911 Noplane EVIDENCE by CB_Brooklyn
by CB_Brooklyn
06 Mar 2008
From the moment people thought that planes crashed in the World Trade Center, the brainwashing had begun.
The “official” account of Boeing 767s striking the North and South Towers, at 400+MPH and 500+MPH respectively, became glued in peoples’ minds as “fact” because of the “tee-vee”. Good ol’ tee-vee. We all trust the media.
Even in 1938, when Orson Welles directed a special Halloween radio broadcast of the novel “War of the Worlds”, millions of Americans believed Martians were invading earth. Everyone trusts the media! (As a side note, I’d like to advertise a new article by Andrew Johnson: “Mars Anomalies”)
It should come to no surprise how the media affects peoples’ minds and our culture, and the media’s reporting of 9/11 is no exception.
The 9/11 coverup perpetrators had their deceptive propaganda well planned. With their total control over the media they successfully conditioned most into believing their “19 boxcutter-wielding Muslims” story. People were overwhelmed; their brains saturated with the propaganda.
November 10, 2001 - George W Bush brainwashes the world into thinking the idea of “inside job” is crazy: ”Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20011110-3.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K5M0xtxQVQ
But the propaganda didn’t stop there. The coverup perps, the experts they are, knew some people would see through their “boxcutter” deception, so they crafted an alternate propaganda… specifically targeting those already suspicious of the “official” story.
Lenin, the first Communist dictator after the takeover of Russia in 1917, is widely credited with the following quotation, "The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves."
http://www.realnews247.com/fascism_disguis...t_democracy.htm
This alternate propaganda is promoted by government plants within the “truth movement”, along with its fabricated evidence (such as molten metal). Of course, the media carefully publicize this “evidence” as a “wacky conspiracy theory”…
November 14, 2005 - Tucker Carlson brainwashes the world into thinking the idea of an “inside job” theory is offensive. Steven Jones promotes the “alternate propaganda”:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10053445
Yet, the coverup perpetrators use ridicule to keep the “REAL” version hidden…
December 6, 2006 - Steven E Jones brainwashes the 9/11 “truth movement” into thinking the idea of directed energy weapons and no planes is “crazy disinfo”: “Of late, [Jim Fetzer] refers often to his association now with Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds. These two are noted for their no-planes-hit-the-Towers theories and for promoting the notion of ray-beams from space knocking down the Towers.”
http://judicial-inc.biz/Steven_Jones_quits_911.htm
Jones is one of many in and around the “truth movement” associated with Los Alamos where Directed Energy Weapons are researched. See here to learn how the 9/11 attacks, the 9/11 cover up, and the 9/11 "truth movement" were orchestrated by people associated with directed energy weapons and the media. Jones also suppressed free energy research in ways that mirror his 9/11 coverup:
9/11 Directed Energy Weapon / TV-Fakery Suppression Timeline
By CB_Brooklyn
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/inde...d=151&Itemid=60
Timeline of Events Involving Steve Jones, Crockett Grabbe and Steve Koonin
By Russ Gerst
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/inde...d=162&Itemid=60
If no-planes/TV-Fakery were “crazy disinfo”, why didn’t the media use it to discredit the “truth movement”? Here’s a video of Dr Morgan Reynolds on FOX News: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reQZT9Hzvt8
Certainly if no-planes/TV-Fakery were “crazy disinfo”, the media would have invited Dr Reynolds back. Why didn’t they?
On top of that, why didn’t the media report Reynolds’ or Wood’s court cases, represented by Attorney Jerry Leaphart?
Dr Morgan Reynolds, suing on behalf of the United States of America and demanding a Trial by Jury, has evidence that the Media broadcasted cartoons of an airplane hitting the South Tower.
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&...e1=federal_case
Docket No. 1:07-cv-04612-GBD
Title: Dr. Morgan Reynolds ex rel. USA vs. Science Applications International Corp. et al.
Venue: United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Judge: George B. Daniels
Dr Judy Wood, suing on behalf of the United States of America and demanding a Trial by Jury, has evidence that Directed Energy Weapons were a causal factor in the destruction of the World Trade Center.
http://drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.html
Docket No. 1:07-cv-03314-GBD
Title: Dr. Judy Wood ex rel. USA vs. Applied Research Associates, Inc. et al.
