Operation 9-11: Rendezvous Points

Frank Levi, August 2003

Updated 13th Aug - New information on rendezvous points

Updated 14th Sept - Possible error about GPS tracking, some planes use this to link to the Flight Tracker but not all, mostly they use radar. If anyone has any more information please contact me.

Many people have speculated that the US government deliberately allowed the 9-11 attacks to happen to give them justification for the "War Against Terrorism". There is no moral difference between "allowing someone to be murdered" and murdering someone. And the former is much more likely to go wrong.

Is it possible that the US government and their allies may have actually carried out the attacks on 9-11 as a false flag operation?

Key questions:

  1. Would members of the US military and intelligence agencies attack their own people?
  2. How many people would have to be complicit in order to carry out such a huge operation?

Operation Northwoods is a document discovered through the Freedom of Information Act which proved conclusively that high ranking members of the US military have planned in the past to use fake terror attacks to justify war. This particular plan was to justify an invasion of Cuba by carrying out numerous acts of violence and trickery.

A full scanned copy of Operation Northwoods can be seen at:


The matter-of-fact way in which this memo is presented is quite shocking.

"We could blow up a ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba"

"We could develop a communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities or even in Washington".

For the purpose of this article we will be focusing on one particular section:


This section deals with a mock shoot-down of a passenger plane with the intention of blaming Cuba. The basic points follow:

  • A plane at Eglin Air Force base would be painted up to be an exact replica of a registered plane belonging to a "CIA proprietary organisation" in Miami.
  • This painted plane would be secretly swapped with the real aircraft and loaded with passengers using fake identities. The real craft would be converted into a remote controlled drone. During the flight, the real aircraft (drone) would rendezvous with the fake aircraft. The plane with the fake passengers on board would fly very low and land in the base.
  • Passengers and plane would then return to normal and the drone flight would continue on its way
  • As the plane flew over Cuba a fake distress message would be broadcast indicating an attack by a Cuban MIG fighter. This would be interrupted by the remote detonation of explosives on board the plane.

A few other points to note:

Was 9-11 a more complex version of Operation Northwoods? If so, what happened to the passengers?

Rendezvous and Land

Many articles about the hijackings have shown diagrams of the flight-paths followed by the four hijacked planes. These flight paths were not taken from recordings of Air Traffic Control radar as you might think, but from Flight-Tracking services, available to the public on the Internet.

If you connect to a Flight-Tracker you can actually watch a plane on its journey using radar information. Air traffic controllers use radar and the information sent from the plane's transponder, which shows altitude as well as the plane's identification. The hijackers turned off the planes' transponders which made it difficult for ATC to track them, but the flight tracking service continued to record the planes' locations.

If Operation 9-11 was based loosely on Operation Northwoods, what exactly did they do? It would make sense to rendezvous with a drone as close as possible to a military base to avoid the chances of someone seeing an unexplained blip on the radar. If the passenger planes were landed it would need to be at airports or bases close to the target so that the radar trace would appear to finish at the target.

Let's look at some images of the flights as picked up by a company called Flight Explorer. Here we see the overlaid tracks for Flight 11 and Flight 175.

Our rendezvous point for both of these planes would seem to be fairly simple and can be seen even more clearly as an animation. Click on this link to see the animated flight paths.

You will notice immediately that the two planes almost meet each other at a point north of NYC. So what exactly is at this point?

Stewart International Airport which is also the location of Stewart Air National Guard Base and the 105th airlift wing. Home of some very large c-5a carrier planes.


Now look at a diagram of the airport itself:

Those two runways fairly closely match the paths taken by Flight 11 and 175 don't they?

So were the two planes really that close to this airport?

FAA worker says hijacked jeltiners almost collided before striking World Trade Center

"The terrorists, however, nearly had their plans dashed when the two planes almost collided outside the city, the employee said. "The two aircraft got too close to each other down by Stewart" International Airport in New Windsor, N.Y., the employee said."

How could this be done without an Air Traffic Controller noticing something funny?

From the same article:

"One air traffic controller - with the help of an assistant - monitored the flight patterns of the two jets that toppled the World Trade Center, the employee said. He directed American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175 - both Boeing 767 jets that had Boston to Los Angeles routes, the employee said.
The same controller handled Egypt Air Flight 990 when it crashed off the coast of Massachusetts in 1999, the employee said."

For those who don't know, Flight 990 was full of Egyptian Military top brass and is suspected by some people of having been crashed using remote control. What a coincidence.


We have a number of possibilities here. You may have noticed that the last blip for Flight 175 is a little out of place. Could the last blip in each flight path have been added on to show the planes apparently finishing at the world trade center?

If this is the case perhaps flight 11 could have landed at La Guardia airport (directly below the second last blip)

A simple possibility is that some sort of hijacking was actually taking place on the plane, the real pilots were still flying the plane and were told to land at La Guardia airport.

