This is a partial analysis by Chris Soda of a document authored by Canadian Professor A.K.Dewdney entitled: GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY: AN ALTERNATIVE 9/11 SCENARIO. I have used the copy of the document found here http://feralnews.com/issues/911/dewdney/ghost_riders_1-4_1.html and have corresponded with Professor Dewdney and received assurance that this copy is in fact authored by him.
My work here follows the chronological order of Professor Dewdney's document; the earlier analysis you will read concerns comments found near the beginning of GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY and my later analysis concerns comments found near the end of GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY etc. Whenever I have interjected in parenthese my initials will accompany those parentheses. All phrases and sentences in quotation marks are exact quotes from the copy of the document found at the URL listed above:

(1) "If Al Qaida was responsible for the attacks, what possible reason would bin Laden have for not claiming responsibility? The White House claim that Al Qaida's purpose was to inflict "nameless terror" on America is deeply contradictory. The only other terrorist acts for which none of the "regular" organizations took responsibility, namely, the bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, as well as the attack on the USS Cole in 2000, were also blamed on Al Qaida. What reason would bin Laden have for imagining that the terror inflicted by Al Qaida on September 11 would be blamed on anyone but Al Qaida, let alone be "nameless?" It simply fails to make sense. Worse yet, bin Laden has repeatedly denied involvement in the attacks. On September 11 bin Laden said "This terrorist act is the action of some American group. I have nothing to do with it." Later, on September 28, "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable [sic] act." (Ummat, 2001)"

ANALYSIS OF (1):

It is not logical to infer that, because Osama bin laden, or any other individual or group, does not claim responsibility for one or more events, he or that group are not responsible for the perpetration of those events. Many perpetrators of immoral and/or criminals acts do not claim responsibility for their actions nor even acknowledge the immoral and/or criminal nature of those actions. NATO is one such group. (witness their past and ongoing immoral and criminal acts in the Balkans, including the 1999 murders of thousands of innocents) The white male caller who in July 1996 warned of a bomb that would soon detonate in Centennial Park in Atlanta is one such individual. To quote from a news item online:

"By Michael J. Sniffen, Associated Press writer: A calm caller believed to be a white male telephoned 911 with a warning just 18 minutes before a pipe bomb blasted an Olympic concert in Atlanta, but an alert state officer had already spotted the knapsack holding the bomb and had begun evacuating people. The 911 call came at 1:07 a.m., too late to play a role in that evacuation, federal officials said yesterday. They credited a Georgia Bureau of Investigation agent with saving lives by acting quickly after he spotted the untended knapsack just before 1 a.m.....The caller said only that a bomb would go off in Centennial Park within 30 minutes but gave no name and did not claim responsibility on behalf of any group...." [this quote from www.s-t.com)

Professor Dewdney apparently fails to appreciate that killers of innocents often do not claim responsibility for their actions in order to seed confusion and panic amongst the family, friends, sympathizers and/or co-citizens of those innocents. Many terrorist groups and individuals seek to confuse their claimed enemies as much as they seek to kill them directly. To quote from another online article:

"When terrorists undertake objective and demand terrorism, they identify themselves and make known their objective or demand since they want their followers and the rest of the world to know that they were behind the act of terrorism. When they undertake punishment terrorism, they do not do so and leave the victim guessing as to who could have been behind the act. The pre-1994 terrorist united front led by Carlos carried out some acts of punishment terrorism directed against its identified enemies of international capitalism or Zionism for which it did not claim responsibility.

Osama bin Laden, who had spent some months in Khartoum, Sudan, at the same time as Carlos, who is now in jail in France, ordered a number of acts of punishment terrorism against the US after the formation of his International Front in 1998, for which no claim for responsibility was made.

Amongst such acts of punishment terrorism for which no responsibility was claimed, one could mention the explosions in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam in 1998, the attack on a US naval ship in Aden in 2000 and the terrorist strikes of 11 September 2001.

bin Laden wears two hats. He is the head of the Al Qaida, which is a Saudi-centric, exclusively Arab organisation, consisting largely of Saudis, Yemenis, Egyptians and some Algerians. At the same time, he is the head of the International Islamic Front, which is a conglomerate of about a dozen Islamic terrorist organisations of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, the Xinjiang province of China and the southern Philippines. " (from www.subcontinent.com)

Professor Dewdney quotes bin laden as saying "This terrorist act is the action of some American group. I have nothing to do with it" and "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable [sic] act." Absent from Professor Dewdney's "alternative scenario" is the fact that Osama bin laden has publicly encouraged the killing of men, women, and children. For instance, here is one example:

"...On that basis, and in compliance with God's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies--civilians and military--is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it....We -- with God's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it....." (from www.ict.org)

The quoted words above were signed by Osama bin laden and others about 5 years before Professor Dewdney offered his "alternative scenario".