Venue: United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Judge: George B. Daniels
=================================================
UPDATE!!! While composing this article the author became aware of the following:
New York Times
“For Engineer, a Cloud of Litigation After 9/11”
By Jim Dwyer
February 23, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/nyregion/23about.htm
The relevant quote is as follows (emphasis added):
”… one man has sued on behalf of the United States, claiming that Mr. Gilsanz is part of a vast conspiracy to cover up the truth about 9/11, including the “so-called building failures.” The lawsuit maintains that exotic weaponry actually destroyed the buildings, and that the airplanes were mass psychological trickery.”
Wood and Reynolds have filed two separate lawsuits.
No mention of Wood/Reynolds/Leaphart’s names in the Times article.
=================================================
Let us review…
The media (i.e. MSNBC):
promote the “official” version as “the truth”
ridicule the “alternate” version as the “offensive wacky conspiracy theory”
shun the “REAL” version and court cases
Plants in the ”truth movement” (i.e. Steven Jones):
promote the “alternate” version as “the truth”
ridicule the “REAL” version as “offensive wacky conspiracy theory”
We can now understand why many “truthers” shy away from no-planes/TV-Fakery. Seems the 9/11 coverup perps tricked the “truth movement” with a well orchestrated plan of deception! Will these theories really “damage” the “truth movement”, or has the movement merely been tricked into thinking so?
Many “truthers” often wonder why the mainstream media hasn’t broken the “inside job” story yet. The reason is simple: The 9/11 perps have not been exposed. (Check the “Suppression Timeline” linked above.)
Only after the real 9/11 perpetrators are widely exposed with the media break!
Will “truthers” finally start promoting no-planes/TV-Fakery? If the “truth movement” can’t admit their mistakes, why should the average person? People will simply continue believing what they feel most comfortable with: the “boxcutter” story. They don’t care about the evidence. Why should they? After all, the “truth movement” doesn’t. Or do they???
How many “truthers” have looked at the no-planes/TV-Fakery evidence lately… evidence that anyone can understand?
Below you will find a ton of evidence. Look it through… you maybe surprised!
======================================================
======================================================
======================================================
*HOLOGRAMS / PROJECTIONS*
Claim: Just the idea that planes were projected in the air is loony tune crazy!
FACT: This technology was reported in the media before 9/11 pertaining to military psychological operations (PSYOPS).
Washington Post
“When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing”
By William M. Arkin
February 1, 1999
http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=2970
A few notable quotes (emphasis added):
According to a military physicist given the task of looking into the hologram idea, the feasibility had been established of projecting large, three-dimensional objects that appeared to float in the air.
…
…washingtonpost.com has learned that a super secret program was established in 1994 to pursue the very technology for PSYOPS application. The "Holographic Projector" is described in a classified Air Force document as a system to "project information power from space ... for special operations deception missions."
…
Voice-morphing? Fake video? Holographic projection? They sound more like Mission Impossible and Star Trek gimmicks than weapons. Yet for each, there are corresponding and growing research efforts as the technologies improve and offensive information warfare expands.
*EYEWITNESS REPORTS*
Claim: Thousands upon thousands of New Yorkers witnessed commercial airliners hit the towers.
FACT: Few people reported hearing and seeing planes. Most testimonies of those who did are inconsistent with that of a wide-body commercial airliner hitting a building at 800 feet altitude, full throttle.
A jet plane takeoff at 300 feet altitude is 10 times louder than a rock concert:
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy99/phy99405.htm
Wide body commercial airliners are LOUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vJliayH6co
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldIEzBMI6qA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ph-66g5L1g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1YHn9c3AAY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7vhL0Mm9bw
A very small percentage of the approximately 500 First Responders at the WTC reported seeing commercial airliners. An even smaller number reported hearing them. However, they had no trouble hearing the fighter jets later on. See this analysis of the WTC Task Force Interviews for full information:
Going in Search of Planes in NYC - by Andrew Johnson
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/inde...d=134&Itemid=60
Two examples…
WTC Task Force Interview
Stephen Gregory
Assistant Commissioner, Bureau of Communications
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...HIC/9110008.PDF
Excerpts (pages 20-21) (emphasis added):
Q. Where were you when the second plane hit?
A. We were down at the command post between Liberty and Albany on the west side of West Street. …
Q. Did you see or hear the second plane before it hit the World Trade Center?
A. I never actually saw the plane, but l heard it. You could hear it coming in and then we heard the explosion and you could hear the roar of the plane coming in. At first I didn't realize it was a plane. I thought it was like the roar of fire, like something had just incinerated, like a gas tank or an oil tank. It sounded like a tremendous roar and then you heard boom and then there was a big fire, a lot of fire, a big fireball. I never actually saw a plane hit the building. I never saw that. I saw it on television, but I never saw it while I was standing there.
