraldo…”

The remaining information, as presented in this document, appears at
first glance to be seriously wrong. Interesting correlations appear
upon closer examination.


http://www.starstreamresearch.com/STAR%20GATE%20Jarrah%20clean.JPG

The art of remote viewing is far from being an exact science. There is
a signal to noise ratio involved, and errors are to be expected. There
is the extraordinary distance in spacetime from 1983 to 2001. More
importantly for this report, the original data presented by the “four
different sources” is not available. What appears in the document is
an informal analytical summary and interpretation of the raw data
provided by the viewers. The methodology used by the viewers is not
known. It is noted within the document that “this information was
produced unofficially and is unconfirmed.”

The Account by Paul Smith

The account by Paul Smith, telling of his involvement in special
INSCOM/Monroe Institute RAPT sessions held during late 1983, fits the
apparent time frame of the creation of the document.

Smith writes that he was among the second group of INSCOM people to
“get RAPT’ed” sometime around Dec. 2, 1983. [1]

About the Thursday Dec. 8th, 1983 Future 15 sessions Smith writes:

“…we were to try to perceive events occurring over the next two
years.”

INSCOM RAPT Gateway Experience Precognition Session, ~ Dec 9th, 1983

Page 150-151 of Paul Smith’s book, “Reading the Enemy’s Mind,” tells
the story of a special future oriented remote viewing group session at
the Monroe Institute.

Smith mentions being tasked against a specific target:

“Will there be a terrorist attack against government facilities in the
Washington, D.C. area in next few months?”

“Where will the next terrorist attack take place?”

“When will the next attack take place?”

Papers with the impressions were handed in, and according to Smith,
“…we never heard about it to my recollection.”

Interpretation

In this extended preliminary report, STARSTREAM has dissected the
original document using “conceptual remote viewing” methodology. This
allows for reexamination of the data as presented in the original
document. Key basic concepts can be mapped to a presumed target event:
the failed attack against Washington, D.C. during the terrorist events
of 9-11-2001. In this context, United Flight 93 appears to be the
primary origin of the 1983 report. It is generally accepted that the
hijackers aboard Flight 93 intended to fly the plane into the U.S.
Capitol Building. The terrorist piloting Flight 93 was Ziad Jarrah
(Jarrah is also sometimes spelled Jarrahi). Jarrah is a name that
might be considered to “sound like Jerry, Gerard, or Geraldo.” We note
that none of the names of other terrorists involved in the attack
against Washington, D.C. bear any resemblance to Jerry, Gerard, or
Geraldo.

Jarrah, a foreigner from Lebanon, was not Iranian but was of middle
eastern origin. Jarrah spoke both English and French.

Examining the Data

We begin with the assumption that remote viewed data represents a very
noisy signal, buried in a set of non-local interactions separated from
each other in ordinary spacetime by the limit of the speed of light.
The basic black box with an input and an output forms the basis of our
model. Since there are no accepted theories of a non-local signal
(that is a signal that propagates faster than light, and is therefore
outside of causality) we restrict the actual phenomenology to a black
box, which accepts an input and produces an output. The internal
workings of the black box are not important for our purposes.

For the black box the choice of any input signal will affect the
output signal.

The primary problem we wish to avoid for our black box is CONCEPTUAL
OVERLAY. Conceptual overlay results from the improper choice of an
input signal into the black box. An input signal which results in an
output that is strongly over-correlated to the input signal is
considered to have been colored by conceptual overlay. The resulting
output signal is generally localized and produces little or no
information about the distant non-local target. Ideally we wish to
maximize the output signal for non-local information, which can later
be correlated to actual events.

Our method relies on mapping and selection rather than pre-biased
interpretations of the raw signal output of the black box. It is
expected that the output is a noisy mixture of local and non-local
signals. To optimize the correlations we focus on the primitive
content rather than on the original analysis and conceptual overlay
for our interpretation.

Note that the primary distinguishing characteristic of this method is
that we do not directly ask questions of the black box. Instead we
allow the non-local signal to query our local reality. We observe any
conceptual correlations to actual events.