Both sets of words are attributed to Osama bin laden. Only one set of those words appears in GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY. A careful scientist and pursuer of the truth would not use information or sources that display contradictory patterns. At the very least the concept of "responsibility" has to be more precisely defined (including the concept as to how this word is defined by Osama bin laden) by anyone offering us an "alternative scenario to 9/11".

Many criminal courts include prosecutors who try to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, the existence of a method, motive, weapon, prior knowledge, ability to undertake, etc in the execution of murder. If someone (in this case Osama bin laden) has publicly encouraged the murder of a specific group of men, women and children (this specific group being Americans), and the murders of that specific group of men women and children do in fact occur after the public encouragement, and if this person has had associations with and/or aided those who have murdered other men women and children in the past, then this person has through their own volition made themselves suspect.

There is no viable "alternative scenario" to common sense.

Most of all, the record of Osama bin laden and others in Al Qaida, in association and common cause with their support groups, speaks for itself and needs no qualifications....

(2) "Another discrepancy in the September 11 attacks is apparent to anyone who has followed the history of "terrorism." The sheer size of the operation as outlined by the White House, the high degree of coordination involved, and the need for absolute secrecy, is not one, but two, orders of magnitude greater in scale than anything previously attempted by any terrorist group. Indeed, even the previous attacks blamed on Al Qaida were relatively simple operations involving the clandestine transport of explosive materials (by boat or car) to the target site....The scale of the operation [9/11 cs], however it may have been achieved, was more suited to a large, well-organized intelligence agency, with as many as 50 field agents involved, each privy to one or more aspects of the plan. With such a large operation, leaks are inevitable."

ANALYSIS OF (2):

Many current members of Al Qaida, and/or their supporters, were part of a very large-scale "operation" in the past: namely, the ousting of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan. This includes Osama bin laden himself. Members of Al Qaida are quite capable of planning and executing complex plans of action and/or simple plans of action involving many personnel. Apparently when Professor Dewdney alludes to the "history of terrorism" he does not consider much of the 1980s which saw 7 years of planning and execution of actions by many of the current members of Al Qaida and/or their supporters to defeat one of the worlds' premier armies...(the success of which means there were very few if any "leaks")....nor is it apparent that Professor Dewdney is aware of the many news and intelligence sources throughout the world who have pin-pointed Osama bin laden and Al Qaida as being quite able, again, to carry out terrorist activities on a large scale and involving large numbers of personnel: to quote examples of this:

"The United Press International reports the analysis of Richard Sale, an expert in terrorism, which states that Bin Laden was most active in the Balkans in mid-June of 1998." (from www.realitymacedonia.org)

"Bulgarian weekly 'Tema' claims that many of the members of the Balkan headquarters [of Al Qaida and their support groups cs] still carry arms, which they got from NATO and the American army, before and during the war in Kosovo. The weekly writes that under the command of Osama Bin Laden's terrorist network, there are around 7,500 Islamic fighters in Bosnia, while their number and around 15.000 on Kosovo. [sic cs] There are as many fighters in Albania and around 5,000 in Macedonia. 'Tema' claims that Ibrahim Rugova, the leader of the moderate political party of the Albanians in Kosovo [sic cs], confirmed this information in a statement published by Reuters..." (this quote also found at www.realitymacedonia.org)

Professor Dewdney states unequivocally that the murders on 9/11 "...as outlined by the White House, [indicate a cs] high degree of coordination involved, and the need for absolute secrecy, is not one, but two, orders of magnitude greater in scale than anything previously attempted by any terrorist group." but offers no qualitative evidence to support this. As a matter of fact, group of individuals, outnumbered and outgunned, that successfully defended a country from the might of the Soviet Union and can also attack with impunity the citizens in the country of today's premier army, while using stealth as a major weapon, have already established themselves as capable of secrecy of the highest order. To quote a source online:

"Even when the invasion at Normandy began, the Allies let security leaks to indicate the Normandy invasion was a diversion to get the Germans to move their divisions away from the other locations, and that the main attack was about to come at a different location, probably under Gen. Patton. This “hoax” fooled Hitler and it certainly enhanced the success of the Normandy invasion. Had the Germans moved their many divisions to reinforce Normandy, it surely would have made the costs in lives and equipment much greater for the invasion. It is certainly a great example of how warfare accomplishments are achieved largely through deception.