"Another controller at the Nashua center confirms these events, adding some of what the hijacker was saying. "One of the pilots keyed their mike so the conversation between the pilot and the person in the cockpit could be heard," a second controller says. "The person in the cockpit was speaking in English. He was saying something like, 'Don't do anything foolish. You're not going to get hurt.' ""

"This controller also says that someone in the cockpit may have said something about guiding the plane toward Kennedy or LaGuardia airport in New York. But the controller, who was not handling the plane himself, is unsure whether the pilot or hijacker was speaking. If the latter, it may have been a ruse to make the pilot believe the plane was being diverted to an airport, not to a murder-suicide mission at the World Trade Center."

(Christian Science Monitor, Sept 13th 2001)


Flight 175 is more interesting to analyse. Check out this link:

The Seattle Times. Understanding the conflict. Graphics & video.

"Less than 30 minutes into a journey that was to have taken six hours, Flight 175 took a sharp turn south into central New Jersey, near Trenton, an unusual diversion for a plane heading west, airline employees said. It then headed directly toward Manhattan. "

"Somewhere between Philadelphia and Newark less than 90 miles from Manhattan Flight 175 made its final radar contact, according to a statement released by United Airlines. About the same time, American Flight 11 struck the north tower of the World Trade Center, setting off a massive explosion."

Trenton is close to Brown Mills, the location of McGuire Air Force Base. You'll also notice if you look at the white time markings on the diagram above that Flight 175 also seems to be slowing down a great deal as it approaches Trenton. Which is what planes do when they land. Look at the last two blips before the plane supposedly turns towards NY. They are in a direct line towards Brown Mills

Alternatively, it may have landed at La Guardia with Flight 11. Perhaps they both assumed new transponder/radio identities as they approached the airport?


Flight 93 and Flight 77

Flight 93 was supposed to take-off from Newark airport at 8:00 but was delayed  by 42 minutes.

In the image below you can see the original flight plan on the right with estimated arrival time set as 02:15 pm at San Francisco. You can see it flies very close to both Cleveland and Pittsburgh airports. Not long before the plane disappears from the radar, whoever was flying the plane filed an electronic change of flight-plan to DCA (Ronald Reagan International Airport) with an estimated arrival time of 10:28.

Why any "suicide hijacker" would ever dream of filing a change of flight plan is totally beyond comprehension. We'll come back to this later.

It looks like whoever was flying Flight 93 was trying to land. Around the time the flight plan was changed Flight 93 was heading towards the municipal airport in Johnstown at a low altitude. Was someone hoping to land here but changed flight plan to DCA because of difficulty contacting ATC (jammed radio?).

One thing is for certain - all the crashes were supposed to happen at around the same time. If Flight 93 had not been delayed by 42 minutes and had followed the same path, it would have arrived in Washington at 9:46. This is around the same time that Flight 77 supposedly crashed into the Pentagon

What happened to Flight 77?

Unlike all the other planes the radar track suddenly stops over Southern Ohio. Completely dead. Any other flight path diagrams you may have seen have the estimated path drawn in.

None of the other planes lost the flight tracking at an early stage in the journey. Why just on this plane? Was it shot down or remotely exploded? Did it land in the very small Portsmouth Airport or fly very low and land in one of the larger airports in the area? Was it really Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon? Perhaps it had another destination which had to be abandoned because of the Flight 93 delay. If this plane had changed its path at this point and flown directly to Chicago (and the Sears Tower) it would have passed directly over Dayton and the Wright Patterson air base.

So what actually happened?

There are a number of possibilities:

  • The real planes rendezvoused with the military planes and the empty military planes were crashed into the buildings. If so, were the passengers just aliases with actors playing bereaved relatives? Were people offered money to disappear as part of the plan? Were they killed or imprisoned? It's difficult to believe that around two hundred fake passengers could be alive and complicit without someone blowing the whistle. They are more likely to be either innocent and dead or complicit and dead.
  • The real planes were modified to allow remote control, rendezvoused with military planes which would jam the radio and transponder signals whilst guiding the planes to their targets. A staged hijacking may have been happening, or the pilots may have been given bogus orders to fly to the rendezvous point because of an emergency.
  • Another possibility is that a staged hijacking was taking place on the planes but the planes were flown back to the airport (except flight 93). Meanwhile, the remote controlled drones would do their work.

Lets not forget the c-130 plane seen flying directly above flight 77 "as if to prevent two planes from appearing on radar while at the same time guiding the jet toward the Pentagon"

Was there an opportunity to modify or even substitute any of the planes? Read this witness report from Sept 10th:


"On Monday, September 10 at about 1 pm, my husband and I flew into Newark, returning from a meeting of the CSWE Commission on Conferences and Faculty Development. We flew past the World Trade Center Towers on our way into Newark, and the plane's landing gear lowered. Suddenly, the landing gear and the plane lifted again, and we were told that we had been diverted to LaGuardia Airport, as there was a fire in Newark Airport. We flew past the Twin Towers again on our way to land at LaGuardia.

There was some confusion when we landed at LaGuardia, and over a period of three hours, we were led off the plane, back on the plane, and then off the plane again. This seemed strange at the time. In light of the events of September 11, we now wonder if the fire in Newark was in any way connected to the terrorist attack which would occur the next day."


Please send feedback, corrections, ridicule etc. to frank@the-movement.com

More to come soon...