Friday, September 28, 2007

Big Cruise Missile hit the WTC?

Teledyne Ryan ZBQM-111A Model 258 Firebrand target.
What hit the WTC?

I went though a few of these videos showing the second impact and took note of the voices and what they said. From the ones that I consider authentic I heard:
  • It was a big plane.
  • xyz said it was a rocket
  • it was a missile, f..king fast
and I remember the idiot-Howard Stern "on the air" eyewitness, -- listen minute 150 to minute 154 -- who said: "decent sized plane" "50 60 people" ... maybe an MD80 ... and the BBC forum entry: “I saw a plane coming, it had two engines on either side of the tail”. and some eyewitness said: IT WAS A MISSILE and another: IT HAD NO WINDOWS and a BLUE LOGO.

For those that actually saw a 767, there WAS a real passenger jet did a FLY BY!!
(check.. plane circling [minute 153]
.. and David Thom pictures).

I pondered for a while and asked myself: Why not? It may have been a big missile!
911 was planned and executed by the US military. No-one else has the capabilities to
  • fool (covert op planning)
  • organise (command the machinery)
  • cover-up (rule over people)
Why not load up a heavy, winged missile with aeroplane parts and a mechanism that creates the 767 wing-shaped impact holes?

The shape of the "flying object"

Big, i.e. fat and long just like the images showing a long dark object with winglets..


[Image]The stealthed object we will call a Whatzit travels across the face of the building. Notice there is no plane visable in any frame, just a cloud of smoke with a cigar shaped shadow, and "dust pimples." 1st impact (webfairy)



The image “http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/4158/peterstridxz0.gif” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors. Peter Strid (killtown, also see "amputee planes)


WHAT TYPE OF AEROPLANE?

There must be a selection of platforms to retrofit with GPS (superb accuracy)

[Image]For example the Snark from 1960.

Northrop SSM-A-3/B-62/SM-62 Snark

The Snark was the only intercontinental surface-to-surface cruise missile ever deployed by the U.S. Air Force, but was operational for only a very short time because it was already made obsolete by the new ICBMs.

In early 1959, the USAF activated its first (and eventually only) Snark missile wing, and the first SM-62A production missiles, fitted with a W-39 thermonuclear warhead (4 MT), were delivered in May that year. The first SM-62A launch occurred in November 1959, and in February 1961, the unit was declared fully operational with 30 deployed missiles.

Specifications

Note: Data given by several sources show slight variations. Figures given below may therefore be inaccurate!

Data for XSSM-A-3, SM-62A:

SM-62A
Length 20.93 m (68 ft 8 in)
Wingspan 12.86 m (42 ft 2.4 in)
Height 4.52 m (14 ft 10 in)
Weight (w/o booster) 22500 kg (49600 lb); booster: 5150 kg (11365 lb)
Speed Mach 0.94
Ceiling 18300 m (60000 ft)
Range 9650 km (6000 miles)
Propulsion Pratt & Whitney J57-P-17 turbojet; 51.1 kN (11500 lb)
Booster: 2x Allegany Ballistics solid-fueled rocket; 580 kN (130000 lb) for 4 s each
Warhead W-39 thermonuclear (4 MT)







http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/snark.htm





Maybe something like this:


http://farm1.static.flickr.com/167/408498198_feff37fb9e_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/167/408498198_feff37fb9e_o.jpg

http://digg.com/general_sciences/Cruise_Missile_caught_on_Google_Maps_flying_over_Utah/all


Everyone would have heard a 767 for a mile or so. It was eriely quiet otherwise!!

A 767 at full throttle at 600 feet is a spectacular event that NOBODY in a wider vicinity can miss or be unclear about. These big turbofan engines make a very characteristic sound: a deafening roar, a deep droning sound. And they are LOUD when the throttle is on full. Very loud.

People described a high-pitch whistle sound, there is even a recording of it... (sept clues)

If a real, noisy 767 had impacted = there would be more footage of it, there would be lots of photos that show the plane half-in, tail still out. People would have had enough time to find the big thing and press the shutter.

With a missile -- or whatever sneaky thing they used -- people did not have time to click. There was no incredible roar. Nothing big to point at.

There are no photos that convince me. All look like inserts.


I would really like to see these thousands of eyewitnesses be asked this question:

Did you REALLY see a 767 with your own eyes or is it POSSIBLE that you saw "something" and the TV-coverage made you think it was 767 boeings?

Did you see the video where the noplaners call one of these eyewitnesses and show his statement in a documentary... and then he tell them on the phone that he was in his flat at the time, and maybe heard others say it?

Uncanny.

There are quite a few.

I'ts time for someone to make a list of YouTube videos that shows eyewitnesses for both options:

PLANE
NOPLANE

I have a feeling that the NOPLANE evidence will be more convincing.

The sound on the videos is nearly all faked. See September clues for goddess sake.
Although jet noise is the loudest when it has just passed overhead, you can hear a low flying jet coming. You don't have much time, but it's enough for people with a readied camera.





The Navy has some big cruise missiles, right?

Somehow the Tomahawk seems to be too thin
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WMUS_Tomahawk.htm


WMUS_Tomahawk_IV_front_pic.jpg


Too old, too short:


http://museum.nist.gov/panels/batmissile/room2.htm
http://museum.nist.gov/panels/batmissile/index.html

Martin MGM-1 Matador
Matador cruise missile launch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM-1_Matador


AGM-48 Skybolt (a B-52 Stratofortress in background)
AGM-48 Skybolt (a B-52 Stratofortress in background)

fatter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skybolt_ALBM


But this one:

Teledyne Ryan ZBQM-111A Model 258 Firebrand target.

BQM-111A - Model 258 Firebrand - DIAMETER 71 cm (28 in)

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-111.html



Target Drones:
http://www.vectorsite.net/twuav_02.html
http://www.vectorsite.net/twuav.html
Bookmark and Share
posted by u2r2h at 10:48 PM

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I thought the same thing about the pentagon. The commercial jet was flown by a skilled top gun pilot (this is true). He flew in low and passed over the pentagon and then a bomb was ignited. This is conjecture but it accomodates the no plane "hit" the pentagon which is what I have always concluded with those who saw the aircraft.

Its not a no planes vs. planes debate, its a what combination of events happened to pull off the illusion.

Tuesday, November 13, 2007 at 5:39:00 AM PST  

Post a Comment

<< Home