| 9-11 - LOOKING GLASS NEWS | |
|
Flying a Plane Into the World Trade Center? |
|
|
by Jesse TVNewsLies.org Entered into the database on Wednesday, June 14th, 2006 @ 16:30:40 MST |
|
Here is a new, and so far unasked question about the badly debunked
official explanation of the events of September 11th 2001. If you spend years
planning a spectacular attack on the World Trade Center in New York City, and
you are a less than adequate pilot, and you wanted to ensure the attack would
be completed without giving the U.S. air defense apparatus the chance to follow
their normal procedures and intercept your plane, why would you choose to fly
out of Boston? Why would you choose to risk getting lost or stopped as you try
to fly 190 miles to your target when you can hijack a plane from one of three
airports within sight of the target? There are three airports that would enable a pilot or a hijacker to have visual
contact with the World Trade Center within a minute or two of takeoff. With
all the planning these so called hijackers must have made, how stupid would
they have to have been to travel to Boston in order to attack NY? We have been
told that the so-called hijackers were barely able to pilot even simple two
seater aircraft, but we are supposed to believe that they felt confident enough
to navigate to NY from Boston without the help of ground control. Are we to
believe that i they would not have flown out an airport from which they had
constant visual contact with their target? Also keep in mind that planes taking
off from these NY area airports would have more fuel remaining in their tanks
when they made contact. They would not have to burn off 45 minutes worth of
destructive explosive fuel. Here is why they had to fly out of Boston: it is because the real planes had
to be switched with the remote controlled modified 737s that actually impacted
the towers. Yes, planes did hit the towers and the Pentagon, but not the planes
that we have been told. I am convinced based on the current body of evidence,
that the planes that hit the towers were 737s flown by remote control and that
a Skywarrior hit the Pentagon. Where are the other planes? Skeptics would disqualify this commentary by saying
something stupid like “well, where are the real planes then?” I’ll
tell you where the real planes are, they are destroyed and the people on board
were murdered. They were sacrificed “for the good of the nation.”
At least that is the reason for their sacrifice we would hear from a Machiavellian
leader who follows such illogic. I will ask that you look into that particular
philosophy so that you understand what I mean. We already know that the hawks
in the Bush administration are Machiavellian in their thinking; we hear that
on a regular basis from Chris Matthews on MSNBC. The only problem is that Matthews
never explains what that means. In a nutshell that means that the hawks in the
White House will lie, cheat, deceive and even kill for the overall good of their
mission. These are the same people that lose no sleep about the almost 3000
Americans that they sent to be killed in Iraq as part of this same mission.
These people have no problem sacrificing others in order to achieve their mission.
They did it with Iraq and they did it on 9/11. Stop telling me that they would
never do that because they already did! When I teach people how to watch or interpret news I tell them to ask themselves
three very important questions when they being told something by the lying bastards
in the media: 1. Does this information make sense to you? 2. Does this information make sense to you? 3. Does this information make sense to you? Once again, I ask you: would hijackers planning on attacking New York City,
a city with 3 airports within direct eyesight of the intended target, choose
to launch their attack from 190 miles away when they could have launched their
attack from a distance of less than 15 miles? We are told that these ‘hijackers’
were such geniuses that they could deceive the most sophisticated air defense
system in history. After spending all that time and resources to plan an attack
of that scale why would minimally trained pilots with no airliner experience
make such a senseless choice Think about it! _________________________________
Read from Looking Glass News The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training The Destruction of the World Trade Center 9-11: Animation showing military precision of flight paths We Have Some Holes in the Plane Stories Why NORAD Interceptors Couldn't Catch Those 911 Boeings All "9-11" News Articles |
|