| http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=101&contentid=483&page=2
9-11: The Flight of the Bumble Planes by SNAKE PLISSKEN AS TOLD TO CAROL VALENTINE (March 10, 2002) -- Eureka! One of my readers, who calls himself "Snake Plissken," has put it together. He tells us why the passenger lists of the four September 11 "suicide" jets were so small, how remote control was used, why the transponders were turned off, why the radar tracks of the four planes were confused, why there was no Boeing 757 debris at the Pentagon ... By George, I think he's got it! My e-mail exchanges with Snake took place over a series of days. With Snake's agreement, I have consolidated the exchanges, inserted some reference URLs, and made minor edits. My comments and additions will be bracketed thus [ ]. As you read what Snake has to say, keep the following in mind: "Magic is the pretended performance of those things which cannot be done. The success of a magician's simulation of doing the impossible depends upon misleading the minds of his audiences. This, in the main, is done by adding, to a performance, details of which the spectators are unaware, and leaving out others which they believe you have not left out. In short a performance of magic is largely a demonstration of the universal reliability of certain facts of psychology." (John Mulholland, "The Art of Illusion," Charles Scribner & Sons, 1944.) In what follows, Snake unravels the illusions of the 9-11 magicians. === Carol, You did some fine research on 9-11. You came within inches of solving the puzzle of the "suicide" jets, and now you need the rest of the story. Let me explain by making a suggestion. Go visit a bumblebee hive some time, and try to keep your eye on just one bee. You can't do it. You get confused. Think of the 9-11 jets as bumblebees. Matter of fact, you could even call Operation 911 "Flight of the Bumble Planes." I've worked in cryptology and there are many ways of hiding the truth. Substitute information, omit information, scramble the information out of sequence, and add nonsense (random garbage). All four methods were used on the 9-11 incident. Let me lay out the clues and show you where they lead. THE CLUES * First Clue -- Few Passengers On The Four Flights: Many have remarked about the short passenger lists on the four 911 jets. You might get a low turnout for a 767 or 757 now and then, but four coast-to-coast flights taking off from the East inside of a few minutes of each other, all with short passenger lists? Nuts. That's your first clue. * Second Clue -- First Report of First WTC Crash: The second clue comes from the first New York eyewitness on NBC. She had no question about what she saw. You could hear it in her voice. If she was the state's witness, the defense team would have their heads between their knees before she stopped talking. What did she say? She heard an airplane coming in low and looked up. She saw a small private jet, and watched it fly into the first WTC tower, the North tower. She was certain in her description -- most people know the difference between a big round-nose commercial jet and a smaller plane. [ CV cmments: [ In his testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on October 25, 2001, NORAD commander Ralph Eberhart said of the first September 11 report: "We were told it was a light commuter airplane. It didn't look like that was caused by a light commuter airplane." [ http://www.ngaus.org/newsroom/HomelandDefenseTranscript.doc [ http://www.Public-Action.com/911/eberhart-testimony.html ] Later, some dodgy report came in from an anonymous source in the "United Airlines Command Center" that American Airlines had a hijacking, and they gradually padded the story out until the viewer felt like he was part of an unfolding revelation on the size and make of the plane. So the first eyewitness's story got shellacked. * Third clue -- Pentagon Crash: The first report on NBC said there had been an explosion near the Pentagon heliport. No mention of a plane. If you were watching ABC, the first reports cited eyewitnesses who said a business jet had crashed into the Pentagon. Notice that this description is similar to the first report about the WTC. A small plane, not a big, round nosed passenger jet. Then ABC interviewed some media executive who said he "saw the whole thing" from his car on the freeway. It was an American Airlines passenger jet. Good luck the road didn't need his attention while he was gawking. And of course it was a big passenger jet scraping the light poles with it's belly as it came in low. And that story paved the way for the official truth. * Fourth Clue -- No Boeing 757 Debris at Pentagon Crash Site. By now lots of people have realized there is something very wrong with the story of Flight 77's crash into the Pentagon. What's the problem? The wingspan of a 757 is about 125 feet, with about 35 feet between the two