edro9494
08-03-2007, 03:28 AM
Israelis did 9/11. Not the government. Just Israelis and Silverstein.
How they did it - the summary:
1) They planted bombs (probably micronukes) in the WTC towers.
2) Israeli commandos posed as Arabs and caught the planes with fake IDs.
3) All four airports have been penetrated by the Israelis: Mossad employees of an Israeli company, ICTS, plant bombs, guns, gas canisters and other equipment on the planes some time before the hijackers catch the planes.
4) The hijackers get on the planes and mid-air hold up the passengers with the guns onboard. They shoot the pilots dead and take over the cockpit. They turn off the transponder and disable the emergency response button, and put the plane onto electronic remote control mode.
5) The hijackers release a gas that incapacitates the passengers and knocks them out.
6) The plane is diverted to an isolated region.
7) The hijackers jump from the plane with parachutes when the plane has descended to an altitude of about 7000 feet and has slowed down to about 150 knots or less.
Cool The hijackers get picked up by one of the Mossad operatives on the ground
9) The plane is flown by remote control FMCS (flight management computer system) and FANS to its destination and into the designated building or into the ground (Shanksville).
10) Simultaneously that the plane is flown into the building, the plane is detonated by remote control.
11) The 3 WTC buildings are detonated some time later.
__________________________________________________ ___________________
The Long Version
Israelis did 9/11:
Taken from another forum:
Quote:
Originally Posted by A-Train:
debus, you seem to be working from the assumption that the cockpit voice recorder from FL93 is legitimate evidence. I don't believe it is. I believe it is junk.
A-Train, you were the one who convinced me that the phone calls from the plane are real: "Don't fight the phone calls". It isn't only the CVR that indicates the hijackers are still in the cockpit at 10:00 AM (the point in time when all the voices stop), it is also the phone calls that show this:
Quote
9:58 a.m.: Todd Beamer Ends Call; He and Others in Rear of Plane Join Takeover Attempt
Todd Beamer ends his long phone call with a Verizon phone company representative saying that they plan “to jump” the hijacker in the back of the plane who has the bomb. In the background, the phone operator already could hear an “awful commotion” of people shouting, and women screaming, “Oh my God,” and “God help us.” He lets go of the phone but leaves it connected. His famous last words are said to nearby passengers: “Are you ready guys? Let’s roll” (alternate version: “You ready? Okay. Let’s roll”). [Longman, 2002, pp. 204; Newsweek, 9/22/2001; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/2001] Sounds of fighting in the back of the plane where Beamer is can be heard about a minute after such sounds in the front. [Observer, 12/2/2001]
9:58 a.m.: CeeCee Lyles Cries they’re Doing It; Strange Sounds Follow
CeeCee Lyles says to her husband, “Aah, it feels like the plane’s going down.” Her husband Lorne says, “What’s that?” She replies, “I think they’re going to do it. they’re forcing their way into the cockpit” (an alternate version says, “they’re getting ready to force their way into the cockpit”). A little later she screams, then says, “they’re doing it! they’re doing it! they’re doing it!” Her husband hears more screaming in the background, then he hears a “whooshing sound, a sound like wind,” then more screaming, and then the call breaks off. [Longman, 2002, pp. 180; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/2001; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/2001]
9:58 a.m.: Flight 93 Passengers Run to First Class
Sandy Bradshaw tells her husband, “Everyone’s running to first class. I’ve got to go. Bye.” She had been speaking with him since 9:50 a.m. [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/2001; Boston Globe, 11/23/2001]
9:58 a.m.: Ed Felt Said to Describe Explosion and White Smoke from Bathroom Call
A man dials emergency 9-1-1 from a bathroom on the plane, crying, “We’re being hijacked, We’re being hijacked!” [Toronto Sun, 9/16/2001] The operator reports, “He heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him.” [ABC News, 9/11/2001; ABC News, 9/11/2001; Associated Press, 9/12/2001] One minute after the call begins, the line goes dead.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t...of _9/11=ua93
These phone calls show that none of the hijackers left the cockpit before 10:00 AM. The passengers would have reported it if the hijackers had come out of the cockpit. At 10:00 AM the passengers are assembled at the cockpit door trying to ram it open.
More about Edward Felt's phone call. He was the passenger that was unaccounted for in Todd Beamer's call where he gives a head count of the passengers. Felt went into one of the toilets to make his call. In the middle of the phone call, he ducks his head out to see what is going on. Apparently the toilet was in the front section of the plane. He reports seeing white smoke and an explosion. One minute later the line goes dead. He made the phone call at 9:58AM.
Quote
The operator reports, “He heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him.” [ABC News, 9/11/2001; ABC News, 9/11/2001; Associated Press, 9/12/2001] One minute after the call begins, the line goes dead. [Pittsburgh Channel, 12/6/2001] Investigators believe this was Edward Felt, the only passenger not accounted for on phone calls. He was sitting in first class, so he probably was in the bathroom near the front of the plane. At one point, he appears to have peeked out the bathroom door during the call. [Longman, 2002, pp. 193-194, 196] The mentions of smoke and explosions on the recording of his call are now denied. [Longman, 2002, pp. 264] The person who took Felt’s call is not allowed to speak to the media. [Mirror, 9/12/2002]
Extract: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/c...tem=a958edfelt
Main site: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t...of _9/11=ua93
I hypothesize that the Israeli hijackers at around 10:00 released an anesthetic gas into the main cabin. This was the cause of the explosion and the white smoke observed by Felt at this time. As the canister of aerosol gas was opened and the gas under pressure released, it made the sound of an explosion and created white vapor mist. The mist was the 'white smoke' seen by Felt. After he reports these observations, he stops talking. He has been disabled by the gas.
Everyone else stops talking at that point. After 10:00 AM, all passengers cease talking the although not all the phones are cut off. Some listeners can hear background noises but no talking, except for a few screams.
The talking ceases abruptly. A gas can silence people instantaneously. Gas quickly spreads through the air and will knock out people as soon as they inhale it. That was the aim. The hijackers wanted to knock out the passengers so they could exit the plane unobserved. Deception and secrecy was an important part of the plan. If passengers had reported the hijackers dropping from the planes in parachutes, the hijackers' cover as suicide hijackers would have been blown.
The hijackers chose this moment to release the gas. The passengers were about to break down the door and the hijackers had to stop them.
Quote
10:00 a.m.: Hijackers Respond to Passenger Revolt
According to the 9/11 Commission, the hijacker pilot, presumably Ziad Jarrah, has been rolling the plane sharply to the left and right in an attempt to prevent passengers from reaching the cockpit. At this time, he stabilizes the plane and asks another hijacker, “Is that it? Shall we finish it off?” [My comments in bold: he means shall they release the gas and finish the passengers off] Another voice answers, “No. Not yet. When they all come, we finish it off.” The pilot starts pitching the nose of the airplane up and down. A few seconds later a passenger’s voice can be heard saying, “In the cockpit. If we don’t we’ll die!” Another voice says, “Roll it!” which some speculate could be a reference to pushing a foot cart into the cockpit door. [The passengers are at the point of breaking in, so the hijackers have to act now - they have to disable the passengers and they do so by releasing the gas - the "explosion and white smoke" seen by Felt from his location in the front of the plane] By 10:01, the pilot stops the pitching and says, “Allah o akbar! Allah o akbar!” (“God is great”), then asks, “Is that it? I mean, shall we put it down?” Another hijacker responds, “Yes, put it in it, and pull it down.” [New York Times, 7/22/2004; San Francisco Chronicle, 7/23/2004] [The gas has been released; the passengers have been disabled (and silenced) and now the hijackers will escape from the plane and then the plane will be brought down by remote control. The Israelis accomplish their escape and at 10:06, not 10:03, the plane crashes and simultaneously explodes in a remote field in Pennsylvania.]
Extract: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/c...ijackersrepond
Main site: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t...of _9/11=ua93
The call by Elizabeth Wainio supports the gas being released at that time. She is on the phone to her stepmother at 10:00, approx. the time Felt reports an explosion and white smoke. She speaks of a sensation of leaving her body, of being in a trancelike state, and her stepmother says she was breathing in a strange manner.
Quote
(10:00 a.m.): Elizabeth Wainio Says they’re Rushing the Cockpit
Elizabeth Wainio. [Source: Family photo]Elizabeth Wainio.
Flight 93 passenger Elizabeth Wainio says to her stepmother, “Mom, they’re rushing the cockpit. I’ve got to go. Bye,” then hangs up. This may have been a delayed reaction to events, since her stepmother says that in their 10-minute call, Elizabeth was in a trancelike state, appeared to have resigned herself to death, was breathing in a strange manner, and even said she felt she was leaving her body. The timing for this call is also approximate, and variously reported as taking place just before or just after 10:00 a.m. [MSNBC, 7/30/2002; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/2001]
Extract: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/c...em=a1000wainio
Main site: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t...of _9/11=ua93
This sensation of floating above your body and of being in a trancelike state are experienced when undergoes an anesthetic procedure.
Right after this (at 10:00), no more information by the passengers is relayed via the phones.
Only strange sounds are heard by the listeners between 10:00 and 10:06. The fact that the listeners report hearing sounds on the plane right up until 10:06 proves that the plane crashed at 10:06, and not 10:03.
The government lies about the time of the crash because they don't want to explain why there is silence for 6 minutes between the passengers ceasing to talk and the plane crash. One would expect passengers to talk right up until the plane crashed.
Quote
(Between 10:00-10:06 a.m.): Flight 93 Cell Call Listeners Hear Silence, Strange Sounds
During this time, there apparently are no calls from Flight 93. Several cell phones that are left on record only silence. For instance, although Todd Beamer does not hang up, nothing more is heard after he puts down the phone, suggesting things are quiet in the back of the plane. [Longman, 2002, pp. 218] The only exception is Richard Makely, who listens to Jeremy Glick’s open phone line after Glick goes to attack the hijackers. A reporter summarizes Makely explaining that, “The silence last two minutes, then there [is] screaming. More silence, followed by more screams. Finally, there [is] a mechanical sound the hijackers opening an exit door and leaving the plane, followed by nothing.” [San Francisco Chronicle, 9/17/2001] The second silence lasts between 60 and 90 seconds. [Longman, 2002, pp. 219]
The silence indicates some event like a gassing occurred on the plane: an event that silenced the passengers suddenly. The government doesn't want people speculating as to what caused this silence as they might suspect the use of an anesthetic gas, and this raises awkward questions about how did the Arab hijackers get gas onboard.
There is a clear pattern of denial and obfuscation: the government doesn't want to admit guns nor gas was used in the hijacking. Such things like gas and guns require the infiltration of airports and point to a much more sophisticated operation than the official government story tells. Arabs would not have been able to infiltrate the airports but Mossad could. Suspicion might fall on the Israelis, and the government whose business is to protect the Israelis (like they protected them in USS Liberty) don't want that.
A-Train says:
Thus, as far as I am concerned, the commandos could have made their jumps anytime after 9:39 and before 10:00. We know from the phone calls that the passengers commenced their revolt at about 10:00. What we will never know is what they found when they made it to the cockpit. The plane was shot down/exploded before they were able to relay their findings via phone calls. The timing of the shoot down was probably by design of the conspirators, who did not want the passengers reporting an empty cockpit.
Then who turned on the transponder at 10:00 and turned it off at 10:03? It would have had to have been the hijackers. After they had disabled the passengers with anesthetic gas, they were now free to leave the plane. Israelis don't generally carry out suicide missions. This was a false flag operation and it was planned to the last detail. They had private Learjets on standby that could scramble as soon as they were given a signal. So the hijackers turned on the transponder to notify their handlers that they were ready to evacuate the plane. The transponder gives a plane's precise location and its altitude. This is all the information the Israelis needed to scramble a Learjet to the location of the airliner and carry out the detonation part of the plan. The Israelis had to destroy the plane completely to make sure there would be no evidence pointing to how they hijacked the plane left. They also did that to obscure the fact that the hijackers were missing from the plane.