A year ago, we were the victim of a massive terrorist deception. [9/11 cs] We had been the victims of terrorist attacks in foreign lands and seas, but how could we ever imagine that such a devastating attack would occur here at home? The very fact that it did happen is positive proof that the terrorists’ art of deception is always a serious threat to our way of life."

(the above quote from Manassas Chapter Newsletter September 2002 Volume 8 issue 9)

Professor Dewdney fails to give any supportive evidence for this magic number of "as many as 50". If Professor Dewdney is certain that 51 (or, 1,000,051 for that matter...) field agents were not involved, we readers of GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY are left without his method of ascertaining this figure....Professor Dewdney also fails to show his proof for the claim by him that "...with such a large operation (9/11 cs) leaks are inevitable." It is not logical to assume or conclude that because an "operation" is "large" that "leaks are inevitable". The would-be perpetrators of a large action may decide to "leak" information of that planned action in order to divert defences away from a location more desireable for the perpetrators to target; the same perpetrators may decide to not "leak" any information because the target of that planned action is their number one choice; the same perpetrators may have a weak infrastructure allowing an unintended "leak" or the same perpetrators may have a solid infrastructure with no "leaks" as a result (see also the quote above from the Manassas Newsletter regarding the planning of the Normandy invasion). Professor Dewdney does not mention in GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY that it is not the size of an "operation", nor the number of personnel involved, but the quality and/or dedication of this personnel determining the likelihood of any "leaks". Al Qaida certainly has dedicated personnel and on this basis alone, irrespective of past histories, it is possible that this Al Qaida group, including Osama bin laden, could have planned and executed some or all of the events of 9/11....there is no evidence in the public domain that the "size of the operation" automatically excludes Al Qaida and/or Osama bin laden nor is their any evidence in the public domain to conclude that "leaks" are inevitable in any terrorist activity.

(3) "David Stern, an expert on Israeli intelligence operations, stated, "This attack required a high level of military precision and the resources of an advanced intelligence agency. In addition, the attackers would have needed to be extremely familiar with both Air Force One flight operations, civil airline flight paths, and aerial assault tactics on sensitive US cities like Washington." Stern also pointed out that the attacks "serve no Arab group or nation's interest, but their timing came in the midst of international condemnation of Israel . . ."

ANALYSIS OF (3)

Al Qaida and groups allied with it are part of a global-wide network. Each operation carried out by Al Qaida and/or groups allied with it are planned in great detail. An advanced intelligence capability is part of this alliance. Computers and cell phones are only part of the methodology used to acquire and transmit this intelligence; the use of "runners" by Al Qaida and/or groups allied with them make the interception of their intelligence gathering and/or the execution of their actions all the more difficult. This alliance also uses vast sums of money that are difficult to trace because of their method of avoiding as often as possible electronic transactions. Al Qaida and/or groups allied with them are in the upper stages of bioweapon capabilities. None of these facts are to be found in GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY; on the contrary, when one reads GHOST RIDER IN THE SKY the allusions of Professor Dewdney are obvious: in his view there is a greater probability that Mossad (the Israeli intelligence agency) had the means to be involved in the events of 9/11 than either Osama bin laden and/or Al Qaida. A fair appraisal of the realities on September 11, 2001 would have taken into consideration (and given equal space to) the fact that MANY groups and/or countries had the capability of planning and executing the crashing of airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon- including Al Qaida. There were many countries and their respective intelligence agencies who were/are suspected of involvement in the events of 9/11 yet Professor Dewdney only chose to highlight the Mossad from Israel. Israel has been "internationally condemned" almost nonstop since the inception of its state in 1948- it does not need to crash airliners into buildings to draw attention either away from or towards itself. The United States is the largest donor of aid to Israel; the numbers in the public domain suggest a total of at least 80 billion US dollars to date- and counting. Professor Dewdney's "alternative scenario" offers no insight as to why Israel or one or more of its various internal governmental agencies would want to undertake a terrorist operation against innocents. Capability does not imply probability.

