A former CIA and civilian pilot has sworn an affidavit, stating that no planes flew into the Twin Towers as it would have been physically impossible.
John Lear, the son of Learjet inventor, Bill Lear, has given his expert evidence that it would have been physically impossible for Boeing 767s, like Flights AA11 and UA175 to have hit the Twin Towers on 9/11, particularly when flown by inexperienced pilots:
‘No Boeing 767 airliners hit the Twin Towers as fraudulently alleged by the government, media, NIST and its contractors’, he stated in the affidavit.
‘Such crashes did not occur because they are physically impossible as depicted, for the following reasons: in the case of UAL 175 going into the south tower, a real Boeing 767 would have begun 'telescoping' when the nose hit the 14 inch steel columns which are 39 inches on center.
‘The vertical and horizontal tail would have instantaneously separated from the aircraft, hit the steel box columns and fallen to the ground.
‘The engines when impacting the steel columns would havemaintained their general shape and either fallen to the ground or been recovered in the debris of the collapsed building.
‘No Boeing 767 could attain a speed of 540 mph at 1000 feet above sea level ‘parasite drag doubles with velocity’ and ‘parasite power’ cubes with velocity.
‘The debris of the collapse should have contained massive sections of the Boeing 767, including 3 engine cores weighing approximately 9000 pounds apiece which could not have been hidden. Yet there is no evidence of any of these massive structural components from either 767 at the WTC. Such complete disappearance of 767s is impossible.
The affidavit, dated 28th January 2014 is part of a law suit being pursued by Morgan Reynolds in the United States District Court, Southern District, New York.
In March 2007, Reynolds, a former chief economist under the George W Bush administration filed a Request For Correction with the US National Institute of Science and Technology citing his belief that real commercial jets (Boeings) did not hit the WTC towers.
Although the 9/11 Truth movement initially rejected the ‘no-planes’ theory as too outlandish, after scientific and rational analysis, it has become a widely accepted explanation of the evidence collected.
Unlike any other form of statement, an affidavit becomes truth in law, if it is not rebutted. It will now be up to critics of the theory to present their evidence and analysis to rebut the statement point by point. If they do not – or cannot – then the US government will be obliged to admit that the account given by the 9/11 Commission is wrong.
The 65 year old retired airline captain and former CIA pilot – who has over 19,000 hours of flight time -- also drew attention to the inexperience of the pilots who allegedly flew the planes:
‘The alleged 'controlled' descent into New York on a relatively straight course by a novice pilot in unlikely in the extreme because of the difficulty of controlling heading, descent rate and descent speed within the parameters of 'controlled' flight.
‘It takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret the "EFIS" (Electronic Flight Instrument Display) display, with which none of the hijacker pilots would have been familiar or received training on, and use his controls, including the ailerons, rudder, elevators, spoilers and throttles to effect, control and maintain a descent.
http://neonnettle.com/news/211-ex-cia-pilot-gives-sworn-testimony-t...
Comment
what bugged me early on in my learning process was why no cameraman ever took his focus from the building, and onto the incoming plane? As we all know, planes are loud as fuck. That was a big reason why i kept digging into it.
Oh, remind me I've forgotten. lol
Cheers Gary!
seriously mentally compromised?
There are two sides to a coin and I have taken the time to look at both sides.
Take this as a suggestion. Learning more is what motivates me in my old age.
Cheers Spyda
Mr Best says it best! I remember watching "September Clues" back in like '08....good stuff there!
The building is made of 200,000 tons of steel, plus concrete...mesh like?, sure thing...
So dumb to NOT use planes when you *easily* *CAN*.
MISSILES no ???????
So your saying that the engines cut the steel, and then the wings, tail, oh and the landing gear, all arranged themselves to proceed through the two twelve foot holes (made by the engines) and out the other side. Nose first. Yea rite
I know it's hard to believe - but if a plane was to hit the sea, at the speeds they say, it would break up into thousands of pieces. FACT. But it's only water - same stuff you make a cup of coffee. So how can you tell me that an aluminium made plane can penetrate steel, without so much as a wing falling off, as I've said before bullshit. But a plane is doomed crashing into the sea or lake. It just doesn't make sense. Try September Clues. It's only another of those CT's, but you will be more enlightend about the biggest piece of bullshit that has ever come out of the USA. Bigger than JFK. And don't forget that GWB can read a book upside down. On that note, keep reading watching and learning. Cheers
"Destroying the New World Order"
THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE SITE!
© 2024 Created by truth. Powered by
You need to be a member of 12160 Social Network to add comments!
Join 12160 Social Network