And so the hijackers make their escape unwitnessed as all the passengers have succumbed to the anesthetic gas. The hijackers, wearing respirators and fitted out with parachutes, make their way to one of the exits of the plane. The plane is cruising at an altitude of 7,000 feet and has been slowed right down to less than 150 miles/hour. This is the window of opportunity the hijackers need. They open one of the exit doors and jettison from the plane. The noise of 'holing' can be heard thereafter on the tape: mostly wind sounds.
They are observed by a Learjet that is cruising nearby. Several minutes later, the plane flies over Shanksville and crashes nose-down into an abandoned mine. At that point the plane is detonated by remote control, just like the Pentagon plane was detonated before it hit the Pentagon. (And also the planes in NY at their moments of impact.) All the planes have been pre-wired with explosives that are detonated when they crash. The planes have to be destroyed to remove incriminating evidence.
It isn't hard to imagine how the CVR could have been faked. The FBI is ordered to find and confiscate the box from the crash scene in Shanksville-- or whatever remains of it-- and send it immediately to the Justice Department in Washington. Like the good soldiers they are, the FBI obeys unquestioningly and the box ends up on the desk of Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff, an Israeli citizen whose mother was a Mossad agent. Chertoff sends it to a Mossad acting studio in Tel Aviv, where the tape is altered or completely redone to give Americans the impression of a heroic and desperate struggle to take control of the plane.
The contents of the CVR is consistent with the contents of the phone calls. If the CVR was faked, then you would have to say the phone calls were faked too.
Such a phony recording would not have been too difficult to make. Unlike a phone call conversation to a loved one, which would be next to impossible to fake, the bogus CVR has only bits and pieces of voices from the presumed American heroes, and even those voices are obscured by the supposed sound of plates and glassware crashing around.
The Israelis had no plan to fake the CVR and phone calls on Flt 93. Flt 93 was the flight that didn't go according to plan. Something happened on this flight: it was delayed and airforce jets were going to be scrambled any minute. This is also why the passengers of Fl 93 had time to gather together an assault force. The Israelis would have had to preempt such a situation occurring and fake a CVR to complement this event. I think this scenario is very doubtful.
The praying Arabs, the heroic Americans who take control, but tragically too late to save themselves: sounds like a B-movie script to me.
It was scripted. The Israeli hijackers knew they had to carry on like fanatical Muslims. In fact, I think they went over the top somewhat.
Quote:
debus, I urge you and other truth seekers to dismiss the evidence provided by the Cockpit Voice Recorder from FL93. It had passed through the hands of unknown parties before being presented to the families, and is therefore unreliable. Like the Fatty Bin Laden tape, the CVR from FL93 ought to be used to learn not what happened, but what the conspiracy wants us to believe happened.
I think the CVR is consistent with everything that happened on that flight including the events reported by phone; that's why the government is covering up about the last few minutes of the tape. The government's version of what happened conflicts with the contents of the tape. They say the plane crashed at 10:03 even though sounds - the wind - can be heard until 10:06. If they're going to fake the CVR, they wouldn't include things like this that they would have trouble explaining away.
__________________________________________________ ______________________
This theory is the one that best conforms to the available evidence about 9/11. Minute by minute the events as reported on the CVR and phone calls by passengers fit with the theory that the Israelis hijacked the flights and used gas and parachutes and guns.
They used the latest in chemical warfare to immobilize the passengers and disable them, just as the Russian commando team did in the Chechen theater a few years back. They probably used the same gas to incapacitate them.
The Israelis bailed out of the planes at an altitude of 7000 feet, the height of the plane as recorded by the transponder. Note the transponder was turned on briefly, for three minutes, shortly before the plane crashed.
Gassing the passengers and crew is how the Israeli commandos managed to escape from them undetected. That is why hardly anyone suspects the Israelis to be behind the hijackings. Almost everybody assumes the hijackers died on the planes. Most people have never thought of the possibility of Israelis hijacking the planes and think Arab terrorists did it. However Arabs however did not control the security of the four 9/11 airports and did not bring the guns onboard. Neither did they blow up the buildings. 9/11 was clearly a complex operation that could only have been carried out with the assistance of a national intelligence agency.
Who had the means and the motive to carry out such an undertaking? Only Israel. And Israel is the country that has a history of carrying out such false flag attacks. And they have a history of carrying these out frequently.
__________________________________________________ ________
Speculation about the aerosolized drug used in the attack.
Information about fentanyl, or strictly one of its derivatives, the drug that is speculated to have been used in the attack on the plane passengers during the 9/11 hijackings. It was used in the Chechen rebel hostage crisis. It is very likely other agents were used as well in the drug mixture such as halothane.
Contrary to what the authorities in Moscow have said about fentanyl in some reports, it is lethal at high doses. Any drug is lethal if it is given in a high enough dose. Many deaths have been reported with the patch form of the drug.
Quote
http://www.answers.com/topic/moscow-...hostage-crisis
Moscow theater hostage crisis
The Moscow theatre hostage crisis was the seizure on October 23, 2002 of a crowded Moscow theatre by armed Chechen men and women who claimed allegiance to the separatist movement in Chechnya. They took over 900 hostages and demanded the withdrawal of Russian forces from Chechnya. After a siege of two and a half days, Russian Spetsnaz ("special forces") raided the <SNIP> ................
It is settled that the security services pumped an aerosol anesthetic into the theater. This was done by means of the air conditioning system. After thirty minutes, when the gas had taken effect, the physical assault commenced from the roof and all entrances and, it is said, including through the sewers.
Within the theater, it became apparent to gunmen and hostages alike that a gas had been emitted into the building. Hostages reported that some people in the audience fell asleep, and the gunmen put on respirators <SNIP> ........
Identifying the gas
It was reported that efforts to treat victims were complicated because the Russian government refused to inform doctors what type of gas had been used. At the time, the gas was surmised to be some sort of surgical anesthetic or chemical weapon. Foreign embassies in Moscow issued official requests for more information on the gas to aid in treatment, but were publicly ignored.
While still refusing to identify the gas, on October 28 the Russian government informed the US Embassy of some of the gas' effects. Based on this information and examinations of victims, doctors concluded the gas was a morphine derivative.
On Wednesday, October 30, Russia responded to increasing domestic and international pressure with a statement on the unknown gas by Health Minister Yuri Shevchenko. He identified it as a fentanyl derivative[1][3] (possibly the large animal immobilant carfentanil[citation needed]), a powerful opioid[citation needed]. Boris Grebenyuk, the All-Russia Disaster Relief Service chief, said the services used Trimethyl Phentanylum.[1] New Scientist pointed out that trimethyl fentanyl is not a gas but an aerosol.[4]
A German toxicology professor who examined several German hostages said that their blood and urine contained halothane, a surgical anesthetic not commonly used in the West, and that it was likely the gas had additional components. However, halothane has a strong odor (although often defined as "pleasant" by comparison with other anesthetic gases). Thus, by the time the whole theatre area would be filled with halothane to a concentration compatible with loss of consciousness (0.5% - 3%), it is likely that terrorists inside would have realized they were being attacked. Additionally, recovery of consciousness is rapid after the flow of gas is interrupted, unlike with high-dose fentanyl administration. Therefore, although halothane might have been a component in the aerosol, it was probably not a major component.[citation needed]
The gas is now generally agreed to have been the top-secret fentanyl derivative Kolokol-1 developed by the KGB in the 1970's.[citation needed] Russian doctors, who helped hostages in first minutes after the siege, used an usual fentanyl's antidote, naloxone, for injections.[5] <SNIP> ..................
The things the Israeli false flag planners would have been looking for in a gas are its incapacitating action and the rapidity of the onset of that action.
Fentanyl is used as an anesthetic in its liquid form. It is usually given as an injection when used to put patients to sleep. There are fentanyl patches that are used as painkillers. Some addicts mix fentanyl with heroin. Fentanyl, a synthetic narcotic, is 10,000x more potent than morphine in its analgesic action.
An aerosolized (nebulized) derivative of fentanyl must have been used in the Chechen theater attack, as fentanyl is a liquid compound. The substance used in the Chechen hostage rescue was not really a gas, but an aerosol. That was why I speculate Felt reported a 'white smoke' - it was not smoke but white vapor or mist of the nebulized drug as it was released into the atmosphere of the main cabin.
Below is a report of the drug(s) that were released into the Chechen theater by the American College of Emergency Physicians.
"In this age of terrorism, the element of surprise is an important tool. Just as few people expected that hijacked jet aircraft would be transformed into offensive missiles of mass destruction, medical providers likely expected to receive victims suffering from bullet wounds, not a mysterious intoxication."
Such substances are not only being used to rescue people but to deliberately incapacitate them in hostage situations.
Quote
http://www.kafkas.org.tr/perspektif/text5/3.txt
UNEXPECTED "GAS" CASUALTIES IN MOSCOW: A MEDICAL TOXICOLOGY PERSPECTIVE
6 May 2003, American College of Emergency Physicians
----------------------------------------
Unexpected "Gas" Casualties In Moscow: A Medical Toxicology Perspective
In October 2002, the Russian military used a mysterious "gas" to incapacitate Chechen rebels at a Moscow theater. Despite increased interest in the potential use of lethal chemical weapons in recent years, the medical community has paid little attention to the development of incapacitating, calmative, and "less than lethal" technologies. In this analysis, we review the events surrounding the use of a calmative "gas" during the Russian military action and discuss what is currently known about fentanyl derivatives, their aerosolization, and the rationale for their use as incapacitating agents. Collectively, the available evidence strongly suggests that a combination of a potent aerosolized fentanyl derivative, such as carfentanil, and an inhalational anesthetic, such as halothane, was used. The paper also assesses potential errors leading to the loss of a substantial number of hostages. Several lessons can be learned from this surprising and novel use of an incapacitating gas.
Introduction
On October 26, 2002, more than 120 hostages held at the Moscow Dubrovka Theater Center by Chechen rebels died during a rescue attempt by Russian military special forces. First reports suggested that a "poison" gas had been used by the elite spotznaz in order to subdue the rebels and rescue the hostages. But what gas was it? According to press reports, Russian physicians were told that an anesthetic gas had been pumped into the theater, but the gas was not identified.1 Perhaps concerns regarding the restrictions in the recently ratified Chemical Weapons Convention contributed to the cloak of secrecy surrounding the identity of the toxic agent.2
Medical toxicologists are familiar with many of the toxicologic issues surrounding chemical warfare agents; however, our assumption about which agents were used during this daring hostage rescue did not fit with the reported clinical effects. In this age of terrorism, the element of surprise is an important tool. Just as few people expected that hijacked jet aircraft would be transformed into offensive missiles of mass destruction, medical providers likely expected to receive victims suffering from bullet wounds, not a mysterious intoxication. Despite visits by military medics to some Moscow hospitals several hours before the raid, advising health care providers to increase their supplies of naloxone,3 the emergency medical system was not adequately prepared to receive hundreds of casualties suffering from opioid intoxication.
What happened?
