Why is no one talking about the plane crash

Jim Stone 7/10/2013

Permalink

There are too many anomalies surrounding the San Francisco crash of the 777 from Hong Kong. First of all, that plane would have been the most likely one to have been carrying Snowden if it was supposed to have instead been en route to Mexico City before refueling and continuing it's flight. Whether or not they were is irrelevant from the perspective of an electronic hijacking, with the precedent of what happened with the Bolivian President's plane already. Taking hostile action against aircraft that "could" have Snowden aboard is going to be the status quo, and any crashes or disasters that were unwarranted will be written off as collateral damage. Let's look at the anomalies surrounding this crash.

1. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the airplane, and it appeared to be making a perfectly controlled approach that was way too low, and then suddenly just crashed.
2. The airport did not respond with emergency personnel. Instead, the Army responded to the crash, and as a result it took them over a half hour to arrive at the scene and do anything at all. People who were on the plane were blown away by the complete lack of any emergency response from the airport, which when it finally arrived happened AFTER everyone was off the plane and had walked away from the scene and done other things, such as aid people who had fallen out of the broken section and were laying injured out in the open. When the aircraft was on fire, it was AFTER everyone got their carry ons off the plane, and basically exited at their own pace. Flight attendants were throwing peanuts to the passengers in droves as they exited the plane. None of this made it into the mainstream press. Crazy stuff.
3. The FBI was there but offered no assistance to the injured passengers. Instead, the injured were quarantined at the airport until the FBI fully debriefed every single one of them. Why would the FBI not give a damn about the injured and debrief them immediately rather than in the hospital afterward, and why would the FBI even need to debrief anyone at all? This only happens when there is a huge government action going on, and they need to issue threats or payoffs to keep people's mouths shut.
4. The flight recorders were promply confiscated and flown to Washington DC, before anyone from Hong Kong, the people who owned the plane, had a chance to check anything. Though the FAA could be expected to take the flight recorders into their posession, I am sure we are, as a result of them being taken by the most lying government in world history, going to get an accurate answer for what they really recorded. Cool.
5. There were no weather anomalies AT ALL that could have caused the crash. The automated warning which is supposed to tell the pilots to pull up when an approach is bad happened three seconds before the plane hit the ground. This is impossible, for the last 40 years or so these warning systems have been in all commercial aircraft and they work great. Pilots typically get at least a 45 second warning if an approach is not going right, why did this aircraft give the warning only 3 seconds before impact? I think I have an answer. If the plane was remote hijacked it is entirely possible that the warning to pull up was instead given to the remote hijacker, and when he figured he could not recover the approach he returned control to the pilots . . . . . too late. Witnesses on the ground said the plane went to full throttle immediately before impact.
The media was quick to blame the pilots as being inexperienced and "in training" but I'd like to pop the big question - how does being in "training" cause an automated system to give an approach warning WAY TOO LATE? The ILS system at the airport which assists pilots during foggy weather while they are making blind approaches was offline for maintenance, but with the weather being perfect it was not needed at all. The approach warning that failed is just part of the airplane, which operates completely independent of any system on the ground and observes it's environment and calculates where and how the plane is going to touch down based on sensor inputs. Even 1970's vintage soviet Migs had systems of this type which functioned perfectly, and I find the failure of this system in a state of the art high class American plane to be highly suspicious. It had to have been disabled and that could have easily happened if the plane was remotely hijacked.
My conclusion?
The departure airport location, the failure of the arrival airport emergency response, the presence of the army, the debriefing by the FBI, the failure of the aircraft's own approach warning system, and the immediate confiscation of the flight recorders add up to what I think is the greatest probability - that aircraft was not supposed to land in San Francisco AT ALL, it was probably supposed to land in Mexico City, got remote hijacked because they thought it might have Snowden en route to Venezuela, was flown by a desk bound idiot who could run Microsoft flight simulator really well, and crashed. The supporting stories about the passengers are all B.S., if they were true why would the FBI have to debrief everyone?
Fat chance we will get the truth in all of this from the scamming ziopress, perhaps I am wrong with this assessment but seriously, as far as what is "official" goes, things really don't add up.

I got booted off the air mid program by Jeff Rense

Jim Stone 7/9/2013

Permalink

While on the air with Mike Harris today, Rense pulled the plug mid program. This is another open letter to Jeff Rense

You yourself had the Fukushima report posted for half a day before pulling it, who put pressure on you to do so? The topic was not Fukushima, it was the NSA, which I am one of the top, if not THE top media presense that can speak about this topic accurately. Are you sure pulling the plug was a good idea? Let's move on to the root of the issue -
Either someone put pressure on you to keep me off the air because I did a flawless investigation of Fukushima including interviewing the lead engineer who designed reactor 3, an investigation which also pegged the quake, tsunami, and Fuku disaster on Isreal beyond all doubt, or you are afraid of nuclear power and are against it like a religion. If you really believe the quake in Japan was natural, just look at the pictures of the totally undamaged cities and towns as the tsunami rolls in if you do not "get it".