(4) "A highly suspicious occurrence was the airing of a videotape supposedly shot in Palestine on the day of the attacks. The video shows Palestinians celebrating something. The media claimed that the Palestinians were celebrating the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The only problem with the tapes is the time of day. Shadows thrown by the stands and buildings in the vicinity of the celebrants clearly show the local time to be approximately noon. At the time of the attacks, however, it was already 5:00 pm (daylight time) in Palestine. At that time of day (and year), the angle of the shadows would be at most 30 degrees from the horizontal and readily visible on the video as deep shadows.

Since the tape is unquestionably a fake, shot at some other time and on some other occasion of celebration, it must be asked how it got into the hands of the American media (via an "independent producer") so quickly, unless it had been prepared in advance of the attacks. There is no other explanation for this anomaly."

ANALYSIS OF (4)

The "only problem" here is with Professor Dewdney's claims- not the tapes.

There is no doubt that the footage aired by CNN and others is an actual recording of Palestinians in the Middle East celebrating the murders of innocents on September 11, 2001. This tape is not "unquestionably a fake"; it was an unquestionably accurate recording of unquestionably factual events on September 11, 2001 as filmed by a Reuters TV crew; CNN used this footage from East Jerusalem at around 3pm Israeli time (about 9AM New York time). The sun would have been high in the sky at the time and place this Reuters crew filmed as it was only about 10 days before the fall equinox (when day and night are nearly equal in length). Associated Press was also in Jerusalem on 9/11 at the time of the terrorist attacks in the United States and photographed Palestinians celebrating those attacks as well. The only "anomaly" is the fact that a Canadian professor would write otherwise....readers can access www.worldtimeserver.com and/or www.timeanddate.com to check these approximate times for themselves.

(5) "Planted Evidence: Another difficulty arises in the matter of evidence discovered by FBI investigators in the parking lots of airports used by the hijackers. In more than one rental vehicle, field officers recovered copies of the Qur'an and aircraft flight manuals. In a context where the White House was stressing the 'sophistication' of the attackers, as well as the high state of organization and coordination necessary to carry them out, it would seem reasonable to assume that all operatives would have been extensively briefed on the importance of leaving no trace of themselves or their mission (in pursuit of 'nameless terror'). Such a briefing would certainly include all personal possessions, religious documents, flight manuals, and so on. The rental vehicles would be left as clean as they were when they were rented. No Muslim, (especially, one supposes, a 'fanatic') would ever leave a Qur'an in a rented vehicle, especially if he knew he would not be returning to it."

ANALYSIS OF (5)

Would not someone, on what they feel will be their last day on Earth, bring with themselves or carry on their person for as long as possible whatever objects they cherished most? Is it not possible that a dedicated member of Al Qaida who claimed Muslim faith would bring a copy of the Koran and read from it for inspiration and strength, then leave it behind because this same person would not want something they cherished to burn in a fire? Many religious scholars claim the Bible strictly condemns the murder of innocents yet murderers claiming Christian faith kill; many religious scholars claim the Koran strictly prohibits the murder of innocents yet murderers claiming Muslim faith kill; many religious scholars claim the Talmud stritcly prohibits the murder of innocents yet murderers claiming Jewish faith kill. Professor Dewdney claims that "no Muslim" would leave a copy of the Koran "in a rented vehicle especially if he knew he would not be returning to it", yet murderers claiming Muslim faith have often apparently violated the tenements of their own faith- and the faith of others. Missing from GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY is the total number, to date, of suicide-bombers claiming Muslim faith- many scholars pointing out that suicide is strictly prohibited in the Koran. Disputing a claim on the grounds of what are unclear religious practices is hardly an accepted professorial method for discovery of truth....

(6) "There is no known instance, prior to September 11, 2001, of a terrestrial airplane crash from which the essential flight and voice data were not ultimately recovered. Only one of the eight black boxes was ever recovered, namely the CVR of United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in rural Pennsylvania."

ANALYSIS OF (6)

Information in the public domain does not support these claims by Professor Dewdney. In at least 2 other instances it is not clear whether or not black boxes were recovered after the crash of airliners. This is one instance:

"The Boeing cargo plane slammed into a building mainly inhabited by Surinam and Antilles immigrants in Amsterdam's southern suburb of Biljmer shortly after take-off from Amsterdam-Schipol Airport on October 4, 1992. Four crew members were killed, along with 39 people on the ground. The fact that the black boxes were never found and that the cargo, estimated at around 20 tons of equipment for civilian or military use, was never established has fanned wild speculation over the catastrophe."