On October 23, 2002, more than 800 people attending a stage show were taken captive by some 50 Chechen rebels. The rebels repeatedly threatened to blow up the theater if their political demands were not met. The Russian military stormed the theater early in the morning of October 26. An unidentified "gas" was introduced into the theater through the ventilation system approximately 15 minutes before the military offensive.4 Hundreds of hostages were taken to local hospitals suffering from "sleeping gas" poisoning. According to local reports, "doctors spent the first few hours testing various antidotes before they found something that worked."5 Some of the medical personnel may have assumed that the victims had been exposed to conventional chemical agents, such as the nerve agents sarin or VX. Some of the first victims were treated with atropine, an intervention that proved ineffective.6 The finding of miosis may have added to the initial confusion. Other experts speculated that the gas might have been BZ, an incapacitating agent that produces anticholinergic delirium.7 Western embassy physicians examined some of the hostages and concluded, "the agent they were exposed to appears consistent with an opiate rather than a nerve agent."1 According to 2 Moscow physicians, "many patients had classic signs of opioid intoxication: pinpoint pupils, unconsciousness, [and] depressed breathing."8 The opioid hypothesis was supported by reports from Russian physicians that naloxone was successful in reversing the effects of the intoxication.9
The Russian Health Minister announced 4 days after the event that, "a fentanyl derivative was used to neutralize the terrorists." He went on to state that the gas "cannot by itself be called lethal."10 Despite this claim, 127 (16%) of the 800 hostages in the theater died, and more than 650 of the survivors required hospitalization.11 The Russian Health Minister attributed the deaths of the hostages to their poor condition from limited food and water and immobility during 3 days of captivity. By 12 days after the rescue, 67 hostages and 9 rescuers remained hospitalized, 5 in critical condition.11
Little information is available about the dose of the chemicals used. One Russian physician stated that toxicology testing to identify the exposure was not performed because "to conduct such tests we have to know approximately what we're looking for, and we didn't know what to look for. Besides, we didn't have the technical means to conduct such tests."8 Preliminary analyses of blood and urine specimens from 2 survivors who returned to Germany detected traces of halothane, no fentanyl, and no evidence of nerve agents.12
Although one of these patients had been on a ventilator, a possible source of halothane contamination, the other patient had not been ventilated. These early analytic findings and the reports from Russian health officials suggest that the toxic gas was some sort of combination agent. News reports suggested that the most likely combination of agents was a highly potent fentanyl derivative used in conjunction with an inhalational anesthetic agent, such as halothane.8
Aerosols of fentanyl and fentanyl derivatives
A large number of fentanyl derivatives have been developed. Many are more potent than fentanyl. Like fentanyl and meperidine, these agents all have a phenylpiperidine structure, are structurally dissimilar to natural opiates, and are potent agonists at µ opioid receptors. Depending on the dose, fentanyl and its derivatives produce analgesia, respiratory depression, central nervous system depression, and miosis.
The Russian acknowledgment that the gas was a fentanyl derivative raised a number of issues regarding the use of such an agent in this situation. Many observers were unaware that an aerosolized fentanyl preparation was even available. However, investigations into the utility of administering fentanyl as a nebulized aerosol were first reported more than a decade ago.13,14 A "gas" of fentanyl or one of its derivatives is not a gas per se, but an aerosol of fine particles. The physical behavior of an aerosol differs considerably from that of a true gas. Particle size may influence the distribution of such an aerosol. The more potent the drug, the less needed to aerosolize to obtain the same effect. Conditions favoring aerosolubility may be influenced by the potency of the specific agent.
In a 1998 study,15 the delivery of 100 to 300 µg of aerosolized fentanyl base was shown to have comparable bioavailability to intravenous administration at the same dosage. Worsley et al14 had noted earlier wide variation in blood levels after patients were given aerosolized fentanyl for postoperative anesthesia and suggested that this unpredictability in fentanyl pharmacokinetics was a result of its high lipid solubility and high volume of distribution. Another challenge is the short duration of action of fentanyl. Researchers have developed a liposome-encapsulated drug carrier system to provide a more controlled and sustained release of aerosolized fentanyl.15 A 1999 paper16 concluded, "inhalation of fentanyl offers an easy, noninvasive route of administration ... [although] additional study is required to determine the safety and efficacy."
Identifying the exact fentanyl derivative that was used in the Moscow incident is difficult without definitive analytic confirmation. Sufentanil is shorter acting, is much more potent than fentanyl, and is available as a nasal spray. Its lipid solubility is much greater than fentanyl or morphine (Table). Alfentanil is a ultra-short-acting analgesic agent that has a more rapid onset of action and shorter duration of action than fentanyl and sufentanil.17
Carfentanil
Carfentanil is another fentanyl derivative with very high potency and a high therapeutic index. It is a one of a series of N-4-substituted 1-(2-arylethyl)-4-piperidinyl-N-phenylpropanamide compounds. It is the only opioid approved in the United States for immobilizing large exotic animals; it is not approved for use in human beings.19 Known as Wildnil, it is used primarily as an incapacitating agent for large animals, such as elephants, rhinoceroses, wolves,20 seals,21 and polar bears.22 A typical dose to immobilize seals is 10 µg/kg.21 It may also be administered intravenously, transmucosally,23 or orally.24
Published reports on the analgesic activity and toxicity of carfentanil date to the 1970s. In a rat study, Van Bever et al25 compared carfentanil and 3-methyl fentanyl with fentanyl, morphine, and meperidine. They found that carfentanil had the lowest median effective dose (0.00032 mg/kg), with a potency 10,000 times greater than morphine. Furthermore, they found that these 4-substituted fentanyl derivates had an unusually high safety margin (Table).
The narcotizing effects of carfentanil may recur 2 to 24 hours after treatment with an opioid antagonist.19 In an investigation on carfentanil in Rocky Mountain elk, high-dose naltrexone (100 or 500 mg of naltrexone per mg of carfentanil) was an effective antagonist; however, renarcotization at 8 to 24 hours was common when only 25 or 50 mg of naltrexone per mg carfentanil was used.26 "Narcotic recycling" also occurred in carfentanil-immobilized wood bison that were treated with naloxone.27 Given the high lipophilicity of these fentanyl derivatives, redistribution from tissue stores to the central compartment may explain the recurrent opioid effect. Similar effects are known to occur with high-dose fentanyl anesthesia and may be potentiated by acidosis, hypothermia, and rewarming.28
In a recent report29 prepared for the US government, entitled "The Advantages and Limitations of Calmatives for Use as a Non-Lethal Technique," the authors write that carfentanil "has gained new interest ... because of the recent pursuit of novel calmative agents capable of unconventional administration." The report continues, "although not yet used in human populations, this drug offers the potential advantage of being administered to non-compliant or violent patients in situations requiring only indirect contact."29 This report did not discuss aerosolization; however, aerosolized carfentanil is currently under study. The Web site of KROSS, Inc. states that it is monitoring a clinical study involving carfentanil aerosol.30 A MEDLINE search from 1966 to November 2002 did not identify published studies on aerosolized carfentanil.
Another mystery surrounding the Russian event is whether it involved a single agent or a combination of agents. The early German analytic data12 showing evidence of halothane plus the Russian admission to using a fentanyl derivative suggest that more than 1 agent was used. This may also explain the failure to fully obtain reversal with naloxone in some cases, although hypoxic brain injury also may have contributed.
It seems very possible that the Russians used a multiagent regimen consisting of a highly potent opioid and an inhalational anesthetic agent. For decades, the combination of an opioid with an inhalational anesthetic agent has been a mainstay of the balanced anesthesia approach. Fentanyl and its derivates are commonly used in conjunction with inhalational anesthetic agents.31 Fentanyl, sufentanil, and alfentanil are routinely used with inhalational agents, such as nitrous oxide or isoflurane. A combination approach also may help prevent emergence reactions that may occur with opioids. Glenski et al32 showed that low-dose sufentanil at a 0.5 µg/kg dose can be used successfully to supplement halothane/nitrous oxide anesthesia in infants and children. However, a slightly higher dose of sufentanil was associated with increased adverse events, such as hypotension, bradycardia, and respiratory depression. In one patient, reversal with an opioid antagonist was required.32
Unexpected deaths
If carfentanil was used, why did more than 120 hostages die? Carfentanil has a therapeutic index of 10,600. Shortly after the tragedy, it was reported that the consensus of Russian health experts was that "this drug could not have caused death."8 Given the extraordinarily high therapeutic index of carfentanil, reactions among Russian officials suggest that the large number of deaths from gas poisoning was not anticipated.
Several factors may explain the deaths. Unpredictable uptake of opioids after a given dose is one problem: up to fivefold variation in plasma concentration may occur after the administration of a standard dose. In addition, there may be a three- to fivefold variability in therapeutic plasma levels of opioids needed to effectively block a defined response. In the Moscow theater, a uniform dose of the carfentanil-halothane mixture would have been quite improbable. Air currents would be expected to disperse the aerosol unequally through the theater. For example, the physical positioning of each hostage in relationship to the ventilation system must have considerably influenced the individual's exposure dose.
Other variables may also influence the toxicity of opioids. Fentanyl and most of its derivatives are highly lipid soluble and have large volumes of distribution. Many patients remained in intensive care units for several days after the exposure. We can only speculate that hypoxic brain injury, as well as delayed redistribution of the fentanyl derivative to the central compartment, may have contributed to prolonged hemodynamic and respiratory instability. The wide therapeutic margin of drugs, such as carfentanil, may have lulled some scientists into believing that the poison gas could not have produced lethality. However, the lowest median effective dose (ED50) in these studies was based on the tail-withdrawal test in rats.25 As many researchers have learned over the years, animal data cannot be extrapolated directly to human beings.
Lessons learned
It seems likely that the 800 hostages were about to be killed by Chechen rebels. To rescue them, the Russian military used a calmative agent in an attempt to subdue the rebels. The intent was likely to win control of the theater with as little loss of life as possible. Given the large number of explosives in the hands of the hostage takers, a conventional assault or the use of more toxic chemical agents might have significantly increased the number of casualties. Although it may seem excessive that 16% of the 800 hostages may have died from the gas exposure, 84% survived. We do not know that a different tactic would have provided a better outcome.
The use of a "sleeping gas" or calmative agent in this setting is a novel attempt at saving the most lives. Medical attention to these approaches has been scanty. A MEDLINE search from 1966 to 2002 reveals few reports on calmative agents. Delivery of fentanyl as an aerosol has only been reported in a few pilot projects, and to our knowledge, information on the aerosolization of carfentanil is not reported at all in the public domain. Greater collaboration between clinicians and military planners is encouraged.
A better appreciation of some of the pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic issues relating to carfentanil redistribution might have heightened concerns about recurrent toxicity. A therapeutic index of 10,600 (or 25,000 in the case of sufentanil) may inappropriately lessen anxiety about the potential lethality of these agents. Given some factors, such as the lipophilicity of the fentanyl derivatives and the health status of the exposed, as well as great uncertainty regarding the absorbed dose, the potential for inadvertent overdose should have been addressed more thoroughly. Ironically, opioid intoxication is a relatively simple poisoning to treat. Preparation of rescuers and medical teams with suitable stores of effective antidotes, such as naloxone, is essential. The Moscow event urgently prompts a reassessment of our antidote armamentarium. In the United States, naloxone, for a long time a critical antidote to treat heroin overdose and iatrogenic opioid toxicity, has now become a crucial component of our chemical warfare antidote repository.
Nine days after the Moscow theater incident, the US National Research Council issued a report entitled "Developing Effective Non-Lethal Weapon Options Is Needed to Enhance Naval Force Capabilities."33 This long-awaited study strongly recommended that the "US Department of the Navy should move toward integrating non-lethal weapons-designed to incapacitate people or material while minimizing unintended death and damage-into naval war fighting requirements, research and development programs, acquisition plans, and operations." The report states that one of the problems in the past was the "lack of new ideas" and "small budget" and that a greater emphasis is needed "on understanding the effects of non-lethal weapons on intended targets and whether those effects are useful for military operations and within the bounds of treaty constraints." In addition, the report adds that the "highest priority should be placed on four science and technology areas of non-lethal weapons," including the development of calmative agents. Medical toxicologists, emergency physicians, and physicians in general may have a constructive role in sharing expertise and staying current on these rapidly progressing technologies.
References
1. Lethal Moscow gas an opiate? CBS News Web site. October 29, 2002. Available at: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in527298.shtml. Accessed January 3, 2003.
2. Ruppe D. CWC: Experts differ on whether Russian hostage rescue violated treaty. Global Security Newswire. October 30, 2002. Available at: http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues...11_1_chmw.html. Accessed January 3, 2003.
3. Moscow mystery "gas." Venik's Aviation Web site. Available at: http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/news059.htm. Accessed January 3, 2003.
4. Myers S. From anxiety, fear and hope, the deadly rescue in Moscow. New York Times. November 1, 2002:Section A; page 1.
5. Anger grows over gas tactics. CNN Web site. October 28, 2002. Available at: http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe...gas/index.html. Accessed January 3, 2003.