jet engines. [ http://www.boeing.com/commercial/757-200/ext.html [ http://www.Public-Action.com/911/boeing757-200 The hole left by whatever hit the building was 70 feet across. [ US News & World Report, December 10, 2001, pg. 31 [ http://www.Public-Action.com/911/usn011210-1.jpg After the smoke died down, everyone could see the Pentagon but no one could see the plane. The Pentagon is made of masonry -- limestone -- not steel and glass. The aluminum wings of the plane should have been ripped off and left outside the building. We should have seen wing wreckage. But there was none. [ CV comments: [ I have studied TV footage taken contemporaneously by various networks and reviewed photos from news magazines published just after 9-11. After the smoke died down, no Boeing 757 debris was visible. [ See the following URLs at the website of the U.S. Army Military District of Washington, D.C., sent to me by researcher John DiNardo, . By the way, Mr. DiNardo suspects that inside explosives were used at the Pentagon on 9-11. Certainly the damaged section of the building had just been renovated; explosives would have been easy to install. ] [ http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/news_photos/911/pages/firetruck.html [ http://www.Public-Action.com/911/pentagon6 [ http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/news_photos/911/pages/capitolview.html [ http://www.Public-Action.com/911/pentagon5 [ http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/news_photos/911/pages/cars damaged.html [ http://www.Public-Action.com/911/pentagon2 ] [The scenes depicted by the US Army photos are consistent with contemporaneously published photos in the popular press. See, for example, US News and World Report, September 14, 2001, pg. 40. [ http://www.Public-Action.com/911/usn010914-1.jpg [ and the photo that appeared in Newsweek's 2001 "Extra" edition, pgs. 26, 27. [ http://www.Public-Action.com/911/nwkxtr-1.jpg [ This photograph below, with caption, appeared on the US Army Military District of Washington site. It unwittingly demonstrates that there was no Boeing 757 wreckage. Think now: a hundred thousand pounds of seats, framework, skin plates, engine parts, flaps, wheels, luggage, interior panels, electronics, and this little out-of-context scrap of God-knows what was shown by the Pentagon. http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/news_photos/911/pages/planepiece.html http://www.Public-Action.com/911/pentagon0 [ In the last several months, largely as a result of Mr. DiNardo's work, there has been growing Internet discussion of the lack of Boeing 757 debris outside the Pentagon. Now, magically, new photos of "Boeing 757" Pentagon wreckage are beginning to appear. Check out the websites of Mike Rivero and Joe Vialls for copies of these fakes. Rivero and Vialls, by endorsing them as real, have surely identified themselves as members of the fake opposition. [ OK. Now back to Snake Plissken] * Fifth Clue -- Quality of Pilots in Pentagon crash: As you point out [ Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS, http://www.Public action.com/911/robotplane.html ] the flying instructors who trained the "suicide" pilots of Flight 77 said they were hopeless. "It was like they had hardly even ever driven a car ..." The flight instructors called the two, "dumb and dumber," and told them to quit taking lessons. Yet the Washington Post described the maneuvers of Flight 77 before it hit the Pentagon. The huge jet took a 270 degree hairpin turn to make its target. The Post said Flight 77 had to be flown by expert pilots. Something is wrong here. Now "dumb and dumber" are expert pilots. That is your fifth clue. * Sixth Clue -- Transponders Turned Off: As you point out, the "hijackers" turned off the transponders which transmit information showing the airline names, flight numbers, and altitude. But the FAA also uses conventional radar, so the "hijackers" must have known the planes were still visible. Why would the "hijackers" shut the transponders off, you asked? You are looking at your sixth clue. ["Did NORAD Send The 'Suicide' Jets?" Part 1 [ http://www.Public-Action.com/911/noradsend.html ] * Seventh Clue -- Confusion On Radar Tracks: As you point out, some of these flights disappeared from the conventional radar scopes. [See above-cited URL.] That's your seventh clue. * Eighth Clue -- Second WTC Tower Barely Hit: Have a look at the footage of the second WTC tower being hit. The plane almost missed the tower and just managed to hit the corner. Yet the first plane struck its target dead center. That's your eighth clue. [ See diagrams from Wag the WTC website at: [ http://www.Public Action.com/911/psyopnews/Extra/1/southtowerpath.jpg HERE'S WHAT HAPPENED * A Boeing 767 was secured and painted up to look like a United Airlines jet. It had remote controls installed in it, courtesy of some NORAD types. Call that plane "Pseudo