WTC Task Force Interview
Murray Murad
Lieutenant Investigator, Bureau of Investigations and Trials
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...HIC/9110009.PDF
Excerpts (pages 2-5) (emphasis added) [my comments in brackets]:
Well, I was conducting business down on Greenwich and Liberty at Engine 10, Truck 10, on that day.
…
It was about 8:41 that we heard a plane hovering over the fire house. It sounded like the plane was right on top of us. [400MPH airplanes do not “hover”]
…
So about two or three minutes after hearing it, you heard something like revving. We took a look, and, boom, the north tower is hit. [Is “two or three minutes” realistic? Being that 400 MPH is well over 5 mile a minute, did Murad also hear planes take off and land at LaGuardia Airport, approximately 10 miles away?]
…
Maybe about 10 to 12-minutes after that first plane, I heard another plane. Then I said to myself, we're being attacked.
I ran downstairs. No sooner did I run downstairs and look up, that I saw the second plane strike the south tower. It was such a vicious hit and such a precision hit, it was unbelievable. [How come he didn’t report the deafening sound of a 500+ MPH commercial jet right above hit head?]
==========================================
A precision hit all right. But… retired commercial airline / military pilot, Russ Wittenberg, who flew for Pan Am and United for over 30 years, piloted Flight 93 (Shanksville) and Flight 175 (South Tower) before 9/11. He says the alleged hijackers could not have flown those planes:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3606159506368831731
==========================================
This analysis of the book “Never Forget: An Oral History of September 11, 2001” also has some interesting quotes:
The Original No Planers: Most Witnesses at the WTC Heard And Saw No Planes
By Morgan Reynolds
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&...inal_no_planers
A few selected quotes (emphasis added):
• Gary Smiley, 38, FDNY paramedic, was carrying an injured woman across Church Street who kept yelling "plane" and Smiley recalled, "I looked up at that point, and that's when the second plane hit the South Tower. The explosion was unbelievable. It was right over my head. You didn't hear anything. People ask me sometimes, 'What did you hear?' I heard nothing. "
• John Abruzzo, 43, staff accountant, Port Authority, and C5-C6 quadriplegic: "I worked on the 69th floor of the North Tower...My desk faces north. I can see over my partition out the north windows. I don't remember hearing any sound, or an explosion. But I do remember that the building suddenly swayed, and that it swayed in one direction only. I thought the building was going to collapse right then and there. We've been in storms, you know, where the building sways back and forth, but that's nothing...it took an hour and a half to get from the 69th floor down to the street level, and another ten to fifteen minutes to get to Stuyvesant High School."
• Steven Bienkowski, 37, NYPD Harbor Unit Scuba Team: "I happened to be sitting in the back left side of the (helicopter) ship. There were two pilots, two crew chiefs, my partner, and I. We were on the southwest side of the South Tower, and I glanced over my shoulder and there came a United Airlines aircraft right at us, a little bit underneath where we were. And I do mean a little bit underneath us. It probably missed us by about three hundred feet, and it proceeded to fly right through the building, right in front of us. I must have gone numb. I don't remember hearing an explosion, although it must have been extremely loud. I don't remember the helicopter moving...When that second plane went into the building, it just looked like an evil magician's trick. It looked nothing like what I would have imagined a plane crashing into a building would look like. The plane just completely disappeared and turned into a giant fireball. Being there was surreal. I guess the brain tries to protect you in times like that. You have some kind of defense mechanism in there that shuts down some of your senses. It just doesn't allow you to believe."
==========================================
An interesting fact: CameraPlanet was responsible for collecting the amateur footage on 9/11.
