Despite all the previous arguments and evidence presented to date that clearly shows the American government’s own official storyline on what had happened on 9/11, is far from true, and that yes indeed it was what is often termed; “an inside job” - what I'm about to reveal, adds even a more sinister edge to it all.  

This article is not for the novice on the subject of 9/11; as I don’t really want to cover the already exhausted evidence presented to the world by the many excellent truthers who have dedicated, if not their lives in trying to expose what really took place that fateful day on 9/11 – 2001, they have spent hours, months or even years researching the subject, so what I’m trying to say; there is an abundance of evidence already been compiled and incredible films made and uploaded to youtube and alike for anyone to find out what really occurred that tragic day. 

For those who do not know of me; I’m the author of Trapped in a Masonic World, it took three years to write its 360,000 words and as long to research it.  It, and I was banned from various so called truth sites, including 9/11 Truth on Facebook, and publishers wouldn’t touch it with a bargepole.   I begin to write the book which was to be about 9/11, however, whenever I did any research as to who was really running this world, that it become blatantly obvious the Freemasons and its thousands of affiliates are the ones that do.  Of course they are NOT all “in on it”, - 99% of them have been hoodwinked, - though it’s their mere existence that keeps the same 1% of the fraternity always in power and control. 

And I am not referring to the Freemasons being behind 9/11, as I will no doubt be accused of.  In the above book I just mentioned; I clearly explain that almost every member of our worldwide governments are also members of the very same secret society, that being the Freemasons.- This well proven and known about fact is hardly my fault, you can't going around shooting the messenger just because they remind you of this fact.

Of course I understand that those who believe the "official" storyline will totally disagree with me, and that the expected army of trolls [those behind who I am exposing] will accuse me of 'insulting' the families and memory of those who tragically died that awful day.  Well I'm not, and if a member of my family was involved in 9/11, then I'd be camped outside the Whitehouse/Downing Street - demanding a public inquiry and not just accepting all the blatant lies and cover-ups the US government and the media have been telling us.

The is one of the worlds biggest murders, why on earth isn't there a full independent inquiry?

How much more evidence do you want to see before your understand that our world is run by well paid and finely educated gangsters; - and in proper "Gang'em style at that!

I decided to give Trapped in a Masonic World away free in its PDF format.   I never got around to publishing what I found out about 9/11 and have filed my research away.  I was to include the following information I had discovered in the new book, so have sat on this observation for some years. 

My last book A Madness Shared by Two, proves a police cover-up in the case of the Swedish Eriksson twins, who were captured on film throwing themselves into the oncoming traffic on the M6 motorway in the UK in May 2008.  Despite their horrific injuries and experience, Sabina Eriksson was released from hospital after only five hours, whilst her twin Ursula lay in intensive care with life threatening injuries. Hours later it's alleged Sabina bumped into a man in the street, went back to his home, then stabbed him four times in the heart and chest the very next day.  His name was Glenn Hollinshead.  As said; the book reveals a cover-up and that two police officers lied on TV, and that the hospital concerned, alongside the BBC and Mentorn productions, the makers of the film Madness in the Fast Lane, seem to have colluded and helped cover-up what it is I have since discovered and revealed, - and what the book is based on.  I conclude Sabina Eriksson was innocent of Mr Hollinsheads' murder or manslaughter in which after 16 months on remand she pleaded guilty to, dispite protesting her innocence prior and right up until the final day of trial, and when I believe a "deal" with the police and prosecution was made.  I further believe the 'real' killer/s are still on the loose and were never even looked for by the police, - as it was far more convenient to blame and convict Sabina, whilst covering up a massive police operation I suspect the twins were embroiled in. 

Back in 2008, Professor Paul Zarembka, author of the Hidden History of 9/11, thanked me for correcting a common error which appeared in his book, and in many other articles, publications and websites worldwide.  He first thought I was David McCann from Yale University.  I was the first person to discover and prove this was the case. This disinformation is still believed by many; that there we ‘two’ aircraft sharing the same tail number.  Though as said; I proved this wasn’t the case, as it was the ‘time-zones’ that gave it that impression.  Tail Number N591UA, has been widely misinterpreted as being the aircraft – seen in two separate places at the same time, when in fact it was not, it was always the ‘same’ aircraft. 

