SO IF THEY WERE NOT AIRLINERS - WHAT WERE THEY?
Boeing marketed the 767 to the U.S. Air Force to replace their KC-130 tankers. This military aircraft has no passenger windows and is a refueling
tanker aircraft. Yeah, it’s full of fuel.
In 2001, flying a jetliner remotely could have been done using the flight control computers that were on the planes. Officially, “The 757s and 767s
supposedly used on 9/11 both contain integrated flight management computer systems which provide automatic guidance and control of the aircraft from
immediately after takeoff to final approach and landing."
Magnetometer readings from 9/11 indicate the initial tower holes were created by some kind of energy pulse. This can be seen in films of both tower
crashes, right before the planes hit the buildings. They show up in the area right below the fuselage, directly in front of the large pods under the
plane. EASY ANSWER IS THAT THESE ENERGY PULSES BLEW HOLES IN THE STEEL TO ALLOW THE PLANES TO PENETRATE THE BUILDING. This would probably solve many
of the questions regarding the actual crashes. It would also mean that they were not airliners but large military jets, meaning the US military and
government were involved.
Of course the problem with the above is still the same. Because video and radar data showed that the object was travelling at around 580 miles per
hour. Most pilots agree that 580 miles per hour is an impossible speed for a 767 travelling near sea level. A 767 drone, with a pilot flying remotely,
sitting safely inside a building somewhere, would still face all the challenges of a pilot flying a simulation. The only way they could remotely fly
into a building like that would be at landing speeds. Once again ask yourself, do the films show landing speeds?
Even if we go with the idea that these were souped up military 767’s full of fuel, all the flight problems of high speed still remain – the
aircraft would fly apart – wings going one way and fuselage the other. THE OTHER OPTION IS THAT THEY WERE NOT GOING THAT FAST AND THAT MILITARY
767’S SOMEHOW BLEW AN OPENING IN THE TOWERS BEFORE HITTING THEM.
This makes the most sense, although the radar speed data does not allow this. COULD IT SIMPLY BE THAT THE MILITARY FAKED THE RADAR DATA? Maybe the
planes were only going 300 mph? You better hope so, because if not, that leaves us with cruise missiles and – you guessed it - holograms.
We have all seen the video images of controlled missiles taking out moving trucks. This means that a controlled missile could easily take out a
non-moving office space in a skyscraper. It could also blow through the outer steel wall of the towers and the massively thick concrete and steel
floors. It could also create a nice round hole in the Pentagon and Shanksville. It would also mean that the glow we see on the building before impact
is the hologram light itself, not an energy beam explosion.
But was/is it even possible to create a 3D hologram around a cruise missile? And doing it from another aircraft flying above it – which itself
cannot be seen? How do you disguise a B2 over New York City?
The chopper video, the one which shows the towers from a distance and the smoke blowing to the right – THAT VIDEO CLEARLY SHOWS THE FRONT OF THE
AIRLINER COMING THROUGH THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TOWER. But unlike the French video, which seems to show something similar, there is no shadow cast on
the tower? How could we have a shadow cast in one video and not another? WHEN THAT VISUAL OF THE FRONT OF THE AIRLINER IS CUT OUT AND PLACED NEXT TO
THE VISUAL OF THE FRONT OF THE AIRLINER BEFORE THE CRASH – THE TWO MATCH UP PERFECTLY. We are seeing the front of the airliner coming through the
other side of the building. Since a poor bird would wipe out the nose of an airliner there is no way in Hades it could pass through the tower in one
piece, looking like we see it in the video. SO THIS IS CLEARLY VIDEO FORGERY OR A HOLOGRAM – TAKE YOUR PICK.
SO WE HAVE AT LEAST 5 BIG PROBLEMS:
1 – Airliners cannot fly that fast and stay in one piece.
2 – The images of the airliners entering the towers are not realistic.
3 – Building 7 was blown up on purpose without even using the plane excuse.
4 – There is no plane wreckage at the Pentagon or Pennsylvania.
5 - Can a 3D hologram be projected onto a cruise missile going 570 miles per hour?
Were all 4 airline crashes actually cruise missiles? If so that explains the radar speeds and all the holes. Meaning the cartoon cutouts in the towers
were pre-set to blow out those shapes.
If all 4 were actually planes – and two blew holes into the tower sides - it could leave us with this:
Flight 11 - American Airlines - North Tower - actually a Military remotely flown drone 767 fuel tanker – flying under 400 mph.
Flight 175 United Airlines - South Tower – just like above, a Military 767 fuel tanker.
Flight 77 American Airlines – Pentagon – a Military drone – the “small plane”.
Flight 93 United Airlines – Shanksville – as above, another Military drone – another “small plane”.
EITHER WAY THIS MEANS THERE WERE NO PASSENGERS OR HIJACKERS IN THESE CRASHES.
THE ONLY TERRORIST INVOLVED WERE THOSE WITHIN THE US MILITARY AND GOVERNMENT.
THIS LEAVES ME WITH 2 BIG QUESTIONS:
1 - If it was a hologram – if the military had the ability to fly along above a missile and project a 3D hologram image onto and around it - WHY USE
THE IMAGE OF A MILITARY PLANE WITH A POD AND NOT AN AIRLINER WITH WINDOWS AND LOGOS?
2 - WAS THE POD THE ACTUAL CRUISE MISSLE ITSELF, SEEN THROUGH THE HOLOGRAM?
edit on 16-10-2018 by spiritualarchitect because: more info