Interpretive mapping of the output data

Given an existing set of data from a black box output measurement, we
proceed by reducing the data to primitive conceptual elements. Ideas
are the primary resource in this method, other sensory impressions are
generally not discussed.

Applying CON-RV to the CIA STAR GATE documents

CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1900470003-9
CIA-RDP96-00788ROO1200070002-1

The session(s) which produced the data in this document appears to
have been heavily front loaded with information. This is made more
explicit given the likelihood that the RAPT sessions described by Paul
Smith are the source of the information.

We assume that the following keys were inserted into the input of the
black box:

“terrorist attack”

“government facilities”

“Washington, D.C. area”

“will, when, where” and “next few months”

Given the above, we strongly expect that these items will appear in
some form in the output of the black box.

We also expect some kind of mixture of the above local elements with a
non-local source, given that altered states of consciousness were
likely induced by the methodology at the Monroe Institute. This should
result in a mixed output of noise, and local and non-local signal.

OUR ANALYSIS OF THE DOCUMENT USING CON-RV METHODOLOGY

APPARENT SOURCE

“SOURCES: The sources for this information are Army personnel who have
provided accurate information in the past. This information was
produced unofficially and is unconfirmed. Four different sources
provided information which contained the same basic elements. The
following information are those elements which were generally
repeated.”

We conclude that the origin of the data is likely from INSCOM sessions
held at the Monroe Institute in early December, 1983, based upon the
account by Paul Smith, and the fact that the document states that the
sources were Army personnel, that they provided accurate information
in the past, and that the information was produced unofficially and is
unconfirmed.

The methodology was likely unconventional as explained by Paul Smith
in his book.


http://www.starstreamresearch.com/RAPT.JPG

DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT

“EVENT: Sources state that a small “Lear Jet type aircraft” loaded
with explosives (not further identified) will depart from a northern
mid-west area, perhaps Chicago or near Chicago, and fly to Washington,
D C with the mission of crashing into the US Capitol building. One
source states that he feels there is a flight plan on file at National
Airport.”

The description of the event is heavily front loaded, as noted
previously.

The target “Washington, D.C.” was likely front loaded as an input to
the black box, as was “terrorist” and “attack”, etc.

Here are the primitive elements:

Small aircraft, Learjet, jet-type, aircraft, loaded, explosives,
depart, northern,Midwest, Chicago, mission, crashing, U.S. Capitol
Building, flight plan, National Airport

Mapping to the 9/11 events:

“small”

The 9/11 pilots flew test flights using small aircraft, including a
fly over of the Washington, D.C. area. According to the 911 report
Karl Rove first informed President Bush that a small, twin-engine
plane had crashed into the World Trade Center. National Security
Advisor Condoleezza Rice told Bush that it was a twin-engine aircraft,
and a commercial aircraft.

“Learjet”

NO direct match. We first concluded that this was analytical overlay,
perhaps from the original identification as told to President Bush, of
a small twin-engine commercial jet plane crashing into the World Trade
Center. Later we discovered that a nearly identical description
appears in the 9/11 Commission Report, pages 457-458:

“A 1998 White House tabletop exercise chaired by Richard Clarke
included a scenario in which a terrorist group loaded a Learjet with
explosives and took off for a suicide mission to Washington. Military
officials said they could scramble fighter jets from Langley Air Force
Base to chase the aircraft, but they would need “executive” orders to
shoot it down.”

We wonder if this exercise was influenced or inspired by the 1983 CIA
document. This also demonstrates that there is always the danger of
picking up related but “off target” information during any remote
viewing session.

“jet-type”

All 9/11 planes were 757 or 767 commercial jet aircraft

“aircraft”

The 9/11 plot involved the use of aircraft as weapons of mass
destruction

“loaded”

The 9/11 pilots were concerned that the planes be loaded with the
maximum amount of jet fuel

“explosives”

The jet fuel loaded into the planes was the explosive which turned the
planes into WMD; the terrorists threatened to use an explosive bomb on
Flight 93

“depart”

The 9/11 aircraft involved in the Washington, D.C. area attacks
departed from Newark, New Jersey, and Washington, D.C.