6. Doctors try to solve gas mystery. CNN Web site. October 28, 2002. Available at: http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe...gas/index.html. Accessed January 3, 2003.
7. Russia: More than two days later, gas still a mystery. Radio Free Europe Web site. October 28, 2002. Available at: http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/20...2002161259.asp. Accessed January 3, 2003.
8. Brown D, Baker P. Moscow gas likely a potent narcotic: drug normally used to subdue big game. Washington Post. November 9, 2002:A12.
9. Russia: US believes Russian gas was an opiate. Global Security Newswire. October 29, 2002. Available at: http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues...2_10_29.html#9. Accessed January 3, 2003.
10. Russia comes clean over gas, demands extradition of Chechen envoy. Center for Defense Information Web site. October 31, 2002. Available at: http://www.cdi.org/russia/229-1.cfm. Accessed January 3, 2003.
11. Russia: Officials raise hostage death toll. NTI Global Security Newswire. November 8, 2002. Available at: http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues...1_11_chmw.html. Accessed January 3, 2003.
12. Enserink M, Stone R. Toxicology. Questions swirl over knockout gas used in hostage crisis. Science. 2002;298:1150-1151.MEDLINE CROSSREF
13. Higgins MJ, Asbury AJ, Brodie MJ. Inhaled nebulized fentanyl for postoperative analgesia. Anaesthesia. 1991;46:973-976.MEDLINE
14. Worsley MH, Macleod AD, Brodie MJ, et al. Inhaled fentanyl as a method of analgesia. Anesthesia. 1990;45:449-451.
15. Mather LE, Woodhouse A, Ward ME, et al. Pulmonary administration of aerosolized fentanyl: pharmacokinetic analysis of systemic delivery. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1998;46:37-43.MEDLINE CROSSREF
16. Peng PW, Sandler AN. A review of the use of fentanyl analgesia in the management of acute pain in adults. Anesthesiology. 1999;90:576-599.MEDLINE
17. Rosow C. Remifentanil: a unique opioid analgesic. Anesthesiology. 1993;79:875-876.MEDLINE
18. Jaffe AB, Sharpe LG, Jaffe JH. Rats self-administer sufentanil in aerosol form. Psychopharmacol. 1989;99:289-293.
19. Shaw ML, Carpenter JW, Leith DE. Complications with the use of carfentanil citrate and xylazine hydrochloride to immobilize domestic horses. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1995;206:833-836.MEDLINE
20. Kreeger TJ, Seal US. Immobilization of gray wolves (Canis lupus) with sufentanil citrate. J Wildlife Dis. 1990;26:561-563.
21. Baker JR, Gatesman TJ. Use of carfentanil and a ketamine- xylazine mixture to immobilise wild grey seals (Halichoerus grypus). Vet Rec. 1985;116:208-210.MEDLINE
22. Haigh JC, Lee LJ, Schweinsburg RE. Immobilization of polar bears with carfentanil. J Wildlife Dis. 1983;19:140-144.
23. Kearns KS, Swenson B, Ramsay EC. Oral induction of anesthesia with droperidol and transmucosal carfentanil citrate in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Zoo Wildlife Med. 2000;31:185-189.
24. Mama KR, Steffey EP, Withrow SJ. Use of orally administered carfentanil prior to isoflurane-induced anesthesia in a Kodiak brown bear. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2000;217:546-549.MEDLINE
25. Van Bever WF, Niemegeers CJ, Schellekens KH, et al. N-4- Substituted 1-(2-arylethyl)-4-piperidinyl-N-phenylpropanamides, a novel series of extremely potent analgesics with unusually high safety margin. Arzneimittel-Forschung. 1976;26:1548-1551.
26. Miller MW, Wild MA, Lance WR. Efficacy and safety of naltrexone hydrochloride for antagonizing carfentanil citrate immobilization in captive Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elaphus nelsoni). J Wildlife Dis. 1996;32:234-239.
27. Haigh JC, Gates CC. Capture of wood bison (Bison bison athabascae) using carfentanil-based mixtures. J Wildlife Dis. 1995;31:37-42.
28. Caspi J, Klausner JM, Safadi T, et al. Delayed respiratory depression following fentanyl anesthesia for cardiac surgery. Crit Care Med. 1988;16:238-240.MEDLINE
29. Lakoski JM, Murray WB, Kenny JM. The advantages and limitations of calmatives for use as a non-lethal technique. The Sunshine Project Web site. Available at: http://www.sunshine-project.org. Accessed January 3, 2003.
30. Kross Corporate Accomplishments. Kross, Inc. Web site. Available at: http://kross-inc.com/Corporate.asp. Accessed January 3, 2003.
31. Tammisto R, Aromaa U. The role of halothane and fentanyl in the production of balanced anaesthesia. Act Anaesth Scand. 1982;26:225- 230.
32. Glenski JA, Friesen RH, Lane GA. Low-dose sufentanil as a supplement to halothane/N2O anaesthesia in infants and children. Can J Anaesth. 1988;35:379-384.MEDLINE
33. Committee for an Assessment of Non-Lethal Weapons Science and Technology, National Research Council. An Assessment of Non-Lethal Weapons Science and Technology. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2003.
_________________________________________________
As I have said the fact that the Israelis hijacked the planes and carried out all the phases of the operation is the only theory that CONFORMS with the available known facts about 9/11. The theory shows why the admin lies about certain things. Eg.The person who listened in to Ed Felt's call and heard the report about an explosion and white smoke has been ordered not to talk about this.
Why the need for such secrecy and gag orders? Because the admin wants to cover up Israelis' role in 9/11. They did the same thing in the USS Liberty attack, and the JFK assassination.
The admin does not want the public to know about certain items used in the 9/11 attack. Guns and gas point away from Arabs who had no inside help, and toward the Israelis who did.
That's why the admin has been very adamant in denying that explosives had anything to do with the collapse of the three WTC towers - up until Bush's recent admission that the towers were blown up by bombs. ( But he (predictably) blames the Arabs for it.)
So how did bombs get into these towers? Silverstein, the US mass murderer, let them in. He arranged for a power shutdown a few days before 9/11 so that the Israeli commandos could get into the towers unobserved (sec cams were also shut down) and wire the buildings up for controlled demolition.
All the Israeli art students in Florida before 9/11 were part of a set-up to create a myth that there were Al Qaeda terrorists in America who were planning to attack the US on 9.11.
The Israeli art students WANTED to be noticed. They were out and about making themselves nuisances. Normal surveillance teams wouldn't behave like that. They wouldn't want the people they were keeping under surveillance knowing they were being watched. Not this Israeli surveillance team: they didn't care if 'Atta' ran into them in a shopping mall.
The Mohammed Atta figure was central to the hoax. He was the one the Israelis concentrated on building the myth around. If they could fool the world into believing the Atta story, then they could sell the story of the other eighteen 'Arab' terrorists without creating individual stories about them.
So that was why all the focus was on "Atta". Why it was "HIS" passport that was found intact on the ground after the plane crash; we saw a (fake) VIDEO of "him" with "Bin Laden"; why it is HIM on the cruise boat of Abramoff, partying away. Incidentally, a photo of "Atta" and his girlfriend in Florida looks nothing like the person in the passport photo.
"Atta" was an Israeli impersonator. He was going around in the months before 9/11 busily creating the fairytale of Atta in Florida plotting to hijack planes. That was Atta in the sec cam taken at an ATM machine. And also Atta caught on film at the airport. Note the picture is too grainy to see his face clearly and there is something fishy about the datestamps/timestamps. On one video capture, the date is missing so it could have been any day the film was taken, and in another there are two timestamps with different times given on the screen.
And look Atta running to catch the plane he is going to later hijack!
See? Atta, Atta, Atta, Atta, Atta ...........
Where was the real Atta? He was probably murdered on 9/11 by the Israeli commandos.
The real hijackers were Israeli. They took over the planes with guns. The planes' emergency response buttons were disabled by the ground commando crew before the planes took off. The pilots were killed by guns or held up by guns and then shepherded to the back of the plane.
The commandos chosen for the hijacking were all Arab speakers. Not too hard to find as Israel is in the ME and many Israelis formerly lived in Arab countries. Then all they had to do was speak in Arabic, say Allah O Akhbar! every now and then, and the ruse was complete.
Once they got control of the planes, it was a matter of setting it up for the crash and subsequent detonation. They first flew the planes to remote areas, lowered the speed and the altitude of the planes, then put on their chute gear and respirators, released the gas into the main cabin, and then left the cockpit to make their jump to the ground below. The planes were then flown by remote control to their ultimate destinations.
By remote control from the ground, the Israelis flew the planes into the buildings.
The reason why that Pentagon wing was chosen for the crash was:
1) This wing was the one the Israelis wanted to destroy. It contained all the papers that contained information about the Pentagon Budget and the missing 2.3 trillion dollars and without these papers, the investigation into the missing trillions could go nowhere. The accountants - civilians mostly - were housed in that section of the building.
It had nothing to do with the fact that this wing was being renovated and housed a fewer number of people than other wings. The terrorists wouldn't have cared about keeping the death toll low. A high death toll as possible is what they wanted. The explanation about keeping the deaths low makes no sense whatsoever.
2) Rumsfeld was not in that wing. The plane was initially headed for Rumsfeld's wing and then it made a turn and approached the Pentagon from a totally different direction. The remote-control hijackers had been given orders to pilot the plane in that direction and hit that wing that it did. The turn makes no sense otherwise. If the hijackers' mission was to hit the Pentagon and they were making good headway and had almost reached it, why make a complicated maneuver and turn the plane around at the last minute? Because they were correcting the plane's course so that it would hit the right target.
And how would the Arabs know which wing they wanted to hit anyway? How would they know which wing was being renovated, which one was least populated? They wouldn't.
So when the oddities and the inconsistencies and the leaks of the attack on 9/11 are taken into consideration in this context these oddities and inconsistencies and coincidences no longer look like oddities, inconsistencies and coincidences. They make perfect sense, and were part of the overall plan by the Israelis.
__________________________________________________ _______
FL93 was the flight that didn't go according to plan. It was not meant to crash into a field in Pennsylvania. Some people say it was meant to crash into WTC7; and that Silverstein panicked and brought WTC7 down by demolition because the building was wired up with explosives and he didn't want that discovered in the investigation in the aftermath.
That was why the bulk of the phone calls that were made came from that plane and information that the hijackers didn't want to come out did: like the evidence of the gas (Wainio and Felt's calls), the sounds of "holing" after the passengers stopped talking - the sound of wind rushing through after one exit door had been opened.
The timeline supports all the events I've outlined on that flight.
If you accept the theory that there were hijackers (Israeli hijackers), the evidence fits with that scenario. All the pieces of the puzzle fit in beautifully.
The timing fits perfectly: Felt made his phone call at 9:58 and Wainio was speaking at 10:00 when she reported feeling funny. The hijackers spoke about finishing them off at 10:00. All talking ceased at 10:00.
__________________________________________
The fact that the Israeli hijackers used an anesthetic as to knock out the passengers and the Government knows they did is the reason why the Government conceals the real time of the crash. They say it is 10:03 when the CVR and noises heard on the phone calls say the plane crashed at 10:06. Seismologists also say the plane crashed at 10:06.
Why does the Government lie about the time of the crash and puts it earlier than most other sources?
Because there is something suspicious about the fact that there is a period of six minutes between the people stopping their conversations and the plane crash. You would expect there to be talking right up until the crash - screaming, shouting and so on. Right before the voices ceased to be heard, the passengers were in the middle of trying to break down the cockpit door. What happened to silence them? We know no guns were used or we would have heard the sounds of guns being used, and people would report that, plus you can't shoot everybody dead all at once. Also, where are the screams and sounds of commotion of people being shot at?
So what do we have to show what WAS used to silence people? Wainio's report to her stepmother that:
1) she felt like she was leaving her body
2) she was experiencing difficulty breathing
3) she felt like she was going into a trance.
When does one feel like this? When one is put to sleep.
How do we know the anesthesia was administered by aerosol?