There is also a strong camp, who believe hologram airplanes were used, and as crazed as this may sound, technology exists to make this possible.  I can't see that being the case here, but cannot dimiss this line of thought by others.

Though again we are not discussing this kind of problem,as I want to concentrate on the actual alleged aircraft that were said to be used that day and not all the obvious points that have long been covered. 

There's also an abundance of evidence that can prove the 2^nd aircraft that hit the Twin Towers was a dark-grey – military aircraft, and NOT a commercial airplane; many witnesses have clearly stated and described this aircraft in the above video.

The most likely theory that UAV - ‘drones’ [unmanned aerial vehicle, colloquially known as a drone] were used, is the most feasible explanation to date.  You only have to see how commonplace they are and in their smaller variants.  The world record for an unmanned flight of a commercial aircraft has long been broken; - proving this kind of sized aircraft can be flown by remote control and from the comfort of another place and by simply using a computer.      

So if we are to agree that "drones" [replicas of the airplanes they were imitating] were used, then they had to take-off from somewhere? 

There also had to be a place where the “other” alleged ‘original’ aircraft, laden with “passengers” [mixture of military and secret servicemen and women], - had landed.  The same applies to the alleged airplane that crashed into a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania; despite evidence concluding this couldn’t have happened that way. 

Apart from it being disintegrated by some kind of energy weapon, like that suggested by Dr Judy Woods, no aircraft of that size and particularly the one in question could have crashed into that field they way they say it did. 

The same must be said about the alleged aircraft crashing into the Pentagon, evidence proves this was impossible to have occurred the way it’s been officially reported.   Therefore, on all the evidence I have seen to date and I have studied and researched on this subject - and in-depth since 2005, - for prior to this time I too fell for the “official storyline.”  I too accepted the whole 9/11 thing as being what it was reported as; ‘a terrorist attack’.  Though this is clealry no longer the case, as I am now 100% convinced 9/11 was what many others have long been saying; “An inside job" indeed!

What often has thrown many others off the scent and right track, is the matter of how could this take place, and with so many others involved.   But the biggest poser so far, was; as I have found an explanation as to what must have happened to the “real” aircraft if they didn’t actually crash into the Twin Towers, Pentagon or a field in Shanksville themselves, and where they must have ended up going to.   

The four flights involved needed a flight-path – that on the surface of it; appeared they had departed their due airports and were on the way to their original destinations.   We know recorded evidence seems to prove two of the actual aircraft never even departed their respected airports.  However, we have to work on the premise that four aircraft, whatever they are, as it’s no more difficult to repaint an aircraft and give it a false tail number, than it is to do the same with a stolen motor vehicle, - must have departed to give it the impression they were involved in the crashes. 

So where on earth must they have gone to if they weren’t involved in the actually incidents? 

This means the original four aircraft [though only two, if two never took off] - and then two drones to replace the ones alleged to have crashed into the World Trade Centre Twin Towers.  This means the possibilty that six aircraft were involved.   No aircraft hit the Pentagon or crashed into the field in Shanksville, though these two aircraft would have needed to have gone elsewhere.  By having two replacement aircraft to hit the towers, makes it that the four actual planes involved not hitting anything, - and only two drone planes needed to strike the towers.  

[Even less if the 'hologram camp' are right!]

This is six aircraft in total, the original four planes - along with the destroying of two military drones.  There's the possiblity that a smaller plane or drone crashed at Shankville, but appears more likely to have been either an explosion inside a pre-made hole filled with old debris of aircraft parts, or it too was a missile that  also appears to have hit the Pentagon, following pre-planted bombs in certain part of the building, and what too many witnessess have claimed really happened that day.

If you were to devise such a mastermind plan for  9/11, you’d need ‘a base’, not so much where to control and give orders from, but a place where you could have full control over the whole plan and all the aircraft involved.  One that ensnared a whole area you confidently have supremacy over, one that would uphold to your rituals and allow you to use the powerful use of symbolism, so as you can clearly show whose in complete command and control, - this will be your footprint.

The place you'd need to use would have to be close enough to where all the original aircraft were heading to.  Other airports have been suggested, though I guess they are wrong, - red herrings, or genuine mistakes. 