(the above quote from www.salamiran.org/Media/TehranTimes/990309.html )

In the second instance, it has not been established as fact that the "black boxes" aboard the KAL 007 airliner which was shot down September 01 1983 were or were not recovered. There are numerous references to this particular case online.

Also, there are numerous online news references to the black boxes of the airliner which is purported to have crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11 being found. All reference to these 3 instances are missing from GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY.

Professor Dewdney believes the recovery or non-recovery of black boxes aboard aircraft belongs in any reasonable discussion as to the viability of an "offical version" versus an "alternative scenario". This is not a logical premise from which to be operating a sincere search for the truth. The actual finding of, or failure to find, black boxes does not necessarily exclude, or include, possible suspects in criminal acts involving airliners. It is irrelvant. A more focused attempt at finding out what actually happened on 9/11 would include a positive determination as to whether or not black boxes (each airliner is supposed to have 2 black boxes before takeoff) were actually on the craft to begin with.

(7) "Although I shall be using an in-principle argument, it must be recognized that the 'devil is in the details' and that certain features of the scheme I have worked out might have to be implemented in another way. About the main conclusion, however, there can be little doubt. The thing is do-able....

....The simplest possible scheme for converting a modern commercial airliner into a flying fuel bomb involves two elements: a) two small canisters of lethal gas hidden in the aircraft's ventilation ducts and triggered either by a timer or by radio signal, b) a small information implant (three numbers) in the flight control system and a means to trigger it.

The agent of choice for part a) would probably be fast-acting sarin, a lethal nerve gas that, at the dose levels to be used in a hijacking, would incapacitate every human being in the aircraft within a minute of first breathing the gas. Should the oxygen masks all pop out of the ceiling, it would make no difference to the outcome. One breath of the deadly gas would be more than sufficient. The symptoms described in the alternative scenario are all typical of sarin poisoning. Sarin degrades chemically within a short time of use, being undetectable thereafter.

The information implant mentioned in part b) would be new coordinates (latitude, longitude and altitude) in a form used by the inertial navigation system (INS), which is part of the aircraft's flight control system (FCS). The central problem of this analysis is to determine which of two ways of achieving this goal is most efficient. In what I call the 'custom job,' a pre-installed virus-like code implant in the flight control computer(s), triggered like the gas canisters (either by timer or by radio signal), sends new coordinates to the INS. No more than a few lines of code would be required: there would be a time/signal check followed by an instruction to replace the Los Angeles coordinates by the ones stored in memory location so-and-so. In the 'installed base' method (Vialls, 2001), the software already exists in the FCC operating system, awaiting its use (presumably) as a counter-hijacking facility. This software would be able to read the new coordinates directly by radio from the ground. It has proved impossible to document this possibility from reliable sources......

...However an electronic hijacking might be managed, the organization responsible would also be sure to add other elements to the basic plan, not only developing lists of ghost riders, but sending fake cellphone calls from some of the passengers.....

...Although it was practically impossible for any calls to get through early in the hijacking of [Flight 93 cs], when it was at or near cruising altitude, there would be no theoretical difficulty after its slow descent over Pennsylvania. But it was then just as unlikely that no cellphone network cascades would occur. On the morning of September 11, no such cascades occurred. Two more elements of doubt thus weigh against the official account.

It must also be remarked that the alleged hijackers of [Flight 93 cs] were remarkably lenient with their passengers, allowing some 13 calls. However, it would seem highly unlikely that hijackers would allow any phone calls for the simple reason that passengers could relay valuable positional and other information useful to authorities on the ground, thus putting the whole mission in jeopardy......

...Any analysis of the cellphone and "airfone" calls from Flight 93 must begin with some basic, high-altitude cellphone facts. According to AT&T spokesperson Alexa Graf, cellphones are not designed for calls from the high altitudes at which most airliners normally operate. It was, in her opinion, a "fluke" that so many calls reached their destinations. (Harter 2001)"

ANALYSIS OF (7): This is the final part of the analysis of GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY

For myself, this section of Professor Dewdney's work is the most confusing aspect of the part of GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY which I read. (except perhaps the casting of doubt by Professor Dewdney on the corroborated reality of Reuters and Associated Press filming people in the Middle East celebrating the murders of 9/11)