Because another caller on the plane reported seeing a white smoke and heard an explosion.
How they did it - the summary:
1) They planted bombs (probably micronukes) in the WTC towers.
2) Israeli commandos posed as Arabs and caught the planes with fake IDs.
3) All four airports have been penetrated by the Israelis: Mossad employees of an Israeli company, ICTS, plant bombs, guns, gas canisters and other equipment on the planes some time before the hijackers catch the planes.
4) The hijackers get on the planes and mid-air hold up the passengers with the guns onboard. They shoot the pilots dead and take over the cockpit. They turn off the transponder and disable the emergency response button, and put the plane onto electronic remote control mode.
5) The hijackers release a gas that incapacitates the passengers and knocks them out.
6) The plane is diverted to an isolated region.
7) The hijackers jump from the plane with parachutes when the plane has descended to an altitude of about 7000 feet and has slowed down to about 150 knots or less.
Cool The hijackers get picked up by one of the Mossad operatives on the ground
9) The plane is flown by remote control FMCS (flight management computer system) and FANS to its destination and into the designated building or into the ground (Shanksville).
10) Simultaneously that the plane is flown into the building, the plane is detonated by remote control.
11) The 3 WTC buildings are detonated some time later.
__________________________________________________ ___________________
The Long Version
Israelis did 9/11:
Taken from another forum:
Quote:
Originally Posted by A-Train:
debus, you seem to be working from the assumption that the cockpit voice recorder from FL93 is legitimate evidence. I don't believe it is. I believe it is junk.
A-Train, you were the one who convinced me that the phone calls from the plane are real: "Don't fight the phone calls". It isn't only the CVR that indicates the hijackers are still in the cockpit at 10:00 AM (the point in time when all the voices stop), it is also the phone calls that show this:
Quote
9:58 a.m.: Todd Beamer Ends Call; He and Others in Rear of Plane Join Takeover Attempt
Todd Beamer ends his long phone call with a Verizon phone company representative saying that they plan “to jump” the hijacker in the back of the plane who has the bomb. In the background, the phone operator already could hear an “awful commotion” of people shouting, and women screaming, “Oh my God,” and “God help us.” He lets go of the phone but leaves it connected. His famous last words are said to nearby passengers: “Are you ready guys? Let’s roll” (alternate version: “You ready? Okay. Let’s roll”). [Longman, 2002, pp. 204; Newsweek, 9/22/2001; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/2001] Sounds of fighting in the back of the plane where Beamer is can be heard about a minute after such sounds in the front. [Observer, 12/2/2001]
9:58 a.m.: CeeCee Lyles Cries they’re Doing It; Strange Sounds Follow
CeeCee Lyles says to her husband, “Aah, it feels like the plane’s going down.” Her husband Lorne says, “What’s that?” She replies, “I think they’re going to do it. they’re forcing their way into the cockpit” (an alternate version says, “they’re getting ready to force their way into the cockpit”). A little later she screams, then says, “they’re doing it! they’re doing it! they’re doing it!” Her husband hears more screaming in the background, then he hears a “whooshing sound, a sound like wind,” then more screaming, and then the call breaks off. [Longman, 2002, pp. 180; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/2001; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/2001]
9:58 a.m.: Flight 93 Passengers Run to First Class
Sandy Bradshaw tells her husband, “Everyone’s running to first class. I’ve got to go. Bye.” She had been speaking with him since 9:50 a.m. [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/2001; Boston Globe, 11/23/2001]
9:58 a.m.: Ed Felt Said to Describe Explosion and White Smoke from Bathroom Call
A man dials emergency 9-1-1 from a bathroom on the plane, crying, “We’re being hijacked, We’re being hijacked!” [Toronto Sun, 9/16/2001] The operator reports, “He heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him.” [ABC News, 9/11/2001; ABC News, 9/11/2001; Associated Press, 9/12/2001] One minute after the call begins, the line goes dead.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t...of _9/11=ua93
These phone calls show that none of the hijackers left the cockpit before 10:00 AM. The passengers would have reported it if the hijackers had come out of the cockpit. At 10:00 AM the passengers are assembled at the cockpit door trying to ram it open.
More about Edward Felt's phone call. He was the passenger that was unaccounted for in Todd Beamer's call where he gives a head count of the passengers. Felt went into one of the toilets to make his call. In the middle of the phone call, he ducks his head out to see what is going on. Apparently the toilet was in the front section of the plane. He reports seeing white smoke and an explosion. One minute later the line goes dead. He made the phone call at 9:58AM.
Quote
The operator reports, “He heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him.” [ABC News, 9/11/2001; ABC News, 9/11/2001; Associated Press, 9/12/2001] One minute after the call begins, the line goes dead. [Pittsburgh Channel, 12/6/2001] Investigators believe this was Edward Felt, the only passenger not accounted for on phone calls. He was sitting in first class, so he probably was in the bathroom near the front of the plane. At one point, he appears to have peeked out the bathroom door during the call. [Longman, 2002, pp. 193-194, 196] The mentions of smoke and explosions on the recording of his call are now denied. [Longman, 2002, pp. 264] The person who took Felt’s call is not allowed to speak to the media. [Mirror, 9/12/2002]
Extract: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/c...tem=a958edfelt
Main site: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t...of _9/11=ua93
I hypothesize that the Israeli hijackers at around 10:00 released an anesthetic gas into the main cabin. This was the cause of the explosion and the white smoke observed by Felt at this time. As the canister of aerosol gas was opened and the gas under pressure released, it made the sound of an explosion and created white vapor mist. The mist was the 'white smoke' seen by Felt. After he reports these observations, he stops talking. He has been disabled by the gas.
Everyone else stops talking at that point. After 10:00 AM, all passengers cease talking the although not all the phones are cut off. Some listeners can hear background noises but no talking, except for a few screams.
The talking ceases abruptly. A gas can silence people instantaneously. Gas quickly spreads through the air and will knock out people as soon as they inhale it. That was the aim. The hijackers wanted to knock out the passengers so they could exit the plane unobserved. Deception and secrecy was an important part of the plan. If passengers had reported the hijackers dropping from the planes in parachutes, the hijackers' cover as suicide hijackers would have been blown.
The hijackers chose this moment to release the gas. The passengers were about to break down the door and the hijackers had to stop them.
Quote
10:00 a.m.: Hijackers Respond to Passenger Revolt
According to the 9/11 Commission, the hijacker pilot, presumably Ziad Jarrah, has been rolling the plane sharply to the left and right in an attempt to prevent passengers from reaching the cockpit. At this time, he stabilizes the plane and asks another hijacker, “Is that it? Shall we finish it off?” [My comments in bold: he means shall they release the gas and finish the passengers off] Another voice answers, “No. Not yet. When they all come, we finish it off.” The pilot starts pitching the nose of the airplane up and down. A few seconds later a passenger’s voice can be heard saying, “In the cockpit. If we don’t we’ll die!” Another voice says, “Roll it!” which some speculate could be a reference to pushing a foot cart into the cockpit door. [The passengers are at the point of breaking in, so the hijackers have to act now - they have to disable the passengers and they do so by releasing the gas - the "explosion and white smoke" seen by Felt from his location in the front of the plane] By 10:01, the pilot stops the pitching and says, “Allah o akbar! Allah o akbar!” (“God is great”), then asks, “Is that it? I mean, shall we put it down?” Another hijacker responds, “Yes, put it in it, and pull it down.” [New York Times, 7/22/2004; San Francisco Chronicle, 7/23/2004] [The gas has been released; the passengers have been disabled (and silenced) and now the hijackers will escape from the plane and then the plane will be brought down by remote control. The Israelis accomplish their escape and at 10:06, not 10:03, the plane crashes and simultaneously explodes in a remote field in Pennsylvania.]
Extract: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/c...ijackersrepond
Main site: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t...of _9/11=ua93
The call by Elizabeth Wainio supports the gas being released at that time. She is on the phone to her stepmother at 10:00, approx. the time Felt reports an explosion and white smoke. She speaks of a sensation of leaving her body, of being in a trancelike state, and her stepmother says she was breathing in a strange manner.
Quote
(10:00 a.m.): Elizabeth Wainio Says they’re Rushing the Cockpit
Elizabeth Wainio. [Source: Family photo]Elizabeth Wainio.
Flight 93 passenger Elizabeth Wainio says to her stepmother, “Mom, they’re rushing the cockpit. I’ve got to go. Bye,” then hangs up. This may have been a delayed reaction to events, since her stepmother says that in their 10-minute call, Elizabeth was in a trancelike state, appeared to have resigned herself to death, was breathing in a strange manner, and even said she felt she was leaving her body. The timing for this call is also approximate, and variously reported as taking place just before or just after 10:00 a.m. [MSNBC, 7/30/2002; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/2001]
Extract: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/c...em=a1000wainio
Main site: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t...of _9/11=ua93
This sensation of floating above your body and of being in a trancelike state are experienced when undergoes an anesthetic procedure.
Right after this (at 10:00), no more information by the passengers is relayed via the phones.
Only strange sounds are heard by the listeners between 10:00 and 10:06. The fact that the listeners report hearing sounds on the plane right up until 10:06 proves that the plane crashed at 10:06, and not 10:03.
The government lies about the time of the crash because they don't want to explain why there is silence for 6 minutes between the passengers ceasing to talk and the plane crash. One would expect passengers to talk right up until the plane crashed.
Quote
(Between 10:00-10:06 a.m.): Flight 93 Cell Call Listeners Hear Silence, Strange Sounds
During this time, there apparently are no calls from Flight 93. Several cell phones that are left on record only silence. For instance, although Todd Beamer does not hang up, nothing more is heard after he puts down the phone, suggesting things are quiet in the back of the plane. [Longman, 2002, pp. 218] The only exception is Richard Makely, who listens to Jeremy Glick’s open phone line after Glick goes to attack the hijackers. A reporter summarizes Makely explaining that, “The silence last two minutes, then there [is] screaming. More silence, followed by more screams. Finally, there [is] a mechanical sound the hijackers opening an exit door and leaving the plane, followed by nothing.” [San Francisco Chronicle, 9/17/2001] The second silence lasts between 60 and 90 seconds. [Longman, 2002, pp. 219]
The silence indicates some event like a gassing occurred on the plane: an event that silenced the passengers suddenly. The government doesn't want people speculating as to what caused this silence as they might suspect the use of an anesthetic gas, and this raises awkward questions about how did the Arab hijackers get gas onboard.
There is a clear pattern of denial and obfuscation: the government doesn't want to admit guns nor gas was used in the hijacking. Such things like gas and guns require the infiltration of airports and point to a much more sophisticated operation than the official government story tells. Arabs would not have been able to infiltrate the airports but Mossad could. Suspicion might fall on the Israelis, and the government whose business is to protect the Israelis (like they protected them in USS Liberty) don't want that.
A-Train says:
Thus, as far as I am concerned, the commandos could have made their jumps anytime after 9:39 and before 10:00. We know from the phone calls that the passengers commenced their revolt at about 10:00. What we will never know is what they found when they made it to the cockpit. The plane was shot down/exploded before they were able to relay their findings via phone calls. The timing of the shoot down was probably by design of the conspirators, who did not want the passengers reporting an empty cockpit.
Then who turned on the transponder at 10:00 and turned it off at 10:03? It would have had to have been the hijackers. After they had disabled the passengers with anesthetic gas, they were now free to leave the plane. Israelis don't generally carry out suicide missions. This was a false flag operation and it was planned to the last detail. They had private Learjets on standby that could scramble as soon as they were given a signal. So the hijackers turned on the transponder to notify their handlers that they were ready to evacuate the plane. The transponder gives a plane's precise location and its altitude. This is all the information the Israelis needed to scramble a Learjet to the location of the airliner and carry out the detonation part of the plan. The Israelis had to destroy the plane completely to make sure there would be no evidence pointing to how they hijacked the plane left. They also did that to obscure the fact that the hijackers were missing from the plane.