Within this secure footprint you’ll see the “drones” take-off, whilst also being able to see the “replaced” aircraft that the drones had taken over the flight-paths-of, along with its “passengers” – and then landing at your controlled site.  This obviously requires an airport with the facilities to carry out such a task. 

You’d want to disperse your “passengers” – that if what I’m saying is true; were probably a combination of genuine and false people – secret servicemen and woman of the military or their related agencies, - and see to it these people are then dealt with and in whatever way you had preplanned for them.   

Out of the hundreds of airports, towns and places I have researched and studied, I’ve concluded only one could be befitting enough that would help fit the needs to make sure this kind of operation could be successfully accomplished.  One that fits in with all the timings, that allowed flights to take off and land in sequence like they did on 9/11, - that the recorded flight activity that day at the airport, proves this could have possibly been achieved.

Here for the first time ever and being the only person in the world to date to suggest such findings; - I would like to announce that in my opinion this place is ‘Harrisburg International Airport’, in Pennsylvania, USA, that could have been supported by the Capital City Airport, also in Harrisburg, this latter airport could have homed the two "drone" aircraft that hit the Twin Towers.  The former could have dealt with the other commercial aircraft involved.

Birds-eye view of Harrisburg International Airport

This is a birds-eye view of the Capital City Airport in Harrisburg on the opposite side of the river to Harrisburg International Airport.  Originally called Capital Landing Field, the facility opened in mid-1930 and was Harrisburg's original commercial service airport.  Capital City Airport is located adjacent to the Defense Distribution Center, one of the largest military distribution centers for the warehousing of supplies and equipment for the U.S. Armed Forces. A parachutte rigger detachment from the 82nd Airborne Division also operates out of Capital City Airport.

Since 1999, Capital City Airport has been owned and operated by the Susquehanna Area Regional Airport Authority (SARAA).

I am not using the following Masonic pyramid “symbolic" meaning as backing up my argument or as being concrete evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, for I mainly want to highlight and conclude Harrisburg International Airport & Capital City Airport as probably being the base/s involved on 9/11, - and purely on its own merits and the very specific convenient location of these airports.

It’s surrounded by military camps and other airports, alongside many industries related to the government and its military complex that employs thousands of local people in the community, it and the whole area is capable of being able to see that this type of plan was carried out in relative seclusion and under strict military control.

In 2010 Forbes rated Harrisburg as the second best place in the U.S. to raise a family, and The Daily Beast website ranked 20 metropolitan areas across the country as being recession-proof, and the Harrisburg region landed at No. 7. The financial stability of the region is in partly due to the high concentration of state and government agencies, such as the military who occupy huge amounts of land and where there are both army-camps and residential dwellings where many of their families were born and bred.   

The Pilots for Truth Organisation - have already covered this subject and spookliy enough and without my prior knowledge, as I worked on other factors to find Harrisburg International Airport and concluded it must have been this airport involved on 9/11, and it wasn't until a Freedom Of Information Act request was answered that confirms my findings!

That's two 100% confirmations that Shanskville and Harrisburg are both "connected" to 9/11, and that by doing what I simply done by joining these two places together; I almost fell off my chair as the hairs stood-up on the back of my neck, - when all of a sudden this three demensional pyramid revealed itself and two of it's cornerstones!

 An ACARS system is a device used to send messages to and from an aircraft. Very similar to text messages and email we use today, Air Traffic Control, the airline itself, and other airplanes can communicate with each other via this "texting" system. ACARS was developed in 1978 and is still used today. Similar to cell phone networks, the ACARS network has remote ground stations installed around the world to route messages from ATC, the airline, etc, to the aircraft depending on it's location and vice versa.

ACARS Messages have been provided through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) which demonstrate that the aircraft received messages through ground stations located in HARRISBURG, PA, and then later routed through a ground station in Pittsburgh, 20 minutes after the aircraft allegedly impacted the South Tower in New York.

How can messages be routed through such remote locations if the aircraft was in NY, not to mention how can messages be routed to an aircraft which allegedly crashed 20 minutes earlier?