Professor Dewdney offers the "alternative 9/11 scenario" part of which includes what he writes was the possibility of a pre-flight-planted change in the hijacked airliner's navigation system which would be affected and/or triggered by a radio signal originating from outside this aircraft. There is some confusion in the public domain as to the possibility and/or workable method of controlling surreptiously (using radio signals) the kinds of civilian aircraft which crashed on 9/11. Professor Dewdney acknowledges this himself in GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY, which makes the inclusion of the possibility of one or more radio signals, originating from outside any of the aircraft involved in 9/11, to activate a pre-planted flight path as an "alternative scenario" even more confusing. It is not logical to suggest sending an electronic signal as a possibility for triggering something on board an aircraft, along with the possibility of setting a timer, then later offer that "....It has proved impossible to document this possibility [electronic signal cs] from reliable sources."

A lack of reliable sourcing is not the best means of selling an "alternative scenario".....

Some claim radio signal control of airborne planes is possible now; others, that it is outright impossible at this stage. Some claim that it is possible in theory but almost impossible in practice. Some also claim that only certain makes or models of airliners have the necessary equipment standard on board for this ground-control to work properly. Here is an online example:

"The National Air Transportation Association (NATA) also would like to see the development of a sophisticated radio-control system that would allow jetliners to be controlled in the event of a hijacking or other emergency." (from www.chipcenter.com)

Professor Dewdney is not clear in his GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY as to why an organization responsible for an "electronic" hijacking (or any other kind of hijacking) would feel the necessity for adding other elements to their basic plan such as "fake cellphone calls" to be placed from that airliner? This is not a logical assumption to make. If there is no surefire way for air traffic controllers, and/or others involved in the safe operation of an aircraft, to send electronically one or more signals to return an aircraft onto its original flight path and/or to relative safety, then it would not matter to the operation/performance/destination of that airliner for hijackers to have to "fake" cell phone calls to prevent an occurence, such as an electronic signal from the ground to ensure the safety of the passengers, which cannot happen. In the "alternative scenario" postulated by Professor Dewdney, the incapacitation of the flight crew is necessary precisely because of this lack of ultimate electronic control originating from outside an aircraft. If in fact the flight crews were incapacitated by gas (which Professor Dewdney offers for consideration as part of his "alternative scenario"), and if an airliner INS system were victimized surreptiously pre-flight (which Professor Dewdney also offers for consideration as part of his "alternative scenario), then there would be no need to deceive people who would have no electronic ability themselves to directly determine the final destination any of the 9/11 airliners.

The only plausible reason for the "addition" to the plans of hijackers of "fake" phone calls would be to "fake" a normal situation onboard the airliners when in fact there was a criminal act in progress in order to delay or prevent the interception and/or downing of these hijacked airliners by US air defense systems. This could have been considered by the hijackers who may have feared that one or more of the hijacked airliners would be intercepted and/or shot down by other aircraft sent by the air traffic controllers or others involved in the safety of civilian aircraft. But in this case the "fake" phone calls would have tried to ensure that a calm, normal situation on board the airliners was in progress; in fact, the public record shows that no such calls of this type were received by anyone.

Does anyone reading this think that hijackers intent on crashing an airplane would make fake cell phone calls to draw attention towards those airplanes?

Yet Professor Dewdney assures us that "...the organization responsible [for the events of 9/11 cs] would also be sure to add other elements to the basic plan, not only developing lists of ghost riders, but sending fake cellphone calls from some of the passengers....."

Professor Dewdney states in GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY that on one of the 9/11 flights the "alleged hijackers... [were cs] ...allowing some 13 phone calls." It is not clear from the public record that anyone on board any of the flights was either prevented or allowed to make or receive cell phone calls, simply because it is not established that any hijackers had control over the access to those cell phones. What is clear from the public record is that cell phone calling from aircraft to the ground is not only physically possible, but a regular occurence. The success of a cell phone caller on an aircraft connecting with someone on the ground depends not just on the height of an aircraft but on a variety of other factors. Many US airliners have "airphon" connections which operate in exactly the same manner as a commercial cell phone (usually on a different mhz wavelength). Many companies offer satellite cell phones which would not cause the "cascade" Professor Dewdney claims would have likely happened if those 13 phone calls were originating from one of the aircraft hijacked on 9/11. The simplest way to refute this "cascade" scenario envisioned by Professor Dewdney is to point to his lack of reference in GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY to the actual number of cell phone calls being made from the same area as the location of the 9/11 airliner used as his example. A "cellphone network cascade" would only result from an overload of users at one or more location points of the cell towers along the airliner flight path route. According to the online record, there were several cell sites available along the route flown by Flight 93 on Sept 11. Professor Dewdney claims also that there was no such "cascade" but in order to reasonably claim that all 13 of those phone calls might have been "faked" as part of an "alternative scenario" he must show that there were a sufficient number of other cell phone users referencing the same cell towers at the same time in order to render both the cell phone signals and official versions of those phone calls being made unreliable. At the present time, the only real doubt as to the legitimacy of these 13 airliner-to-ground cell phone calls being made rests in the area of fiction, not fact. To quote from numerous examples online:

