Updates, 9/11 Film and ACARS of UAL175 & UAL93


By Mark Conlon

 

A few words about Flight 93...

During my research of "Flight 93" and the landing at Reagan Airport at 10:28am, it was apparent that the time-line and supporting evidence can only reach this hypothesis. A lot of the evidence I used to reach this conclusion was based on evidence in the public domain, however mainly ignored or omitted by the truth community, especially 'Pilots For 9/11 Truth' who I am very sceptical of now. 

Below is an interesting clip showing how 'Pilots For 9/11 Truth' edited information from the Air Traffic Control (ATC) communication audio. This is what I call Simon Shack tactics, by only giving the viewer half the information.




I have major concerns involving their omissions of vital evidence of 'Flight 93' which I alluded to earlier. 

It was over 2 years worth of research which led me to this conclusion that "Flight 93" landed at Reagan National Airport at 10:28am. I intend to fully document in detail this research in due course. I shall also be addressing the ACARS data in relation to Flight 93, as great weight was placed on this evidence by 'Pilots For 9/11 Truth' and others. I will hopefully be able to shed more light on this evidence.

ACARS Evidence Flight175 & Flight 93 

 
I am also in the process of conducting "new" research studies into the other 3 flights 11, 175 and 77. I would also like to address areas such as the passengers and phone calls and reach a hypothesis based on all the evidence and information where ever that leads. 



Thanks for reading and caring... 



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

In Search of United Airlines ‘Flight 175’

Image
By Mark Conlon I would like to begin by thanking Julia Ratsey and Conspiracy Cuber for their help towards this blog post. Also thanks to Andrew Johnson, Richard D. Hall and Chris Hampton who have been supportive of my research.   United Airlines “Flight 175” (UAL 175) was a scheduled domestic passenger flight from Logan International Airport, in Boston, Massachusetts, to Los Angeles International Airport, in Los Angeles, California. On September 11 th 2001 UAL 175 was scheduled to depart at 08:00 a.m. for Los Angeles. Allegedly fifty-one passengers and the five hijackers boarded the 767 through Terminal C's Gate 19. The plane pushed back at 07:58 a.m. and took off at 08:14 a.m. from runway 9. It is estimated that UAL 175 was hijacked between 08:42 a.m. and 08:46 a.m. while American Airlines “Flight 11” (AAL 11) was just minutes away from hitting the North Tower. We are told the hijackers forcibly breached the cockpit and overpowered the pilot and first officer, allowing lead hijac
Read more

Who Is 9/11 Harley Guy..? "Seeing Through The Disinformation"

Image
  By Mark Conlon   Much has been made in recent years of the use of "crisis actors" involved in relation to 9/11 and a number of " staged " terrorist attacks that followed. Much of the early promotion of "crisis actors" originated and was heavily promoted by Simon Shack, along with other so-called 9/11 researchers'.  One of the most famous 9/11 cases was the "Harley Guy" on Fox News who gave an account of the " official " 9/11 WTC building collapse story from the get-go, or did he? There has been many people who believe the "Harley Guy" to be actor Mark Adrian Humphries. Of course Mark Humphries denies any involvement on 9/11, and claims he was in Los Angeles at the time the 9/11 events were happening. See image below: Taken from Simon Shack's - September Clues forum.  So who is the "Harley Guy"? I still see and hear people accusing Mark Humphries of being the "Harley Guy". From research which doesn
Read more

Flight 175 and The Truth about 'The Truth in 7 Minutes' in FIVE Minutes

Image
By: Mark Conlon - 25 Jan 2014   (Updated 24 Feb 2017) Short introduction and note by Andrew Johnson [ADJ] Below, Mark has carefully documented some further errors made by Markus Allen in a recent response to another error he made in an earlier video. The thrust of what Markus Allen appears to be trying to say is that “the videos of Flight 175 crashing into the WTC are fake”. This, of course, has been a topic much discussed on 9/11 “truth” websites. I have come to the conclusion, partly because of what I have covered in this article, that there has been a deliberate attempt to promote the 9/11 video fakery position in order to obscure or cover up the knowledge of the use of some type of image projection technology, which was used to create a very powerful illusion of plane crashes (for those chuckling about this idea, simply try and account for the physical evidence that plane wings cannot cut through steel box-girders and also account for the fact that some witnesses did not see or hea
Read more