“northern”

The region of concern was NORAD’s northeastern watch; generally
“northern” is a partial hit, as opposed to say “southern”, etc.

“Midwest”

The Midwest is mentioned in connection with Chicago and the Great
Lakes area. Front loading by the question “where is the plane NOW”
likely skewed this result. Further details, in particular the history
of the aircraft, are required to check this out.

“Chicago”

Again there are indications that Chicago may have some relationship to
the aircraft in the period near to 1983.

NOTE ADDED 10-20-2005:

9/11 and Chicago

One of the items that bothered me about the CIA document that likely
resulted from the 1983 Monroe Institute INSCOM future remote viewing
sessions, was the reference to Chicago.

Today I discovered a reference connecting Chicago with crashing into a
building, from the official 9/11 report:

“At 9:00, Lee Hanson received a second call from his son Peter:

It’s getting bad, Dad-A stewardess was stabbed-They seem to have
knives and Mace-They said they have a bomb-It’s getting very bad on
the plane-Passengers are throwing up and getting sick-The plane is
making jerky movements-I don’t think the pilot is flying the plane-I
think we are going down-I think they intend to go to Chicago or
someplace and fly into a building-Don’t worry, Dad- If it happens,
it’ll be very fast-My God, my God.

The call ended abruptly. Lee Hanson had heard a woman scream just
before it cut off. He turned on a television, and in her home so did
Louise Sweeney. Both then saw the second aircraft hit the World Trade
Center.

At 9:03:11, United Airlines Flight 175 struck the South Tower of the
World Trade Center.51 All on board, along with an unknown number of
people in the tower, were killed instantly.”

“mission”

The 9/11 mission was to inflict as much damage as possible using
aircraft as WMD. Specifically in the Washington, D.C. area the targets
were the Pentagon, the Capitol Building, and the White House. The
White House was considered to be a more difficult target.

“crashing”

Although all of the 911 aircraft crashed, Flight 93 failed to reach
the intended target in Washington, D.C. and crashed into a field in
Pennsylvania.

“U.S. Capitol Building”

The U.S. Capitol building is the assumed intended target of Flight 93

“flight plan”

A general point, that the planes had properly registered flight plans,
and were not rogue invaders

“National Airport”

Although this is likely overlay due to front loading, it should be
noted that National Airport is in the Washington, D.C area.
Identification of National Airport was provided by only one of the
four sources.

TIMELINE

“DATE OF EVENT: The month of December, January or February. The most
probable day is the 6, 16 or 26th of each month.”

Mapping to 9/11 Events:

Note: The timeline was likely seriously skewed by front loading, given
the account of Paul Smith. Several interesting correlations can be
made, however.

[Comment added 8-25-2007: Inversion of images is commonly reported by
remote viewers. It is possible that a 6 can be viewed as a 9, and vice
versa. The original tasking instructions, given in Dec. of 1983,
targeted the “next few months” according to Paul Smith.]

“December, January, or February”

The holiday season of 2001 is discussed in detail in the 9/11 Report,
as Jarrah, Atta, and Shehhi all took foreign trips during this time
period. This suggests that the dates given in the CIA document may
have been focused on the departure and arrival of the terrorists.

“January” 2001

January 2001 was a pivotal month for many of the 9/11 pilots. January
appears 118 times in the 9/11 Commission Report, February appears 79
times, and December appears 100 times. For a quick comparison, March
appears 94 times, April 79 times, June 410 times, July 431 times,
August 168 times, and September, the month of the actual attacks, 376
times. We therefore attach no significance to the dates given by the
remote viewers, apart from the above.

The identified dates may have some significance for Jarrah, in January
of 2001, perhaps related to his completion of Flight School and a trip
to visit his father at the end of January. We have found no other
possible significance and conclude that the dates given are not
related to the 9/11 attack on Washington, D.C.