Its owner, Steven Rosenbaum, is a magician:
http://www.911researchers.com/node/555
==========================================
Some witnesses reported explosions, bombs and missiles. A few examples:
National Review has this quote: “I saw it," he says, "It could have been a plane, but I think it was a bomb — uh, a missile. This could be World War III."
http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock052402.asp
The BBC reports: I distinctly remember somebody saying: “A missile just hit the trade center, I saw a missile hit.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/worl...when/html/1.stm
According to a CNN transcript, a reporter said: a small plane -- I did -- it looked like a propeller plane, came in from the west. An eyewitness also states: I had no idea it was a plane. I just saw the entire top part of the World Trade Center explode. So I turned on the TV when I heard they said it was a plane. It was really strange.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/11/bn.01.html
This eyewitness specifically says NO plane, just a bomb:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0eC3uns3pA
*AIRPLANE PARTS*
Claim: Airplane wreckage proves planes hit the towers.
FACT: The available evidence does not add up.
WTC Task Force Interview
Stephen Gregory
Assistant Commissioner, Bureau of Communications
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...HIC/9110008.PDF
Excerpt (page 20) (emphasis added):
Q. The airplane parts that you referred to, they were on West Street or on Vesey Street?
A. I saw airplane parts on West Street.
Q. How did you know they were airplane parts?
A. It looked like pieces of a plane, skin of a plane. I mean, they weren't really discernible. I couldn't say this was this part of a plane or that was that part. Just knowing a plane had hit the building and I looked and I saw it looked like the skin off a wing or a fuselage or wherever it came from.
Q. Clearly not building material?
A. No. The building material was sort of gray and you could see it, you know, how it differed from the plane. …
WTC Task Force Interview
Salvatore Cassano
Chief
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...HIC/9110011.PDF
Excerpt (pages 14-15) (emphasis added):
Q. On Vesey Street when you first arrived there, what was the scene like? That was where the first plane that hit. Was there any debris on that street?
A. No, there was no debris on that street at all from the first plane. I drove right up there and then like I said, I had just opened my door and the second -- I thought it was the secondary explosion. I didn't know it was another plane in the south tower, because when I heard it, I looked up and I saw debris. It had to be debris flying over from the south tower. Not much, but there was enough coming down in the street where I took off and I ducked into a garage until it cleared up.
After the secondary explosion in the north tower, I didn't know what the hell - I didn't know it was another plane that had hit until I got around to the command post.
There are NO verified airplane parts.
Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests were filed but the government refuses to release documentation:
http://www.911blogger.com/node/14081
See here for more:
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&..._with_jones#NBB
*TV NETWORKS & MILITARY PSYOPS CONNECTION*
Claim: Just the idea the TV Networks and military would work together to deceive the public is wacky cookoo!
FACT: The TV Networks/Military/PSYOPS connection was reported by the media before 9/11.
WorldNetDaily
“Army 'psyops' at CNN - News giant employed military 'psychological operations' personnel”
By Geoff Metcalf
March 3, 2000
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=17437
Some notable quotes (emphasis added):
CNN employed active duty U.S. Army psychological operations personnel last year, WorldNetDaily has confirmed through several sources at Fort Bragg and elsewhere.
Maj. Thomas Collins, U.S. Information Service has confirmed that "psyops" (psychological operations) personnel, soldiers and officers, have worked in the CNN headquarters in Atlanta. The lend/lease exercise was part of an Army program called "Training With Industry." According to Collins, the soldiers and officers, "... worked as regular employees of CNN. Conceivably, they would have worked on stories during the Kosovo war. They helped in the production of news."
…
The CNN military personnel were members of the Airmobile Fourth Psychological Operations Group, stationed at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. One of the main tasks of this group of almost 1200 soldiers and officers is to spread 'selected information.' Critics say that means dissemination of propaganda.
*TV-FAKERY*
Claim: Just the idea the TV Networks would broadcast fake footage is nutcase kooky!
FACT: This technology was reported in the media before 9/11 as being available by TV Networks and the military for the purpose of altering world politics.
Washington Post
“When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing”
By William M. Arkin
February 1, 1999
http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=2970
A few notable quotes (emphasis added):
Digital morphing — voice, video, and photo — has come of age, available for use in psychological operations. PSYOPS, as the military calls it, seek to exploit human vulnerabilities in enemy governments, militaries and populations to pursue national and battlefield objectives.
To some, PSYOPS is a backwater military discipline of leaflet dropping and radio propaganda. To a growing group of information war technologists, it is the nexus of fantasy and reality. Being able to manufacture convincing audio or video, they say, might be the difference in a successful military operation or coup.