This little tiff is counter productive

I would also like to see the American nuclear industry shut down, but for a REAL reason. Nothing that hits your site regarding nuclear topics has any accuracy at all. The real reason why the American nuclear industry needs to be shut down is because initially, when all the nuclear facilities were designed and installed, they were done so with the calculation that the nuclear fuel cycle would be successfully closed (as the Fuku 3 engineer put it, "closing the nuclear loop"), where when fuel could not be run in a boiling water reactor anymore because it's characteristics changed too much, it could, without reprocessing and in the same rods, be loaded directly into a different type of reactor and used as fresh fuel. When the complimentary reactor was done with the fuel it could be loaded straight back into the boiling water reactor and run as new.

After designing Fukushima, this engineer became the lead engineer in this project, and they succeeded in closing the nuclear fuel cycle in 1976. They were going to go operational with this technology in ALL the nuclear facilities as was originally planned when they were built, to prevent an enormous buildup of "spent" fuel that really was not spent at all. The fuel in American power facilities is good for approximately 20 cycles using this technology, and with the technology banned it is good for only ONE. This forced the nuclear industry to keep storing fuel in facilities that were only designed to handle a delay of this technology of 15 years. The technology was delivered in three years, and for no good reason at all Carter banned it via executive order.
I questioned this engineer over the safety of the system, and he said there was never any problem at all, and it was all political mind games to get it banned. He lamented the waste of fuel, but I saw things differently. Unlike this engineer, I knew the Federal Government has long been the enemy of the American people, and I saw the banning of the technology as an act of war. Now we have facilities with 40X the spent fuel they were supposed to have sitting all over America just waiting for the right sequence of problems to cause a huge disaster. If ANYTHING goes wrong and one of those fuel caches catches fire, ANYTHING, like a smart bomb, a Stuxnet attack, or a nuclear war, it's bye bye and every affected nuclear facility is going to become a nation destroying pit of hell. AND IT WAS DONE ON PURPOSE.
THAT is the real story Rense, and I suggest you get with it. Unlike what you believe I am not pro nuclear, certainly NOT within the reality of a sabotaged system such as what America has now. The nuclear industry has been weaponized. THAT is what you should be talking about.
Immediately after getting booted off the air, the internet connection was also cut and my cell modem has since been prevented from accessing the system, even at multiple different locations. It took me a little over two hours to find a wifi hotspot where I was not banned. I know Rense would not have done that, someone else did. So hitting the Rense audience is obviously strictly forbidden by the powers that be. When I looked over what Mike Harris normally covers, he is obviously on our side. If you are as well Rense, you need to grow a pair - this silly divide is downright ridiculous and ultimately counterproductive.
Jim Stone

Snowden may be dead or captured

Permalink

Jim Stone, 7/9/13
I am starting to believe Snowden is dead or captured now. And I think that flight from HK was never supposed to land in the U.S. and got remote hijacked and remote flown to a screwed up landing here. That would explain the FBI briefing everyone, and everyone being told to stay on the plane after it crashed when even for minor non crash events everyone immediately bails out. It would also explain why the airport did not respond to the crash, the military did.
This also would explain why the moment that crash happened all these silly Snowden rats on the aliens and other B.S. stories came out, to bury his credibility now that he cannot speak up.
And if you are among those who think Snowden could not have flown anywhere or gone anywhere without getting shot down and therefore did not fly from China to Russia without being some sort of psy op, you should be aware of the fact that it is not easy to play Spy vs. Spy games in foreign nations, especially those that have nukes. Everything takes planning so you do not get caught messing around, and with Snowden on the move at that time, plots which take weeks to plan and carry out without any chance of getting caught cannot happen. Secrecy is everything, and because Snowden kept moving he became a very hard target.
If Snowden was on that San Francisco crash, that crash happened simply because he boarded a plane that had enough range and fuel to be remote hijacked and flown there. Once he boarded a plane that could make it, there were no plans needed other than to hijack the plane and fly it to the U.S. and the crash was probably remote pilot error.
The FBI interviewing everyone on that plane is very suspicious, they were probably all paid to keep their mouths shut and then placed under additional threat. And the military responding instead of the airport is double whammy stupid obvious something other than a crash was going on there. And consider the fact that any stories about what the passengers came to America for, and what the plane's real destination was came through a media that is far worse than a bag of lies. If we hear nothing more from Snowden, I am calling it - he was on that plane and America hijacked and crashed it.
Ultimately I cannot tell you Snowden was on that plane. I don't know that. But I will say one thing - how the crash happened, the fact that the FED immediately confiscated the flight recorders, the fact that the FBI was on scene immediately and interviewed everyone, bleeding or not before they left the airport, the fact that the military responded and the air port did not until over 45 minutes later, the fact that everyone was told to stay on the plane even as it was starting to burn when the rule is you immediately bail out even if the plane lands perfectly safely and there was only a problem report, and other anomalies including how the Snowden UFO stories started after the crash, makes me think Snowden may well have been on that plane and now they are going to try to peg his credibility into the ground because he can no longer speak up to stop it.
I certainly hope he pops up somewhere in Latin America. I am not betting he will.

http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/