Flight 175" and leave it parked at a military airfield for the moment. * The number of the passengers on each flight was kept artificially low that day. Easy to do. Just monkey with the airline computers and show the fights full so no more tickets are sold. Include some of your own operatives in each flight, maybe. * After the planes are in the air, the transponders must be shut down. There are a few ways to do this, maybe, but the simplest is this: Have one of the NORAD insiders call the pilots and say: "This is the North American Aerospace Defense Command. There is a national emergency. We are under terrorist attack. Turn off your transponders. Maintain radio silence. Here is your new flight plan. You will land at [name] military air base." * The pilots turn off the transponders. The FAA weenies lose the information which identifies the airline, the flight number, and the altitude of the planes. Of course the planes can still be seen on conventional radar, but the planes are just nameless blips now. * What did the radar show of the planes' flight paths? We'll never see the real records, for sure. But in the spy movies, when the spy wants to lose a tail, he gets a double to lead the tail one way while the spy goes the other. If I were designing Operation 911, I'd do that: As each of the original jets is flying, another jet is sent to fly just above or below it, at the same latitude and longitude. The blips of the two planes merge on the radar scopes. Alternately, a plane is sent to cross the flight path of the original plane. Again, the blips merge, just like the little bees you're watching outside the hive. The original planes proceed to the military airfield and air traffic control is thoroughly confused, watching the wrong blips ... That's probably close to the way it was managed. Like I say, we'll never see the radar records so we won't know exactly. [ For the alleged flight paths of the four jets, see [ http://www.Public-Action.com/911/4flights.html [ For names and locations of military airfields in the US, try [ http://www.globemaster.de/bases.html [ You can search for a listing of bases in 9-11 related states by using the search engine.] * A small remote controlled commuter jet filled with incendiaries/explosives -- a cruise missile, if you like -- is flown into the first WTC tower. That's the plane the first NBC eyewitness saw. * The remote controlled "Pseudo Flight 175," decked out to look like a United airlines passenger jet, is sent aloft and flown by remote control - without passengers -- and crashed into the second tower. Beautiful! Everyone has pictures of that. Why did Pseudo Flight 175 almost miss the second tower? Because the remote operators were used to smaller, more maneuverable craft, not a big stubborn passenger jet. The operators brought the jet in on a tight circle and almost blew it because those jets do hairpin turns like the Queen Mary. They brought it in too fast and too close to do the job right and just hit the corner of the tower. * Then another remote controlled commuter jet filled with incendiaries/explosives -- a cruise missile if you like -- hits the Pentagon, in the name of Flight 77. * Eyewitnesses are a dime a dozen. Trusted media whores "witness" the Pentagon hit and claim it was an American Airlines Boeing 757, Flight 77. Reporters lie better than lawyers. * Meanwhile, the passengers from Flights 11, 175, and 77, now at the military airfield, are loaded onto Flight 93. If you've put some of your own agents aboard, they stay on the ground, of course. * Flight 93 is taken aloft. * Flight 93 is shot down or bombed -- makes no difference which. Main deal is to destroy that human meat without questions. Easiest way to dispose of 15,000 lbs. of human flesh, and nobody gets a headline if they find a foot in their front garden. No mass graves will ever be discovered, either. * The trail is further confused by issuing reports that Flight 77 was actually headed towards the White House but changed its course. * The trail is further confused by having The Washington Post wax lyrical about the flying skills of non-existent pilots on a non-existence plane (Flight 77). * The trail is further confused with conflicting reports and artificial catfight issues, such as -- did The Presidential Shrub really see the first tower hit on TV while he was waiting to read the story about the pet goat ... So we know the Boeing that used to be Flight 93 was blown up. The other three original Boeings (Flights 11, 175, 77) still exist somewhere, unless they were cut up for scrap. The passengers and crews of Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93 died in an airplane crash, just like the newspapers said. Only for most of them, it was the wrong crash. But that's as close to the truth as the news media likes to get anyway, so it works. WHY DO IT THAT WAY? So there you have it. Not four planes. More than four. |