The Independent
“When TV brings you the news as it didn't happen: Broadcasters are using virtual imaging technology to alter live broadcasts - and not even the news is safe from tampering”
January 24, 2000
http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=3441
A few notable quotes (emphasis added):
Viewers tuning into American broadcaster CBS's recent news coverage of the millennium celebrations in New York witnessed a televisual sleight of hand which enabled CBS to alter the reality of what they saw. Using "virtual imaging" technology, the broadcaster seamlessly adjusted live video images to include an apparently real promotion for itself in Times Square. The move has sparked debate about the ethics of using advances in broadcast technology to alter reality without telling viewers that what they are seeing isn't really there.
While it's little surprise that advances in TV technology enable broadcasters to better manipulate existing images and create new ones, what is surprising is that this was done during a live broadcast and in a news programme. The CBS evening news coverage involved replacing the logo of rival network NBC with the CBS logo on a large video screen in Times Square. NBC was "outraged" by the use of the technology, and even CBS's evening news presenter, Dan Rather, admitted it was a "mistake".
…
The technology to do this comes from the defence industry where, following the end of the Cold War, a number of companies have developed new ways of commercially exploiting their military navigation and tracking expertise.
…
CBS's problems arise from the fact that its use of the PVI system went one step further than "enhancing" the look of its presentation: it tampered with the reality of an actual event it was depicting in a news show, raising the spectre of TV news reporters reporting "live" from around the world when they're actually far closer to home. The broadcaster - which has also used virtual imaging to modify the New York cityscape - defended itself by insisting: "CBS News' internal standards prohibit digital manipulation or other faking of news footage."
…
CBS is not the only broadcaster to use this technology in news broadcasts. Rival ABC recently included a report on Congress by a reporter wearing an overcoat in front of what to viewers seemed to be the US Capitol. The entire report was taped in a studio.
…
Trouble is, for the time being at least, the onus is on the viewer to draw any example of tampering with reality to the attention of the regulator which then would investigate retrospectively. Assuming, that is, that they realise what they are seeing isn't real.
Technology Review
“Lying With Pixels”
By Ivan Amato
July/August 2000
http://www.911researchers.com/node/174
A few notable quotes (emphasis added):
So far, real-time video manipulation has been within the grasp only of technologically sophisticated organizations such as TV networks and the military. But developers of the technology say it’s becoming simple and cheap enough to spread everywhere. And that has some observers wondering whether real-time video manipulation will erode public confidence in live television images, even when aired by news outlets. “Seeing may no longer be believing,” says Norman Winarsky, corporate vice president for information technology at Sarnoff. “You may not know what to trust.”
…
Deleting people or objects from live video, or inserting prerecorded people or objects into live scenes, is only the beginning of the deceptions becoming possible.
…
Combine the potential erosion of faith in video authenticity with the so-called “CNN effect” and the stage is set for deception to move the world in new ways. Livingston describes the CNN effect as the ability of mass media to go beyond merely reporting what is happening to actually influencing decision-makers as they consider military, international assistance and other national and international issues. “The CNN effect is real,” says James Currie, professor of political science at the National Defense University at Fort McNair in Washington. “Every office you go into at the Pentagon has CNN on.” And that means, he says, that a government, terrorist or advocacy group could set geopolitical events in motion on the strength of a few hours’ worth of credibility achieved by distributing a snippet of well-doctored video.
…
With experience as an army reservist, as a staffer with a top-secret clearance on the Senate’s Intelligence Committee, and as a legislative liaison for the Secretary of the Army, Currie has seen governmental decision-making and politicking up close. He is convinced that real-time video manipulation will be, or already is, in the hands of the military and intelligence communities. And while he has no evidence yet that any government or nongovernment organization has deployed video manipulation techniques, real-time or not, for political or military purposes, he has no problem conjuring up disinformation scenarios. For example, he says, consider the impact of a fabricated video that seemed to show Saddam Hussein “pouring himself a Scotch and taking a big drink of it. You could run it on Middle Eastern television and it would totally undermine his credibility with Islamic audiences.”
*LAWS OF PHYSICS*
Claim: Just the idea the “airplane” videos violate physical laws is wacko disinfo!