6th: May have possible significance, not directly related to the date
of the attack

16th: May have possible significance, not directly related to the date
of the attack

26th: May have possible significance, not directly related to the date
of the attack

[Note added on 8-25-2007: We suggest that the three number sixes
reported above may have been nines. If that were true then the 9, 91,
and 92 might be related to the date of 9/11/2001.]

THE 9/11 AIRPLANES:

“AIRCRAFT: small “Lear Jet type” aircraft

blue and red in color, red predominating

Tail number may include the following characters:

A, N, Y, and the numbers 1 thru 7

most probably N, 2 and 7

Current location is believed to be along the Great

Lakes, perhaps Chicago.

Aircraft may have been purchased within the last 60

days in New Jersey or New York.”

We suspect that there would have been confusion between the entire
9/11 event, where four planes were used as weapons, and the front
loading that specified the Washington, D.C. area. There is a more
serious problem with the time frame, as the request for a current
location in 1983 would conflict with the actual event timeframe of
September 2001. There are several errors resulting from temporal front
loading of the remote viewers.

Apart from dates and timelines, numbers and letters are generally
considered to be among the most difficult targets.

Here are the primitive elements:

Small, Lear Jet type, blue and red (red predominating), tail number,
A, N, Y, the numbers 1 through 7, N, 2, and 7, current location, Great
Lakes, Chicago, aircraft, purchased, last 60 days, New Jersey, New
York

Mapping to 9/11 Events:

“small”

Original report of a plane crashing into the World Trade Center
described the aircraft as a small, twin-engine plane.

“Lear Jet type”

Likely analytical overlay, perhaps confusion given the report of a
small twin-engine commercial jet and the actual 767 and 757’s used in
the attack.

There is also this item mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report:

“A 1998 White House tabletop exercise chaired by Richard Clarke
included a scenario in which a terrorist group loaded a Learjet with
explosives and took off for a suicide mission to Washington. Military
officials said they could scramble fighter jets from Langley Air Force
Base to chase the aircraft, but they would need “executive” orders to
shoot it down.”

“blue and red”

Blue and red are the predominant colors used in the detailing of both
the American Airlines and the United Airlines planes.

“red predominating”

This also appears as analytical overlay, although red might be
considered to stand out more than the blue against the silver metallic
plane bodies.

“Tail number,” “A, N, Y and “the numbers 1 through 7,” “N, 2, and 7”

Identification of the actual tail number would have been the target.
It does appear that there is a partial hit as the letter N is
identified as one of the three most likely letters. This is exactly
correct for all four planes.

The actual tail numbers were:

N612UA
N334AA
N591UA
N644AA

Note that the 3 digital tail numbers all fall between 1 – 7 with the
exception of a single 9 in N591UA, the 757 flown by Jarrah. We assume
that the inclusion of the number 7 is related to the Boeing 757 or 767
designation.

We also note that the tail of the American Airlines planes features
the distinctive “double A” logo and bird graphic, which resembles the
letter Y.

This appears to be a possible hit in most respects except for the
number 9 in N591UA.

“current location”

This is immediately problematic given that there is temporal overlay.

“Great Lakes”

No apparent mapping. Flight 93 turned back towards Washington, D.C
shortly before reaching the Great Lakes area.

“Chicago”

No apparent mapping.

NOTE ADDED 10-20-2005:

9/11 and Chicago

One of the items that bothered me about the CIA document that likely
resulted from the 1983 Monroe Institute INSCOM future remote viewing
sessions, was the reference to Chicago.

Today I discovered a reference connecting Chicago with crashing into a
building, from the official 9/11 report:

“At 9:00, Lee Hanson received a second call from his son Peter:

It’s getting bad, Dad-A stewardess was stabbed-They seem to have
knives and Mace-They said they have a bomb-It’s getting very bad on
the plane-Passengers are throwing up and getting sick-The plane is
making jerky movements-I don’t think the pilot is flying the plane-I
think we are going down-I think they intend to go to Chicago or
someplace and fly into a building-Don’t worry, Dad- If it happens,
it’ll be very fast-My God, my God.

