Barry's Conspiracy World: The "No Plane" Theory

[James H. Fetzer]

http://barryb911.blogspot.com/2011/05/no-plane-theory.html

Barry's Conspiracy World

Exploring Conspiracy Truth

Tuesday, 24 May 2011

The "No Plane" Theory

To the uninitiated, this seems like the most idiotic crock of crap.  Let's take a look at the facts of the morning of 9/11 and see how this "silly" idea came about.

No one saw a plane crash in PA.  There was very little wreckage at the "crash site."  There were no pieces over two feet long.  There were no bodies.  There was not "one drop of blood." There was no black box.  There was a second debris field 8 miles away.  This is very odd and if anything would give credibility to the idea that the plane was shot down, however, there was also very little debris present at the second location.

No one saw a commercial plane hit the Pentagon.  Some witnesses thought they may have seen what appeared to be a small passenger plane or missile.

There were no flight manifests for Flights 11 and 77.  To many aviation experts, this means that the flights never existed.  These flight numbers are for the planes hitting the north tower and the Pentagon.

Let's say for a moment that there were no planes at the Pentagon and in PA.  If that is the case, why would there necessarily be any planes at the WTC?  Well, people saw them and heard them.  There is video of the planes hitting the towers.  That's tough to get around.   But what did they see?  And what did they hear?

They saw a Boeing 767 fly over New York city at 580mph.  This is a problem.  The maximum speed of the Boeing  767   at sea level  is 360mph.  That's not a 20 mph difference, but a 220 mph difference!  Given that drag varies on the square of the velocity and the power required to push through that drag varies on the 4th power of the velocity.  A discrepency of 220 mph is enormous!  Pushing a large aircraft an extra 220mph at sea level is not a trivial matter.  This amounts to an increase in power of 674% -- above full power!  This could not be accomplished by dive bombing the plane, which was not the case as the speed was taken while the plane was at a level cruise.  (The 767 would most likely break apart if somehow it was powered to cruise at 580mph at sea level -- sea level being an enormous difference from a 40,000ft cruising altitude, where the air density is less than 25% of air at sea level.)
  
Let's examine the footage of the planes striking the WTC.

Flight of the Hologram

If you look closely, the plane passes into the building rather like a phantom.  Also, quite significant is the fact that when it hits the building, there seem to be numerous explosionsalong the surface of the building.  Not metal and glass crashing, but explosions.  Furthermore, they don't seem to be timed exactly -- they fire off at slightly different moments, which don't really coincide with the plane hitting the building.  Why would there be numerous small explosions from a plane hitting a building?  (I'm not talking about the big ball of fire explosion, but the small explosions along the surface.  These explosions seem to be making the Wyle E. Coyote cut-out on the face of the building.)

Another obvious question is "What could else it possibly be?  It looks like an airplane!" Well, examine this link and scroll down to Topic 7: Hologram Technology.  Most people are not familiar with the above top secret classified holographic technology which can project solid looking objects from fast flying fighter planes.  Witnesses heard a plane overhead, but it is not impossible that they heard a missile and when couple with the image of a plane, assumed it was a plane. It would be fairly simple to add in a sound effect of loud low frequency rumble, that when added to the sound of a cruise missile, closely models the spectral make-up of a Boeing 767.

Hologram Technology

There have been anecdotal reports of people giving speeches on stage at business conferences, while engaging the audience.  Several minutes into the speech, the actual person walks out and stands next to his hologram which has duped the audience.  A friend of aviation legend John Lear was driving in the California desert and spotted an enormous military cargo plane flying overhead.  He found it odd that such a plane would be flying at such a location -- out in the middle of nowhere.  He looked up and it vanished into thin air.  The witness felt that this must have been a test run of holographic technology.

WHAT ABOUT THE PEOPLE?