And so the hijackers make their escape unwitnessed as all the passengers have succumbed to the anesthetic gas. The hijackers, wearing respirators and fitted out with parachutes, make their way to one of the exits of the plane. The plane is cruising at an altitude of 7,000 feet and has been slowed right down to less than 150 miles/hour. This is the window of opportunity the hijackers need. They open one of the exit doors and jettison from the plane. The noise of 'holing' can be heard thereafter on the tape: mostly wind sounds.
They are observed by a Learjet that is cruising nearby. Several minutes later, the plane flies over Shanksville and crashes nose-down into an abandoned mine. At that point the plane is detonated by remote control, just like the Pentagon plane was detonated before it hit the Pentagon. (And also the planes in NY at their moments of impact.) All the planes have been pre-wired with explosives that are detonated when they crash. The planes have to be destroyed to remove incriminating evidence.
It isn't hard to imagine how the CVR could have been faked. The FBI is ordered to find and confiscate the box from the crash scene in Shanksville-- or whatever remains of it-- and send it immediately to the Justice Department in Washington. Like the good soldiers they are, the FBI obeys unquestioningly and the box ends up on the desk of Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff, an Israeli citizen whose mother was a Mossad agent. Chertoff sends it to a Mossad acting studio in Tel Aviv, where the tape is altered or completely redone to give Americans the impression of a heroic and desperate struggle to take control of the plane.
The contents of the CVR is consistent with the contents of the phone calls. If the CVR was faked, then you would have to say the phone calls were faked too.
Such a phony recording would not have been too difficult to make. Unlike a phone call conversation to a loved one, which would be next to impossible to fake, the bogus CVR has only bits and pieces of voices from the presumed American heroes, and even those voices are obscured by the supposed sound of plates and glassware crashing around.
The Israelis had no plan to fake the CVR and phone calls on Flt 93. Flt 93 was the flight that didn't go according to plan. Something happened on this flight: it was delayed and airforce jets were going to be scrambled any minute. This is also why the passengers of Fl 93 had time to gather together an assault force. The Israelis would have had to preempt such a situation occurring and fake a CVR to complement this event. I think this scenario is very doubtful.
The praying Arabs, the heroic Americans who take control, but tragically too late to save themselves: sounds like a B-movie script to me.
It was scripted. The Israeli hijackers knew they had to carry on like fanatical Muslims. In fact, I think they went over the top somewhat.
Quote:
debus, I urge you and other truth seekers to dismiss the evidence provided by the Cockpit Voice Recorder from FL93. It had passed through the hands of unknown parties before being presented to the families, and is therefore unreliable. Like the Fatty Bin Laden tape, the CVR from FL93 ought to be used to learn not what happened, but what the conspiracy wants us to believe happened.
I think the CVR is consistent with everything that happened on that flight including the events reported by phone; that's why the government is covering up about the last few minutes of the tape. The government's version of what happened conflicts with the contents of the tape. They say the plane crashed at 10:03 even though sounds - the wind - can be heard until 10:06. If they're going to fake the CVR, they wouldn't include things like this that they would have trouble explaining away.
__________________________________________________ ______________________
This theory is the one that best conforms to the available evidence about 9/11. Minute by minute the events as reported on the CVR and phone calls by passengers fit with the theory that the Israelis hijacked the flights and used gas and parachutes and guns.
They used the latest in chemical warfare to immobilize the passengers and disable them, just as the Russian commando team did in the Chechen theater a few years back. They probably used the same gas to incapacitate them.
The Israelis bailed out of the planes at an altitude of 7000 feet, the height of the plane as recorded by the transponder. Note the transponder was turned on briefly, for three minutes, shortly before the plane crashed.
Gassing the passengers and crew is how the Israeli commandos managed to escape from them undetected. That is why hardly anyone suspects the Israelis to be behind the hijackings. Almost everybody assumes the hijackers died on the planes. Most people have never thought of the possibility of Israelis hijacking the planes and think Arab terrorists did it. However Arabs however did not control the security of the four 9/11 airports and did not bring the guns onboard. Neither did they blow up the buildings. 9/11 was clearly a complex operation that could only have been carried out with the assistance of a national intelligence agency.
Who had the means and the motive to carry out such an undertaking? Only Israel. And Israel is the country that has a history of carrying out such false flag attacks. And they have a history of carrying these out frequently.
__________________________________________________ ________
Speculation about the aerosolized drug used in the attack.
Information about fentanyl, or strictly one of its derivatives, the drug that is speculated to have been used in the attack on the plane passengers during the 9/11 hijackings. It was used in the Chechen rebel hostage crisis. It is very likely other agents were used as well in the drug mixture such as halothane.
Contrary to what the authorities in Moscow have said about fentanyl in some reports, it is lethal at high doses. Any drug is lethal if it is given in a high enough dose. Many deaths have been reported with the patch form of the drug.
Quote
http://www.answers.com/topic/moscow-...hostage-crisis
Moscow theater hostage crisis
The Moscow theatre hostage crisis was the seizure on October 23, 2002 of a crowded Moscow theatre by armed Chechen men and women who claimed allegiance to the separatist movement in Chechnya. They took over 900 hostages and demanded the withdrawal of Russian forces from Chechnya. After a siege of two and a half days, Russian Spetsnaz ("special forces") raided the <SNIP> ................
It is settled that the security services pumped an aerosol anesthetic into the theater. This was done by means of the air conditioning system. After thirty minutes, when the gas had taken effect, the physical assault commenced from the roof and all entrances and, it is said, including through the sewers.
Within the theater, it became apparent to gunmen and hostages alike that a gas had been emitted into the building. Hostages reported that some people in the audience fell asleep, and the gunmen put on respirators <SNIP> ........
Identifying the gas
It was reported that efforts to treat victims were complicated because the Russian government refused to inform doctors what type of gas had been used. At the time, the gas was surmised to be some sort of surgical anesthetic or chemical weapon. Foreign embassies in Moscow issued official requests for more information on the gas to aid in treatment, but were publicly ignored.
While still refusing to identify the gas, on October 28 the Russian government informed the US Embassy of some of the gas' effects. Based on this information and examinations of victims, doctors concluded the gas was a morphine derivative.
On Wednesday, October 30, Russia responded to increasing domestic and international pressure with a statement on the unknown gas by Health Minister Yuri Shevchenko. He identified it as a fentanyl derivative[1][3] (possibly the large animal immobilant carfentanil[citation needed]), a powerful opioid[citation needed]. Boris Grebenyuk, the All-Russia Disaster Relief Service chief, said the services used Trimethyl Phentanylum.[1] New Scientist pointed out that trimethyl fentanyl is not a gas but an aerosol.[4]
A German toxicology professor who examined several German hostages said that their blood and urine contained halothane, a surgical anesthetic not commonly used in the West, and that it was likely the gas had additional components. However, halothane has a strong odor (although often defined as "pleasant" by comparison with other anesthetic gases). Thus, by the time the whole theatre area would be filled with halothane to a concentration compatible with loss of consciousness (0.5% - 3%), it is likely that terrorists inside would have realized they were being attacked. Additionally, recovery of consciousness is rapid after the flow of gas is interrupted, unlike with high-dose fentanyl administration. Therefore, although halothane might have been a component in the aerosol, it was probably not a major component.[citation needed]
The gas is now generally agreed to have been the top-secret fentanyl derivative Kolokol-1 developed by the KGB in the 1970's.[citation needed] Russian doctors, who helped hostages in first minutes after the siege, used an usual fentanyl's antidote, naloxone, for injections.[5] <SNIP> ..................
The things the Israeli false flag planners would have been looking for in a gas are its incapacitating action and the rapidity of the onset of that action.
Fentanyl is used as an anesthetic in its liquid form. It is usually given as an injection when used to put patients to sleep. There are fentanyl patches that are used as painkillers. Some addicts mix fentanyl with heroin. Fentanyl, a synthetic narcotic, is 10,000x more potent than morphine in its analgesic action.
An aerosolized (nebulized) derivative of fentanyl must have been used in the Chechen theater attack, as fentanyl is a liquid compound. The substance used in the Chechen hostage rescue was not really a gas, but an aerosol. That was why I speculate Felt reported a 'white smoke' - it was not smoke but white vapor or mist of the nebulized drug as it was released into the atmosphere of the main cabin.
Below is a report of the drug(s) that were released into the Chechen theater by the American College of Emergency Physicians.
"In this age of terrorism, the element of surprise is an important tool. Just as few people expected that hijacked jet aircraft would be transformed into offensive missiles of mass destruction, medical providers likely expected to receive victims suffering from bullet wounds, not a mysterious intoxication."
Such substances are not only being used to rescue people but to deliberately incapacitate them in hostage situations.
Quote
http://www.kafkas.org.tr/perspektif/text5/3.txt
UNEXPECTED "GAS" CASUALTIES IN MOSCOW: A MEDICAL TOXICOLOGY PERSPECTIVE
6 May 2003, American College of Emergency Physicians
----------------------------------------
Unexpected "Gas" Casualties In Moscow: A Medical Toxicology Perspective
In October 2002, the Russian military used a mysterious "gas" to incapacitate Chechen rebels at a Moscow theater. Despite increased interest in the potential use of lethal chemical weapons in recent years, the medical community has paid little attention to the development of incapacitating, calmative, and "less than lethal" technologies. In this analysis, we review the events surrounding the use of a calmative "gas" during the Russian military action and discuss what is currently known about fentanyl derivatives, their aerosolization, and the rationale for their use as incapacitating agents. Collectively, the available evidence strongly suggests that a combination of a potent aerosolized fentanyl derivative, such as carfentanil, and an inhalational anesthetic, such as halothane, was used. The paper also assesses potential errors leading to the loss of a substantial number of hostages. Several lessons can be learned from this surprising and novel use of an incapacitating gas.
Introduction
On October 26, 2002, more than 120 hostages held at the Moscow Dubrovka Theater Center by Chechen rebels died during a rescue attempt by Russian military special forces. First reports suggested that a "poison" gas had been used by the elite spotznaz in order to subdue the rebels and rescue the hostages. But what gas was it? According to press reports, Russian physicians were told that an anesthetic gas had been pumped into the theater, but the gas was not identified.1 Perhaps concerns regarding the restrictions in the recently ratified Chemical Weapons Convention contributed to the cloak of secrecy surrounding the identity of the toxic agent.2
Medical toxicologists are familiar with many of the toxicologic issues surrounding chemical warfare agents; however, our assumption about which agents were used during this daring hostage rescue did not fit with the reported clinical effects. In this age of terrorism, the element of surprise is an important tool. Just as few people expected that hijacked jet aircraft would be transformed into offensive missiles of mass destruction, medical providers likely expected to receive victims suffering from bullet wounds, not a mysterious intoxication. Despite visits by military medics to some Moscow hospitals several hours before the raid, advising health care providers to increase their supplies of naloxone,3 the emergency medical system was not adequately prepared to receive hundreds of casualties suffering from opioid intoxication.
What happened?