FACT: Any video that shows an aluminum airplane with a plastic nosecone gliding through a steel/concrete building violates Newton’s Laws of Motion.
Isaac Newton’s Third Law of Motion: “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
High school physics states that the force an airplane exerts on a building is the same as the force a building exerts on an airplane.
Even Peter Jennings knew the 9/11 airplane video was fake. Note his nervousness and word fumbling when ABC plays this amateur clip back in slow motion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCDu2V3yjS4
As retired Aerospace Engineer Joseph Keith says: "The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!"
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&..._planer_resigns
An airliner would receive the most damage when crashing on a steel building. It would crash against the building, not effortlessly glide through as seen in the FOX 5 “nose out” video:
There were only two “live” news camera broadcasts - FOX5 (WNYW) and ABC7 (WABC) - with all others televised later in the day.
Here’s the ABC 7 shot of the “plane” disappearing behind the North Tower before impacting the South Tower:
==========================================
Is anyone aware… that in October 2007, the WABC Chopper 7 pilot, Paul Smith, was run over and killed by a taxi? The taxi swerved after being cutoff by a “black car”. This could be coincidence. But I find it odd that the camera operator, John Del Giorno, (who sat next to Smith in the chopper) was telephoned by 9/11 researcher, Jeff Hill, just a few months earlier. See here for the news reports covering Smith’s death, and an MP3 of the telephone conversation between Hill and Del Giorno:
http://www.shure.proboards19.com/index.cgi...read=1192128055
==========================================
Note the CNN cartoon video:
These videos of real crashes show just how delicate airplanes are:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyyIh5npMuU
http://www.911researchers.com/node/98
Every known 9/11 WTC “airplane” video is archived here:
[Note: site is very resource intensive]
http://killtown.911review.org/2nd-hit.html
For those with difficulty understanding TV-Fakery via Newton’s Laws, note these:
The Incredible Moving Bridge (Naudet Brothers DVD):
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EiYUGzUUg64
The Spinning WTC (WCBS Footage):
http://www.livevideo.com/video/killtown/3C...inning-wtc.aspx
*DEBUNKED?*
Claim: TV-Fakery has been debunked time and time again.
FACT:The violation of Newton’s Laws of Motion has never been explained.
Several “papers” claiming to debunk TV-Fakery have surfaced. However, not one of them approaches the obvious violation of Newton’s Laws regarding an aluminum airplane with a plastic nosecone gliding through a steel/concrete building. Instead, these strawman papers attempt to discredit TV-Fakery by “explaining away” a few points. Neither Steven Jones nor anyone in his team has ever addressed Newton’s Laws as it applies to TV-Fakery. (I wonder why…)
*BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS DATABASE*
Claim: The missing information for Flights 11 and 77 in the BTS Database means nothing.
FACT: An official at the BTS confirmed that flights with missing “tail number” and “actual departure time” information have been cancelled.
9/11 Researcher Jeff Hill placed a call to the BTS and recorded the conversation:
http://www.shure.proboards19.com/index.cgi...read=1189195954
*CELL PHONE CALLS*
Claim: Just the idea the cell phone calls were faked is cookoo crazy!
FACT: Advanced voice synthesizer technology exists and was reported in the media before 9/11 as being available for military operations. The technology was developed at Los Alamos. (Was Steven Jones involved??)
Washington Post
“When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing”
By William M. Arkin
February 1, 1999
http://forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=2970
A few notable quotes (emphasis added):
It is the result of voice "morphing" technology developed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.
By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile.
==========================================
==========================================
==========================================
Additional Information
==========================================
Dr Reynolds suggested the following addition:
“March 5, 2006
Morgan Reynolds publishes article demonstrating at length that all four plane "crashes" were physically impossible as depicted by government and media. All four "disappearances" were hoaxes proven by absence of airplane debris, undersized holes, absurd silhouettes of passage, impossible physics of aluminum planes gliding through structural steel without losing a flap, panel or wingtip, etc.”
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&...1=we_have_holes
==========================================
And, of course, original no-plane research by Web Fairy:
http://webfairy.org/home.htm
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank the 9/11 Researchers and proofreaders whose work made this paper possible.
Special thanks to Jerry Leaphart (and all others involved), whose legal documents sourced the “War of the Worlds” and Gregory/Murad testimony ideas used.
Submit to News Services
Earth's magnetic field:
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home