The call ended abruptly. Lee Hanson had heard a woman scream just
before it cut off. He turned on a television, and in her home so did
Louise Sweeney. Both then saw the second aircraft hit the World Trade
Center.

At 9:03:11, United Airlines Flight 175 struck the South Tower of the
World Trade Center.51 All on board, along with an unknown number of
people in the tower, were killed instantly.”

“aircraft”

The reference to the aircraft involved, as well as to the timeline,
suggests that the viewers were front loaded with questions such as
“Where or when was the aircraft purchased?” There is the suggestion
that the viewers were being tasked along a line of inquiry that skewed
the data.

“purchased”

The terrorists involved in the 9/11 plot did not purchase any
airplanes, however they did purchase airplane tickets. The locations
associated with the purchase are New York and New Jersey.

“last 60 days”

Once again there is a serious problem with temporal front loading.
Perhaps this is related to the identification of the Chicago and Great
Lakes region?

“New Jersey”

New Jersey plays a predominant role in the 9/11 events.

“New York”

New York plays a predominant role in the 9/11 events.

9/11 PILOTS

“PILOT: not in the country as of 12 Dec 83

foreign, perhaps Iranian

speaks English and perhaps French

May enter the country through Canada on a French passport.

Name may be or sound like Jerry, Gerard or Geraldo.”

The identification of the pilot is the most interesting piece of
information, apart from identification of the plot to use airplanes as
weapons against government buildings in Washington, D.C. Generally it
is our opinion that this information is mostly correct. The most
important data point is the identification of the name of the pilot
flying the mission against the U.S. Capitol Building.

We note that of all of the names of the 9/11 pilots, the only
potential match is Ziad Jarrah. We also note with great interest that
Jarrah is the pilot of Flight 93, and that the target was considered
to be either the White House or the U.S. Capitol Building in
Washington, D.C.

Here are the primitive elements:

Pilot, country, 12 Dec 83, foreign, perhaps Iranian, speaks English,
perhaps (speaks) French, enter country, Canada, French, passport,
name, Jerry, Gerard, Geraldo

Mapping to 9/11 events:

“pilot”

Four planes were used in the 9/11 attacks. The names of the pilots
were Mohammed Atta (Flight 11), Hani Hanjour (Flight 77), Ziad Samir
Jarrah (or Jarrahi)(Flight 93) and Marwan al Shehhi (Flight 175). Of
these four, only Jarrah “sounds like” Jerry, Gerard or Geraldo. It
should also be noted that none of the names of the other hijackers
“sounds like” Jerry, Gerard or Geraldo. Jarrah piloted Flight 93,
bound for Washington, D.C. The likely target was the U.S. Capitol
Building, as there had been some discussion that the White House would
be a difficult target.

“country”

This item is probably front loaded. It is likely that the viewers were
asked “Is the terrorist pilot in the United States?”

“12 DEC 83”

This appears to be the front loaded timeframe of the original sessions

“foreign”

Jarrah a citizen of Lebanon, also lived for a time in Germany

“perhaps Iranian”

This may be related to a quote by one of the passengers on Flight 93.
In the account by MSNBC at

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3067652/

“Jeremy Glick calls his wife, Lyz, in New York to say that three
“Iranian looking” men, one with a red box strapped to his waist, have
taken control of the plane and to call the authorities.”

“speaks English”

Jarrah spoke excellent English

“perhaps (speaks) French”

Some reports state that Jarrah spoke fluent French as well as English

“passport”

The terrorists all entered the United States using passports, in other
words no one entered through illegal channels, although fraudulent
information was used in some cases

“name”

Jarrah was the pilot identified with Flight 93, on a mission to crash
into the United States Capitol Building. Jarrah may be interpreted to
sound like Jerry (as in Jarrahi) Gerard (Jah – rard) or Geraldo.

[1] “Reading the Enemy’s Mind” by Paul Smith, page 143.