This is seemingly a huge problem with the whole "no plane" theory.  Real people died on 9/11.  There is no denying that.  However, the passenger lists are actually supportive pieces of evidence to the idea of "no planes."  The 4 planes all had low loads -- less than 200 people total were onboard, including the crew.  It turns out that many of the names were employees of Boeing and other military contractors or were in the military itself.  The government set up a compensation fund for families of the victims of 9/11.  Each family would receive $2 million compensation.  Only a small percentage of the families entitled to money came forward to collect!  For one plane of 40 victims, only 6 families tried to claim the $2 million!  Moreover, six of the alleged hijackers were seen after 9/11.  One of them spoke in length with his father the next day.  Another hijacker was interviewed on the BBC on 9/12!   One must ask, "How can a pilot fly a plane into a building and do an interview on the BBC the next day?!"

Passenger lists

So what happened to the people?  It would be fairly simple for CIA operatives or black ops NSA security to pick up the crews and the few actual passengers from the planes.

Considering the 9/11 attacks as a whole: What would be the most effective way to carry out the operation?  If the goal was to bring down the world's biggest office buildings in grand fashion (while making it look like an enemy attack), would you want to use commercial airplanes?  Hell no!  Even if you wanted to fly the planes into the towers and THEN implode them with tons of nano-thermite, you still would not want to use planes for such an operation.  (Tests of the WTC dust has shown it contains nano-thermite).  Experienced pilots have testified that it would be extremely difficult to achieve a center hit with the plane.  You would need a totally reliable pilot who could be counted on for a suicide flight.  By all accounts, the hijackers were not very capable pilots.   If just one of the planes just nicked the edge of the tower, it would look enormously fake to still implode the building. 

There is also the problem of the flight path of the plane that hit the Pentagon.  The plane made a nearly 360 degree sharp turn and decent, which would have been difficult even in a large military jet.  This maneuver would not have been possible in a Boeing 767.  Furthermore, the alleged pilot to this craft Hani Hanjour, was not competent to fly a Boeing 767 at any speed.  He could barely fly a Cesna in flight school.  Here is one of many articles on "pilot extraordinaire" Hani Hanjour. 

Pilot extraordinaire

Pilots for Truth examined the flight data recorder for Flight 77 and found it to be faked.  If an accurate barometer reading had been used for the data, the flight would have passed over the Pentagon at an altitude of 273 feet.  There is a run through simulation of Flight 77 on the Pilots for 911 Truth site.

Pilots for 9/11 Truth

There are many more reasons why the idea of airplanes does not hold water.  Pilots for Truth realize the many problems with this notion.  So I ask, "If there were no planes, what happened?"  That is a great question.  So far, the evidence suggests that cruise missiles were flown into the Pentagon and WTC 1 and 2.  (Of course nothing hit WTC 7 -- it imploded seemingly by itself.)  The cruise missiles projected a hologram of a Boeing 767 over NYC.  They didn't bother projecting anything over the Pentagon.  Flight 93 most likely never took place.  "Let's roll" was some creative writing, as was "Hi mom, it's your son Mark Bingham.  You know who I am? [I'm about to crash and die.]"  It turns out that cell phone calls from planes were not possible in 2001.*  The Flight 93 calls could have been faked with available Voice Morphing Technology.**

Nearly 3000 people died for a false flag to justify a false war.  There were no weapons of mass destruction.  The U.S. simply wanted to proceed with military control of the Middle East.

NOTES:

*  The calls from Flight 93 were made from an altitude between 34,300 feet and 40,700 feet.  Canadian scientist and mathematician A.K. Dewdney determined that cell phone calls at an altitude of 20,000 feet could be completed at a rate of less than 1 in 100 in 2001.  Higher altitudes would have been more difficult.  The chances of two callers making successful calls would have been less than 1 in 10,000.  According to reports, there were 9 cell phone calls from Flight 93 at an altitude of over 30,000 feet.

** As reported in the Washington Post in 1999, William Arkin wrote "By taking just a 10 minute digital recording of anyone's voice" voice morphing experts can "clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile."

 

[Thoth II]

"To the uninitiated, this seems like the most idiotic crock of crap"

 

What is really idiotic is that people's perceptions of truth come from the MSM and authority figures, instead of their own independent thinking.  Until people clearly see that, and most do not, society can not improve.  It will be controlled by a handful for them.