On October 23, 2002, more than 800 people attending a stage show were taken captive by some 50 Chechen rebels. The rebels repeatedly threatened to blow up the theater if their political demands were not met. The Russian military stormed the theater early in the morning of October 26. An unidentified "gas" was introduced into the theater through the ventilation system approximately 15 minutes before the military offensive.4 Hundreds of hostages were taken to local hospitals suffering from "sleeping gas" poisoning. According to local reports, "doctors spent the first few hours testing various antidotes before they found something that worked."5 Some of the medical personnel may have assumed that the victims had been exposed to conventional chemical agents, such as the nerve agents sarin or VX. Some of the first victims were treated with atropine, an intervention that proved ineffective.6 The finding of miosis may have added to the initial confusion. Other experts speculated that the gas might have been BZ, an incapacitating agent that produces anticholinergic delirium.7 Western embassy physicians examined some of the hostages and concluded, "the agent they were exposed to appears consistent with an opiate rather than a nerve agent."1 According to 2 Moscow physicians, "many patients had classic signs of opioid intoxication: pinpoint pupils, unconsciousness, [and] depressed breathing."8 The opioid hypothesis was supported by reports from Russian physicians that naloxone was successful in reversing the effects of the intoxication.9
The Russian Health Minister announced 4 days after the event that, "a fentanyl derivative was used to neutralize the terrorists." He went on to state that the gas "cannot by itself be called lethal."10 Despite this claim, 127 (16%) of the 800 hostages in the theater died, and more than 650 of the survivors required hospitalization.11 The Russian Health Minister attributed the deaths of the hostages to their poor condition from limited food and water and immobility during 3 days of captivity. By 12 days after the rescue, 67 hostages and 9 rescuers remained hospitalized, 5 in critical condition.11
Little information is available about the dose of the chemicals used. One Russian physician stated that toxicology testing to identify the exposure was not performed because "to conduct such tests we have to know approximately what we're looking for, and we didn't know what to look for. Besides, we didn't have the technical means to conduct such tests."8 Preliminary analyses of blood and urine specimens from 2 survivors who returned to Germany detected traces of halothane, no fentanyl, and no evidence of nerve agents.12
Although one of these patients had been on a ventilator, a possible source of halothane contamination, the other patient had not been ventilated. These early analytic findings and the reports from Russian health officials suggest that the toxic gas was some sort of combination agent. News reports suggested that the most likely combination of agents was a highly potent fentanyl derivative used in conjunction with an inhalational anesthetic agent, such as halothane.8
Aerosols of fentanyl and fentanyl derivatives
A large number of fentanyl derivatives have been developed. Many are more potent than fentanyl. Like fentanyl and meperidine, these agents all have a phenylpiperidine structure, are structurally dissimilar to natural opiates, and are potent agonists at µ opioid receptors. Depending on the dose, fentanyl and its derivatives produce analgesia, respiratory depression, central nervous system depression, and miosis.
The Russian acknowledgment that the gas was a fentanyl derivative raised a number of issues regarding the use of such an agent in this situation. Many observers were unaware that an aerosolized fentanyl preparation was even available. However, investigations into the utility of administering fentanyl as a nebulized aerosol were first reported more than a decade ago.13,14 A "gas" of fentanyl or one of its derivatives is not a gas per se, but an aerosol of fine particles. The physical behavior of an aerosol differs considerably from that of a true gas. Particle size may influence the distribution of such an aerosol. The more potent the drug, the less needed to aerosolize to obtain the same effect. Conditions favoring aerosolubility may be influenced by the potency of the specific agent.
In a 1998 study,15 the delivery of 100 to 300 µg of aerosolized fentanyl base was shown to have comparable bioavailability to intravenous administration at the same dosage. Worsley et al14 had noted earlier wide variation in blood levels after patients were given aerosolized fentanyl for postoperative anesthesia and suggested that this unpredictability in fentanyl pharmacokinetics was a result of its high lipid solubility and high volume of distribution. Another challenge is the short duration of action of fentanyl. Researchers have developed a liposome-encapsulated drug carrier system to provide a more controlled and sustained release of aerosolized fentanyl.15 A 1999 paper16 concluded, "inhalation of fentanyl offers an easy, noninvasive route of administration ... [although] additional study is required to determine the safety and efficacy."
Identifying the exact fentanyl derivative that was used in the Moscow incident is difficult without definitive analytic confirmation. Sufentanil is shorter acting, is much more potent than fentanyl, and is available as a nasal spray. Its lipid solubility is much greater than fentanyl or morphine (Table). Alfentanil is a ultra-short-acting analgesic agent that has a more rapid onset of action and shorter duration of action than fentanyl and sufentanil.17
Carfentanil
Carfentanil is another fentanyl derivative with very high potency and a high therapeutic index. It is a one of a series of N-4-substituted 1-(2-arylethyl)-4-piperidinyl-N-phenylpropanamide compounds. It is the only opioid approved in the United States for immobilizing large exotic animals; it is not approved for use in human beings.19 Known as Wildnil, it is used primarily as an incapacitating agent for large animals, such as elephants, rhinoceroses, wolves,20 seals,21 and polar bears.22 A typical dose to immobilize seals is 10 µg/kg.21 It may also be administered intravenously, transmucosally,23 or orally.24
Published reports on the analgesic activity and toxicity of carfentanil date to the 1970s. In a rat study, Van Bever et al25 compared carfentanil and 3-methyl fentanyl with fentanyl, morphine, and meperidine. They found that carfentanil had the lowest median effective dose (0.00032 mg/kg), with a potency 10,000 times greater than morphine. Furthermore, they found that these 4-substituted fentanyl derivates had an unusually high safety margin (Table).
The narcotizing effects of carfentanil may recur 2 to 24 hours after treatment with an opioid antagonist.19 In an investigation on carfentanil in Rocky Mountain elk, high-dose naltrexone (100 or 500 mg of naltrexone per mg of carfentanil) was an effective antagonist; however, renarcotization at 8 to 24 hours was common when only 25 or 50 mg of naltrexone per mg carfentanil was used.26 "Narcotic recycling" also occurred in carfentanil-immobilized wood bison that were treated with naloxone.27 Given the high lipophilicity of these fentanyl derivatives, redistribution from tissue stores to the central compartment may explain the recurrent opioid effect. Similar effects are known to occur with high-dose fentanyl anesthesia and may be potentiated by acidosis, hypothermia, and rewarming.28
In a recent report29 prepared for the US government, entitled "The Advantages and Limitations of Calmatives for Use as a Non-Lethal Technique," the authors write that carfentanil "has gained new interest ... because of the recent pursuit of novel calmative agents capable of unconventional administration." The report continues, "although not yet used in human populations, this drug offers the potential advantage of being administered to non-compliant or violent patients in situations requiring only indirect contact."29 This report did not discuss aerosolization; however, aerosolized carfentanil is currently under study. The Web site of KROSS, Inc. states that it is monitoring a clinical study involving carfentanil aerosol.30 A MEDLINE search from 1966 to November 2002 did not identify published studies on aerosolized carfentanil.
Another mystery surrounding the Russian event is whether it involved a single agent or a combination of agents. The early German analytic data12 showing evidence of halothane plus the Russian admission to using a fentanyl derivative suggest that more than 1 agent was used. This may also explain the failure to fully obtain reversal with naloxone in some cases, although hypoxic brain injury also may have contributed.
It seems very possible that the Russians used a multiagent regimen consisting of a highly potent opioid and an inhalational anesthetic agent. For decades, the combination of an opioid with an inhalational anesthetic agent has been a mainstay of the balanced anesthesia approach. Fentanyl and its derivates are commonly used in conjunction with inhalational anesthetic agents.31 Fentanyl, sufentanil, and alfentanil are routinely used with inhalational agents, such as nitrous oxide or isoflurane. A combination approach also may help prevent emergence reactions that may occur with opioids. Glenski et al32 showed that low-dose sufentanil at a 0.5 µg/kg dose can be used successfully to supplement halothane/nitrous oxide anesthesia in infants and children. However, a slightly higher dose of sufentanil was associated with increased adverse events, such as hypotension, bradycardia, and respiratory depression. In one patient, reversal with an opioid antagonist was required.32
Unexpected deaths
If carfentanil was used, why did more than 120 hostages die? Carfentanil has a therapeutic index of 10,600. Shortly after the tragedy, it was reported that the consensus of Russian health experts was that "this drug could not have caused death."8 Given the extraordinarily high therapeutic index of carfentanil, reactions among Russian officials suggest that the large number of deaths from gas poisoning was not anticipated.
Several factors may explain the deaths. Unpredictable uptake of opioids after a given dose is one problem: up to fivefold variation in plasma concentration may occur after the administration of a standard dose. In addition, there may be a three- to fivefold variability in therapeutic plasma levels of opioids needed to effectively block a defined response. In the Moscow theater, a uniform dose of the carfentanil-halothane mixture would have been quite improbable. Air currents would be expected to disperse the aerosol unequally through the theater. For example, the physical positioning of each hostage in relationship to the ventilation system must have considerably influenced the individual's exposure dose.
Other variables may also influence the toxicity of opioids. Fentanyl and most of its derivatives are highly lipid soluble and have large volumes of distribution. Many patients remained in intensive care units for several days after the exposure. We can only speculate that hypoxic brain injury, as well as delayed redistribution of the fentanyl derivative to the central compartment, may have contributed to prolonged hemodynamic and respiratory instability. The wide therapeutic margin of drugs, such as carfentanil, may have lulled some scientists into believing that the poison gas could not have produced lethality. However, the lowest median effective dose (ED50) in these studies was based on the tail-withdrawal test in rats.25 As many researchers have learned over the years, animal data cannot be extrapolated directly to human beings.
Lessons learned
It seems likely that the 800 hostages were about to be killed by Chechen rebels. To rescue them, the Russian military used a calmative agent in an attempt to subdue the rebels. The intent was likely to win control of the theater with as little loss of life as possible. Given the large number of explosives in the hands of the hostage takers, a conventional assault or the use of more toxic chemical agents might have significantly increased the number of casualties. Although it may seem excessive that 16% of the 800 hostages may have died from the gas exposure, 84% survived. We do not know that a different tactic would have provided a better outcome.
The use of a "sleeping gas" or calmative agent in this setting is a novel attempt at saving the most lives. Medical attention to these approaches has been scanty. A MEDLINE search from 1966 to 2002 reveals few reports on calmative agents. Delivery of fentanyl as an aerosol has only been reported in a few pilot projects, and to our knowledge, information on the aerosolization of carfentanil is not reported at all in the public domain. Greater collaboration between clinicians and military planners is encouraged.
A better appreciation of some of the pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic issues relating to carfentanil redistribution might have heightened concerns about recurrent toxicity. A therapeutic index of 10,600 (or 25,000 in the case of sufentanil) may inappropriately lessen anxiety about the potential lethality of these agents. Given some factors, such as the lipophilicity of the fentanyl derivatives and the health status of the exposed, as well as great uncertainty regarding the absorbed dose, the potential for inadvertent overdose should have been addressed more thoroughly. Ironically, opioid intoxication is a relatively simple poisoning to treat. Preparation of rescuers and medical teams with suitable stores of effective antidotes, such as naloxone, is essential. The Moscow event urgently prompts a reassessment of our antidote armamentarium. In the United States, naloxone, for a long time a critical antidote to treat heroin overdose and iatrogenic opioid toxicity, has now become a crucial component of our chemical warfare antidote repository.
Nine days after the Moscow theater incident, the US National Research Council issued a report entitled "Developing Effective Non-Lethal Weapon Options Is Needed to Enhance Naval Force Capabilities."33 This long-awaited study strongly recommended that the "US Department of the Navy should move toward integrating non-lethal weapons-designed to incapacitate people or material while minimizing unintended death and damage-into naval war fighting requirements, research and development programs, acquisition plans, and operations." The report states that one of the problems in the past was the "lack of new ideas" and "small budget" and that a greater emphasis is needed "on understanding the effects of non-lethal weapons on intended targets and whether those effects are useful for military operations and within the bounds of treaty constraints." In addition, the report adds that the "highest priority should be placed on four science and technology areas of non-lethal weapons," including the development of calmative agents. Medical toxicologists, emergency physicians, and physicians in general may have a constructive role in sharing expertise and staying current on these rapidly progressing technologies.
References
1. Lethal Moscow gas an opiate? CBS News Web site. October 29, 2002. Available at: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in527298.shtml. Accessed January 3, 2003.
2. Ruppe D. CWC: Experts differ on whether Russian hostage rescue violated treaty. Global Security Newswire. October 30, 2002. Available at: http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues...11_1_chmw.html. Accessed January 3, 2003.
3. Moscow mystery "gas." Venik's Aviation Web site. Available at: http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/news059.htm. Accessed January 3, 2003.
4. Myers S. From anxiety, fear and hope, the deadly rescue in Moscow. New York Times. November 1, 2002:Section A; page 1.
5. Anger grows over gas tactics. CNN Web site. October 28, 2002. Available at: http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe...gas/index.html. Accessed January 3, 2003.
