Sunday, October 01, 2006

Evidence No Planes Hit WTC

It is interesting to note that in spite of the fact that cameras from every US media corporation were on the scene for the second event at the WTC, there appears to have been NO LIVE BROADCAST of the alleged second impact.
The only feed being broadcast on every network was coming from the WABC helicopter and in fact only shows a silhouette of a plane disappear behind the North tower and a fire ball appear at the other side. All the alleged "impact" videos came later. That certainly would allow time for these to be manufactured using 3D modeling of an aircraft superimposed on real footage of the explosions.

There is a CNN interview by Dave Summers with Carol Hudson who claims to have been on an American Airlines commuter flight from New York to Cleveland that flew very close to the WTC and witnessed the first impact. "It was right outside my window and I'll never forget it." Is the plane seen on the Naudet's fake video? Was that a fake news item to discredit any real witnesses who saw a light plane fly very near the WTC but not hit it? The first news reports were that a light plane flew into the North tower. The official story was established within minutes that a plane had flown into the North tower and this story was reinforced 15mins later as most people watched what they believed to be live video of a second plane flying into the WTC. One archive source of the live broadcasts from Fox and CNN can be downloaded at (thanks to PerpetualYnquisitive for that link)

By the time clearer video of the alleged events became available it was to follow the "shock and awe" of people jumping (or being thrown) out of the towers and the towers themselves disappearing into a cloud of dust with people inside. No doubt calculated to be sufficient trauma to erase any lingering questions anyone may have had over whether or not planes really hit the towers. It had to be true because now the towers were gone!

Building debri blown outwards from impact points Looking at the images from the first few seconds after the alleged impacts it is clear that the building exteria has been blown out and raining down from not only the alleged exit points but also the entrance. The planes are supposed to have had so much momentum that the ripped straight the steel exterior and even out the otherside. With conservation of momentum the impact debri should be blown inward not outward. 911 was also a tragic day for the laws of physics. This image is from the Naudet video of the North Tower.

The same type of build debri can be seen raining from the South towers alleged impact point in CNN's DVD, America Remembers.

It would be crazy to fly planes into buildings wired with high explosives That would risk blowing everything (no pun intended). Even if the impact didn't prematurely detonate any demolition charges, it would cause unpredictable structural damage and risk disabling an unknown number of preset charges, making a "controlled" demolition impossible. There also seems to have been a plan to trap the occupants of the upper floors as no effort was made to rescue anyone from the roof. The upper floors were occupied by banking and financial institutions. If some of these people were being targeted, flying planes into the towers would have been too unpredictable for the criminal gang. And if they really did have rogue aircraft flying around then there is every likelyhood they'd have been located, intercepted and shot down by the airforce. Now if there are no planes, there is nothing see on radars, nothing to intercept and almost nothing to go wrong.

Well almost nothing to go wrong. With so many camera angles to deal with from different sources, there is always a chance that the techs involved in overlaying the plane image might slip up, get the plane on the wrong approach angle or overshoot. Seems that may be what has happened. A collection of possible blunders are highlighted on this video


Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can speculate about the Pentagon affair because in the poor images we have been shown we can't see a commercial airplane.

Everybody is perfectly aware images and video recordings can be doctored, no doubt about it. I agree we can be easily deceived by the media, however, in my opinion you can't propose the "no planes theory" because you're denying something that was seen in situ by the people in New York and by millions of people all over the world. We know many people belive what the media says and they believe it more strongly if it's backed with images. It's a no-win situation.

The "NO PLANES THEORY" seems THE LAST STRAW IN THE 9/11 TRUTH MOVEMENT CONTROLLED DEMOLITION AND DEFAMATION. In the eyes of general public it will definitely frame and chain all 9/11 skepticsm to the loony-nut domain. Checkmate.

There's no way to comprehend how this blog can be puzzled about the Break for News article "Photo Faking the WTC" (article I don't agree with) and accept the no planes theory which is 10 times more unplausible.

Thursday, April 19, 2007 10:53:00 AM  
Blogger War On Suckers said...

No Planes = No hijackers
No Planes = No jet fuel
No Planes = No plane swaps
No Planes = No stand down orders
No Planes = Corporate Media complicity
No Planes = Controlled demolition
No Planes = Naudet Brothers were part of the operation
No Planes = Larry Silverstein didn't just get lucky

As for the 911 "Truth" Movement, where were any of the so called truthers when Larry Silverstein was being cheered as a hero at the opening of the new WTC-7 building infront of the world media one year ago?

As for witnesses. Are you referring to the surprising number of CNN and Fox management personal that just happened to see the alleged first and second planes hit the towers. As for the "millions of people all over the world", they saw and heard exactly what they were supposed to and nothing more.

Saturday, May 12, 2007 10:42:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home