"Elliot Hester, in a book to be published in November, notes that long, sky-high cell phone conversations are commonplace. As a flight attendant, he should know and he relates this vignette as reported in the July 22, 2001 issue of the San Francisco Chronicle."

(the above quote from www.planwireless.com/cell_phones_on_airplanes.htm)

Professor Dewdney goes to great length in GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY to cast doubt on the reality of those 13 cellphone calls being made from Flight 93. Professor Dewdney does not show in GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY that there were no satellite cell phones being used by distraught passengers on 9/11-which one would have to do as part of a viable "alternative scenario". Furthermore, he references a quote from an AT and T spokesperson who suggests both that regular, commercial cell phones are not designed for high-altitude usage and that those 13 phone calls being successfully transmitted were "a fluke".

To answer the first point referenced by Professor Dewdney in his quoting of Ms Graf: Many items can be used in ways they were not designed for- boxcutters, for instance..."not designed for" does not equal 'not able to use for'......

As to the second point, I went to the google.com website, entered "alexa graf" and found this:

"Brenda Raney, Verizon Wireless spokesperson, said that RF signals actually can broadcast fairly high. On Sept. 11, the planes were flying low when people started using their phones. And, each call lasted 60 seconds or less.'They also were digital phones, and there's a little bit more leeway on those digital phones, so it worked,' she said. 'It helped that the planes were flying in areas with plenty of cell sites, too. Even United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in rural Pennsylvania, was supported by several nearby cell sites', Raney added."

(above quote from www.wirelessreview.com/ar/wireless_final_contact_2/ )

There is plenty of evidence to cast doubt on the "alternative scenario" offered by Professor Dewdney in GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY. I termed this analysis "partial" because I found no need to examine in total the many other fallacies of argument offered by Professor Dewdney as an "alternative scenario" to events of 9/11.

Innuendo, unreliable information, and unscientific methodology hardly offer an "alternative scenario" to sober analysis in the establishment of the truth.

This analysis is not meant as a personal attack on the integrity or competence of the author of GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY but rather an attack on some of the fallacies of argument and claim as proposed or suggested or which are inherent in that document.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME IN READING THIS

sincerely,

chris soda

march 14 2003

sources available upon request to natomurders@yahoo.ca

it should be noted that amongst the many articles i used in my extensive research were some of those cited by professor dewdney himself in GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY, and also including other articles found at the websites he referenced

Re: the CNN video, which is still problematic. The attacks
occurred around 9am, so how could people be already celebrating in Palestine.

Re: bin Laden's threats; threats do not equate culpability. That one wouldn't even hold in court.

Soda's position on NATO is legit, but like David Corn and all of the other 911 skeptics he relies too much on official accounts to back up his points. Also, although the Canadian
professor's argument does have holes, we still need to question why the bush administration has effectively closed the 911 investigation (or the Florida recounts for that matter). The investigation was closed after FBI agent Rowley and others started raising issues about the administration having forewarning of a possible terrorist attack.

Mr. Soda's argument is well-thought out and articulated, but
I'm still not convinced of either side, his or Prof. D's.

But Thank god somebody is still raising these issues

you debunk much theory with you're own theory.

Try debunking fact and see how far you get.

http://www.communitycurrency.org/Part1A.html#bush

I saw Osama on a tape talking how he had planned the attack with th other asshole and how he predicted that the towers would fall. He was smiling all the time so who says he did not take responsibility.

I've seen many of those silly tapes too. Which one did
you see, the pickanese-language version or the pig-latin
version? If you believe that, I got a ranch on the moon
to sell you.

I DO understand bullshit, as that's all that comes out of my mouth.