Alex Jones Interviews Phil Jayhan on Flight 175 Appendage, Pod and other Anomalies - Great Interview!

Listen to this Interview between myself (Phil Jayhan) and Alex Jones on June 26th, 2004, yourself: Simply click the link below, download and listen http://www.letsroll911.org/phpwebsite/index.php?module=documents&JAS_DocumentManager_op=downloadFile&JAS_File_id=86 This is only my 2nd or 3rd interview I ever gave and am quite unpolished as can be heard. Today I am content with simply saying there are 2 pieces of equipment on this aircraft, that the pod is there and is anyones guess into what it is, yet it is there, is 2 3D objects, appendages which have been added to this plane, and clearly shouldn't be there. Whether it is a bomb on the port wing is irrelevant. I also make the mistake of saying that it's the first time in history that steel skyscrapers have fallen because of fire alone. And it wasn't fire alone, it was plane damage & fire, along with the bombs in the buildings, as well as the extra goodies on what they claim was Flight 175. I also at that time, wasn't aware the Don DeGrand Pre was likely work for the CIA or the DIA. And here misinformed people about what Colonel Don Degrand Pree shared with me, that Rick Gibney shot down Flight 93, which is still debated somewhat, but most now agree there was no plane is Shanskville. My voice is literally shot from street preaching the Truth of 911 on the streets of Washington DC as well as Manhattan New York in the Summer of 2004. (Around June 26th, 2004) As far as I know, while everyone else was running with Alexs story about the Happy Hooligans and my addition to it with Gibneys name as being the pilot who shot it down, I discovered through simple photo proof that no plane was shot down, and that no plane crashed. No plane. And as far as I know was the very first person the finally break through the disinfo on flight 93 and publish the story. Below are some quotes from Alex Jones during the interview, which everyone should click and at least listen to. "Alex Jones: it is Undeniable..." (The pod or 'Blister' on the bottom of the aircraft, as he called it) Alex Jones Interview, June 26th, 2004 "He says it "Cleary is there..." (Pod, Bulge on Flight 175) Alex Jones Interview, June 26th, 2004 "Cleary there is a Flash on the building before the plane hits..." (Speaking of what I believe is the missile punch-through) Alex Jones Interview, June 26th, 2004 "It's Certainly something spraying out of the aircraft..." (What I think is the Jet Fuel being Sprayed out) Alex Jones Interview, June 26th, 2004 "That can't be missed" (Pod on the bottom of Aircraft) Alex Jones Interview, June 26th, 2004 "You clearly see a Flash under this, it looks like a cruise missile pod....And thats what the cruise missile pods, the external ones look like on larger jet aircraft" "You've got this thing affixed...There is a flash at the back, then you see something shoot out, clearly, and then an impact in front of the plane" "And that clearly is on there." Under this, looks like a "Cruise Missile pod" then you see something shoot out." Alex Jones Interview, June 26th, 2004

Flight 175. Too Hot to Handle - The Photo that Shook Spain

Photo: CARMEN TAYLOR / CNN

Fuzzy? Touched up? Carmen Taylor's photo "has won several photojournalism awards".

Back in June 2003 La Vanguardia in Barcelona, Spain, published an investigative report on the plane that slammed into the South Tower. The report was a simple affair, it used the photo we see here on the left and wondered what these strange objects attached to the underside of the Flight 175 might be, and whether they were just an optical illusion. After a thorough digital image analysis by a Spanish university, the article came to the conclusion that the objects were three-dimensional in nature and could not have been caused by shadows or reflections. Full Stop.

The Letters to the Editor page in La Vanguardia was soon flooded with readers complaining that the article had not explained what these objects could be, but the journalists refused to comment, they were investigative journalists and it was not for them to speculate on unknowns. Besides, La Vanguardia was a respectable, conservative newspaper with a hundred-year-old tradition to protect and they weren't about to get burnt with this Hot Potato, thank you very much.

Surprisingly, despite all the film taken that day before so many eye witnesses, compared to the evidence we have on the other flights, very little is known about Flight 175. Which is why, here in the Kasbah, we thought it was very important to establish Eduardo Martín de Pozuelo and Xavier Mas de Xaxàs' article as a reliable reference and put it into English as soon as possible. This we did. However, not having "a hundred-year-old tradition to protect" we decided to delve a little deeper into the subject.

The digital analysis done by a Spanish university came to the conclusion that what we see here was no mere play of shadows as the plane banks into the South Tower, but physical objects. Obviously, no known commercial airport would have cleared a plane looking like this for take off. Not so obvious, perhaps, is fact that you don't just bolt on a few objects to the exterior of a plane and happily fly off again--aerodynamic drag alone would shear off any external appendages (even before reaching 500 mph) leaving behind a gaping hole. Commercial airliners are built as light as possible and consist of a structural airframe covered by a "soft" metallic skin. Before attaching anything to the outside of an airliner you would have to reinforce the interior with beams and mountings added to the airframe, producing what are known as "hard points" in military planes, where external munitions, missiles and extra fuel tanks can be safely hung. You don't modify an airliner like this in one morning.

See more photo analysis from Amics21.com here: http://www.amics21.com/911/flight175/second.html