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have briefly touched on this subject in 9/11: Intercepted through the excellent research of "Woody Box", who initially discovered such alarming information in the released FOIA documents(1). We now have further information which confirms the aircraft was not in the vicinity of New York City when the attacks occurred. 

ACARS - Source and full details - http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ACARS-CONFIRMED-911-AIRCRAFT-AIRBORNE-...(PilotsFor911Truth.org)

Symbolism is everything to those who control us.  It speaks volumes to those who understand it.  We already know of the Masonic road-layout and design of such cities like that of Washington and London; that from a birds-eye view can easily be seen.

In regards to the USA, we all take it that at the tip of the pyramid; resides those in power = Washington DC, Capital Hill.  There are those who argue that the ‘real power’ comes out of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia; that then filters down to the Grand Lodge of Washington. 

As you can see by my own photographs; I first went to Google maps, typed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, the site of the alleged crash of Flight 93, - this is seen below in the red marker baloon "A".

Then look to your right an you’ll see Harrisburg.  Lower right is Philadelphia, and below centre is Washington D.C. – now join the dots! 

I drew a straight line between Shanksville to Harrisburg, then a line from Harrisburg to Philadelphia, a line from Philadelphia to Washington, and then from Washington to Shanksville, - finally drawing a straight line from Washington to Harrisburg; - this gives it that unique-identifable three dimensional pyramid shape when you turn the map upside down! 

If it’s not intentional, then what a coincidence! 

An exact pyramid shape, even with a 3d effect!  Make what you like of it, but it speaks volumes to me.  And no, I will not accept the argument that you'll find the exact shape on many other maps; - this "pyramid" has a signifcance value of four, and at the four points; - it is therefore beyond coincidence, being accidental or by mere chance.

For you tell me; what are the real odds for this to coincidently occur?

Now - can you help? 

As you can see; the above pyramid covers four points - the 'fifth' lower cornerstone has not yet been identified?  Does anyone know what "place" could be at the precise area of the fifth corner?

I hope evidence like this will help refuel the debate, and a demand into what really happened on 9/11 will take place, - and that a full and independent inquiry is held, contucted by members of the general public and not government paid officials - and filmed live on TV. 

Do share this article. - Though please note: I own the copyright to the photographs and material I have written, though agree for others to freely reproduce such material though as long as it's not for commercial gain purposes - and based on the understanding that you will acredit the original source and understanding of the copyright belonging to that of author David McCann.

____________________________________________________________________

The Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) was an automated control system for tracking and intercepting enemy bomber aircraft used by NORAD from the late 1950s into the 1980s. In later versions, the system could automatically direct aircraft to an interception by sending instructions directly to the aircraft’s autopilot.

In normal operation, communications between the SAGE centers and the interceptor aircraft was relayed via radio equipment at the radar sites, which were more widely spread out than the SAGE centers themselves. A properly equipped aircraft, like the F-106 Delta Dart, could feed the SAGE directions into the autopilot and fly “hands off” to the interception.

NASA and the FAA flew a plane by remote control in 1984;

"In 1984 NASA Dryden Flight Research Center and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) teamed-up in a unique flight experiment called the Controlled Impact Demonstration (CID), to test the impact of a Boeing 720 aircraft using standard fuel with an additive designed to suppress fire."

"On the morning of December 1, 1984, a remotely controlled Boeing 720 transport took off from Edwards Air Force Base (Edwards, California), made a left-hand departure and climbed to an altitude of 2300 feet. It then began a descent-to-landing to a specially prepared runway on the east side of Rogers Dry Lake. Final approach was along the roughly 3.8-degree glide slope."

Indeed, prior to 9/11, remote-controlled planes could fly up to 8,600 miles (from the April 24, 2001 edition of Britain’s International Television News).

One day after 9/11, an article appeared on the top science and technology news service stating; “hijackings could be halted in progress with existing technologies, say aviation researchers”. The article quoted a transportation expert as saying:

“Most modern aircraft have some form of autopilot that could be re-programmed to ignore commands from a hijacker and instead take direction from the ground . . . .”

See also this article, in which the former head of British Airways “suggested . . . that aircraft could be commandeered from the groun...

And some allege that the use of remote control could explain some of the strange behavior by the 9/11 planes.  More on the case of drones being used see; http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/airplanes-have-been-flown-remo...