Last summer I was at a family wedding and brother Rod was doing his magic show that evening. Not far into the show a child four seats away said, “That’s not magic, that’s a trick.”
Exactly. Same thing with the airplane show the government put on September 11, 2001. I have been trying to figure out how these manipulators did the WTC 2 trick for over a year now and I think I have figured it out.
Because of the element of surprise, the WTC 1 hoax at 8:46 a.m. did not have to be very good but WTC 2 at 9:03 a.m. had to be good because so many were watching and listening. This is where the criminals used considerable psy-op “magic.”
The analytical problem is how to reconcile two things: physical impossibility with credible eyewitness testimony. Of course the conventional government/media story is impossible: no aluminum airliner could crash into the towers, crumple not one bit and disappear. Yet we have the fact that many witnesses swear they saw such a magic act that morning, especially the alleged crash at the south tower.
Caution is in order, of course, since physical evidence trumps eyewitness reports and testimony in lower Manhattan was all over the place. A damning example of conflicting testimony and central mind control at work was ABC News anchors overruling their reporter on scene at WTC who never heard or saw a plane coming into the south tower.
Reporter: “…Oh my God.”
Anchor Charles Gibson: “That looks like a second plane has just hit…
R: “I did not see a plane go in. That, that just exploded. I…”
A: “We just saw another plane coming in from the side.”
R: “You did? That was out my view.”
A: “You could see the plane come in just from the righthand side of the screen…”
Marcus Icke considered 41 eyewitness reports from the south tower who claim to have seen an aircraft collide with WTC 2. Many were interviewed that day (more reliable) while others were interviewed later. No one reported seeing a Boeing 767-200 series with United Airlines livery crashing into the tower, an extremely strict standard, but all seemed to report some type of aircraft crashing into the tower. Many reported an aircraft vanished inside the tower. Since this is physically impossible for a real plane, these witnesses were lying or deluded. Some lied (I have my nominees) and some may have been duped. A delusion would be the result of some kind of trickery that remains hidden from researchers. The range of possibilities runs from an airplane fly-by of some kind coordinated with timed explosions inside the tower to David Copperfield on scene. No kidding. He has “disappeared a train” and the Statute of Liberty so maybe he put his mind to work on “disappearing a Big Boeing.”
More extensive analysis of witness testimony is certainly welcome, but commentators at this stage cannot simply point to a tower of babel and assert, “See, many witnesses saw Big Boeings crash into the tower.” Whatever the reliability of individual eyewitnesses may be, testimony contrary to Newtonian laws of motion is worth less than zero.
A promising solution to our dilemma is that the military may have cloaking or stealth technology that allows it to temporarily “disappear” a plane from optical view. Essentially, there would be two ways to turn a plane to “blue sky” at the touch of a button, making the plane invisible to those on the ground and perhaps those at higher levels:
1. flexible liquid crystal display screens on the aircraft itself that display the background image (cloudless blue sky)
2. external sources projecting a background image in so-called stereoscopic form to a camouflaged aircraft covered by a retro reflector.
It would be easier to turn a plane “invisible” on a beautiful, cloudless day and I believe that is why they chose a day like September 11. It was perfect. If the plane had no stealth anti-radar technology, however, the plane would be visible on radar and FAA and military radar records will be forever sealed.
Here is some insight into the possible technology they used:
“Lockheed’s legendary ‘Skunk Works’ experimental arm is known to be developing new electro-chromic materials. Their aim is to create camouflage panels which can change color or tint when subjected to an electrical charge. Other engineers like Boeing and Northrop, are also working on similar stealth technologies.
“One of these systems is the “electrochromic polymer” that is being developed at the University of Florida. These thin sheets cover the aircraft’s skin and sense the hue, color and brightness of the surrounding sky and ground. The image received is then projected onto the aircraft’s opposite side. When charged to a certain voltage, these panels undergo color change. Another similar ‘skin’ is being tested at the top-secret Groom Lake facility at Area 51 in Nevada. It is reputed to be composed of an “electro-magnetically conductive polyaniline-based radar-absorbent composite material.” The system also utilizes photo-sensitive receptors all over the plane that scan the surrounding area, subsequently the data is interpreted by an onboard computer which outputs it much like a computer screen making the aircraft virtually invisible to site.”
The technology was publicly available in 2003, so it is possible the military had it earlier. Such a plane might have taken off from Stewart Air base in Newburgh, NY, the alleged crossover point of the flight paths of Flights 11 and 175. The soon-to-turn-invisible plane would blend in with a radar inject and become the new radar blip. The aircraft could have been remote controlled to fly by the south tower on its east side or piloted by a human. The plane would time its “switch to invisibility” at the south tower with nearly simultaneous ignition of internal charges in the tower. It would all happen within the space of two seconds, stunning everyone and convincing many that they just saw a crash at the tower.
The spectacular fireball on the east side of the south tower went off too fast to be natural and did not burn at the so-called impact hole where oxygen and fuel would be abundant, so it was a trick. The fireball was an “Independence Day” terror event on its own but also performed the role of being a spectacular distraction to further hide the fly by. The plane’s engines presumably would have been quieted to enhance the realism of the feigned crash, perhaps essentially gliding for moments. It then headed out to sea for destruction if remote controlled or more likely it landed at a secret base because it would have been expensive “one-off” technology.
This entire hypothesis, of course, may prove barren but deserves further investigation, especially since it would reconcile impossible crash physics with eyewitness testimony to the contrary. Please people, do not call this a “hologram” theory! I do not believe there is technology to project a realistic 3D high-speed image in broad daylight, as hypothesized by hologram speculation . Instead I am proposing that a real airplane suddenly turned sky blue on its underside, thereby “disappearing” from view, and maybe even simultaneously reflecting lower Manhattan on its topside to fool people at higher elevations.
Here is more food for thought: the same chameleon plane could have appeared at all three events: 9:03a at WTC 2, 9:32-9:37a at the Pentagon, and 10:06a at Shanksville, PA. In truth, the perps only needed the disappearing plane trick at WTC 2 but it is a promising possibility for Shanksville too. The Pentagon event did not really need an airliner but the single plane theory proposed this month as a parody of the JFK single-bullet theory actually might make sense! The same disappearing act by the same secret plane could have been used at all three locations! We shall see if future work bears any of this out.
Visits to my site!
Copyright Morgan Reynolds 2006+ unless otherwise specified. Distribution of and linking to the articles on this website is strongly encouraged, as long as the content is not manipulated or distorted in anyway.