6. Doctors try to solve gas mystery. CNN Web site. October 28, 2002. Available at: http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe...gas/index.html. Accessed January 3, 2003.
7. Russia: More than two days later, gas still a mystery. Radio Free Europe Web site. October 28, 2002. Available at: http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/20...2002161259.asp. Accessed January 3, 2003.
8. Brown D, Baker P. Moscow gas likely a potent narcotic: drug normally used to subdue big game. Washington Post. November 9, 2002:A12.
9. Russia: US believes Russian gas was an opiate. Global Security Newswire. October 29, 2002. Available at: http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues...2_10_29.html#9. Accessed January 3, 2003.
10. Russia comes clean over gas, demands extradition of Chechen envoy. Center for Defense Information Web site. October 31, 2002. Available at: http://www.cdi.org/russia/229-1.cfm. Accessed January 3, 2003.
11. Russia: Officials raise hostage death toll. NTI Global Security Newswire. November 8, 2002. Available at: http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues...1_11_chmw.html. Accessed January 3, 2003.
12. Enserink M, Stone R. Toxicology. Questions swirl over knockout gas used in hostage crisis. Science. 2002;298:1150-1151.MEDLINE CROSSREF
13. Higgins MJ, Asbury AJ, Brodie MJ. Inhaled nebulized fentanyl for postoperative analgesia. Anaesthesia. 1991;46:973-976.MEDLINE
14. Worsley MH, Macleod AD, Brodie MJ, et al. Inhaled fentanyl as a method of analgesia. Anesthesia. 1990;45:449-451.
15. Mather LE, Woodhouse A, Ward ME, et al. Pulmonary administration of aerosolized fentanyl: pharmacokinetic analysis of systemic delivery. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1998;46:37-43.MEDLINE CROSSREF
16. Peng PW, Sandler AN. A review of the use of fentanyl analgesia in the management of acute pain in adults. Anesthesiology. 1999;90:576-599.MEDLINE
17. Rosow C. Remifentanil: a unique opioid analgesic. Anesthesiology. 1993;79:875-876.MEDLINE
18. Jaffe AB, Sharpe LG, Jaffe JH. Rats self-administer sufentanil in aerosol form. Psychopharmacol. 1989;99:289-293.
19. Shaw ML, Carpenter JW, Leith DE. Complications with the use of carfentanil citrate and xylazine hydrochloride to immobilize domestic horses. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1995;206:833-836.MEDLINE
20. Kreeger TJ, Seal US. Immobilization of gray wolves (Canis lupus) with sufentanil citrate. J Wildlife Dis. 1990;26:561-563.
21. Baker JR, Gatesman TJ. Use of carfentanil and a ketamine- xylazine mixture to immobilise wild grey seals (Halichoerus grypus). Vet Rec. 1985;116:208-210.MEDLINE
22. Haigh JC, Lee LJ, Schweinsburg RE. Immobilization of polar bears with carfentanil. J Wildlife Dis. 1983;19:140-144.
23. Kearns KS, Swenson B, Ramsay EC. Oral induction of anesthesia with droperidol and transmucosal carfentanil citrate in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Zoo Wildlife Med. 2000;31:185-189.
24. Mama KR, Steffey EP, Withrow SJ. Use of orally administered carfentanil prior to isoflurane-induced anesthesia in a Kodiak brown bear. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2000;217:546-549.MEDLINE
25. Van Bever WF, Niemegeers CJ, Schellekens KH, et al. N-4- Substituted 1-(2-arylethyl)-4-piperidinyl-N-phenylpropanamides, a novel series of extremely potent analgesics with unusually high safety margin. Arzneimittel-Forschung. 1976;26:1548-1551.
26. Miller MW, Wild MA, Lance WR. Efficacy and safety of naltrexone hydrochloride for antagonizing carfentanil citrate immobilization in captive Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elaphus nelsoni). J Wildlife Dis. 1996;32:234-239.
27. Haigh JC, Gates CC. Capture of wood bison (Bison bison athabascae) using carfentanil-based mixtures. J Wildlife Dis. 1995;31:37-42.
28. Caspi J, Klausner JM, Safadi T, et al. Delayed respiratory depression following fentanyl anesthesia for cardiac surgery. Crit Care Med. 1988;16:238-240.MEDLINE
29. Lakoski JM, Murray WB, Kenny JM. The advantages and limitations of calmatives for use as a non-lethal technique. The Sunshine Project Web site. Available at: http://www.sunshine-project.org. Accessed January 3, 2003.
30. Kross Corporate Accomplishments. Kross, Inc. Web site. Available at: http://kross-inc.com/Corporate.asp. Accessed January 3, 2003.
31. Tammisto R, Aromaa U. The role of halothane and fentanyl in the production of balanced anaesthesia. Act Anaesth Scand. 1982;26:225- 230.
32. Glenski JA, Friesen RH, Lane GA. Low-dose sufentanil as a supplement to halothane/N2O anaesthesia in infants and children. Can J Anaesth. 1988;35:379-384.MEDLINE
33. Committee for an Assessment of Non-Lethal Weapons Science and Technology, National Research Council. An Assessment of Non-Lethal Weapons Science and Technology. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2003.
_________________________________________________
As I have said the fact that the Israelis hijacked the planes and carried out all the phases of the operation is the only theory that CONFORMS with the available known facts about 9/11. The theory shows why the admin lies about certain things. Eg.The person who listened in to Ed Felt's call and heard the report about an explosion and white smoke has been ordered not to talk about this.
Why the need for such secrecy and gag orders? Because the admin wants to cover up Israelis' role in 9/11. They did the same thing in the USS Liberty attack, and the JFK assassination.
The admin does not want the public to know about certain items used in the 9/11 attack. Guns and gas point away from Arabs who had no inside help, and toward the Israelis who did.
That's why the admin has been very adamant in denying that explosives had anything to do with the collapse of the three WTC towers - up until Bush's recent admission that the towers were blown up by bombs. ( But he (predictably) blames the Arabs for it.)
So how did bombs get into these towers? Silverstein, the US mass murderer, let them in. He arranged for a power shutdown a few days before 9/11 so that the Israeli commandos could get into the towers unobserved (sec cams were also shut down) and wire the buildings up for controlled demolition.
All the Israeli art students in Florida before 9/11 were part of a set-up to create a myth that there were Al Qaeda terrorists in America who were planning to attack the US on 9.11.
The Israeli art students WANTED to be noticed. They were out and about making themselves nuisances. Normal surveillance teams wouldn't behave like that. They wouldn't want the people they were keeping under surveillance knowing they were being watched. Not this Israeli surveillance team: they didn't care if 'Atta' ran into them in a shopping mall.
The Mohammed Atta figure was central to the hoax. He was the one the Israelis concentrated on building the myth around. If they could fool the world into believing the Atta story, then they could sell the story of the other eighteen 'Arab' terrorists without creating individual stories about them.
So that was why all the focus was on "Atta". Why it was "HIS" passport that was found intact on the ground after the plane crash; we saw a (fake) VIDEO of "him" with "Bin Laden"; why it is HIM on the cruise boat of Abramoff, partying away. Incidentally, a photo of "Atta" and his girlfriend in Florida looks nothing like the person in the passport photo.
"Atta" was an Israeli impersonator. He was going around in the months before 9/11 busily creating the fairytale of Atta in Florida plotting to hijack planes. That was Atta in the sec cam taken at an ATM machine. And also Atta caught on film at the airport. Note the picture is too grainy to see his face clearly and there is something fishy about the datestamps/timestamps. On one video capture, the date is missing so it could have been any day the film was taken, and in another there are two timestamps with different times given on the screen.
And look Atta running to catch the plane he is going to later hijack!
See? Atta, Atta, Atta, Atta, Atta ...........
Where was the real Atta? He was probably murdered on 9/11 by the Israeli commandos.
The real hijackers were Israeli. They took over the planes with guns. The planes' emergency response buttons were disabled by the ground commando crew before the planes took off. The pilots were killed by guns or held up by guns and then shepherded to the back of the plane.
The commandos chosen for the hijacking were all Arab speakers. Not too hard to find as Israel is in the ME and many Israelis formerly lived in Arab countries. Then all they had to do was speak in Arabic, say Allah O Akhbar! every now and then, and the ruse was complete.
Once they got control of the planes, it was a matter of setting it up for the crash and subsequent detonation. They first flew the planes to remote areas, lowered the speed and the altitude of the planes, then put on their chute gear and respirators, released the gas into the main cabin, and then left the cockpit to make their jump to the ground below. The planes were then flown by remote control to their ultimate destinations.
By remote control from the ground, the Israelis flew the planes into the buildings.
The reason why that Pentagon wing was chosen for the crash was:
1) This wing was the one the Israelis wanted to destroy. It contained all the papers that contained information about the Pentagon Budget and the missing 2.3 trillion dollars and without these papers, the investigation into the missing trillions could go nowhere. The accountants - civilians mostly - were housed in that section of the building.
It had nothing to do with the fact that this wing was being renovated and housed a fewer number of people than other wings. The terrorists wouldn't have cared about keeping the death toll low. A high death toll as possible is what they wanted. The explanation about keeping the deaths low makes no sense whatsoever.
2) Rumsfeld was not in that wing. The plane was initially headed for Rumsfeld's wing and then it made a turn and approached the Pentagon from a totally different direction. The remote-control hijackers had been given orders to pilot the plane in that direction and hit that wing that it did. The turn makes no sense otherwise. If the hijackers' mission was to hit the Pentagon and they were making good headway and had almost reached it, why make a complicated maneuver and turn the plane around at the last minute? Because they were correcting the plane's course so that it would hit the right target.
And how would the Arabs know which wing they wanted to hit anyway? How would they know which wing was being renovated, which one was least populated? They wouldn't.
So when the oddities and the inconsistencies and the leaks of the attack on 9/11 are taken into consideration in this context these oddities and inconsistencies and coincidences no longer look like oddities, inconsistencies and coincidences. They make perfect sense, and were part of the overall plan by the Israelis.
__________________________________________________ _______
FL93 was the flight that didn't go according to plan. It was not meant to crash into a field in Pennsylvania. Some people say it was meant to crash into WTC7; and that Silverstein panicked and brought WTC7 down by demolition because the building was wired up with explosives and he didn't want that discovered in the investigation in the aftermath.
That was why the bulk of the phone calls that were made came from that plane and information that the hijackers didn't want to come out did: like the evidence of the gas (Wainio and Felt's calls), the sounds of "holing" after the passengers stopped talking - the sound of wind rushing through after one exit door had been opened.
The timeline supports all the events I've outlined on that flight.
If you accept the theory that there were hijackers (Israeli hijackers), the evidence fits with that scenario. All the pieces of the puzzle fit in beautifully.
The timing fits perfectly: Felt made his phone call at 9:58 and Wainio was speaking at 10:00 when she reported feeling funny. The hijackers spoke about finishing them off at 10:00. All talking ceased at 10:00.
__________________________________________
The fact that the Israeli hijackers used an anesthetic as to knock out the passengers and the Government knows they did is the reason why the Government conceals the real time of the crash. They say it is 10:03 when the CVR and noises heard on the phone calls say the plane crashed at 10:06. Seismologists also say the plane crashed at 10:06.
Why does the Government lie about the time of the crash and puts it earlier than most other sources?
Because there is something suspicious about the fact that there is a period of six minutes between the people stopping their conversations and the plane crash. You would expect there to be talking right up until the crash - screaming, shouting and so on. Right before the voices ceased to be heard, the passengers were in the middle of trying to break down the cockpit door. What happened to silence them? We know no guns were used or we would have heard the sounds of guns being used, and people would report that, plus you can't shoot everybody dead all at once. Also, where are the screams and sounds of commotion of people being shot at?
So what do we have to show what WAS used to silence people? Wainio's report to her stepmother that:
1) she felt like she was leaving her body
2) she was experiencing difficulty breathing
3) she felt like she was going into a trance.
When does one feel like this? When one is put to sleep.
How do we know the anesthesia was administered by aerosol?
Because another caller on the plane reported seeing a white smoke and heard an explosion.