9/11 — 30 May 2014
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

No Planes on 911 Isn’t a Theory – It’s a Fact

Updated, May 31, 2014, again, June 1, 2:00 a.m., CST

Must See: 9/11 and flight 175

There were no plane crashes on 911. Just like the Malaysian 777 crash hoax, on 911 the acclaimed planes never even took off.

What is seen, here, is not new to many investigators. Even so, it is worth reviewing.

Seen in the clip are two proof demonstrating that what was seen was merely artificial. In other words, the plane crashes into the buildings were merely a media spoof, a videographic fabrication.

What is seen here is the first ‘plane’ penetrating the building without resistance, a physical impossibility. It must be recalled that these were steel-framed, concrete-reinforced buildings bearing powerful, sturdy beams of the finest Japanese-produced tempered steel, these steel supports being over 12-inches thick.

The video depicts a plane, after slicing through the building with ease, as exploding: inside the building, not against it, as would be expected.

According to the video page:

Next..is something no one could possibly argue with. Shown in slow motion the plane’s (actually, the image of a plane) wing, before contacting the building, seems to pass behind a building that is quite far in the background of the two towers. It’s clear that the mishap was the result of a computer graphics glitch that happened during the creation process.



The crashes of planes into the towers are, therefore, hoaxes. Wretched Zionist operatives created this imagery through CGI and other methods in their computer labs, then uploaded the videos to the Internet and played the fakes on the national networks.

The buildings were taken down by bombs, not planes. The henchmen who set and then detonated those bombs were rabid, extremist Israeli Jews

There were no other devices used. This was a controlled demolition perpetrated by the arch-Zionist cabal led by the lying, cheating American-based Zionist trillionaire, David Rockefeller.

The image analysis is, ultimately, irrelevant. It’s just hoax video production. The real images, the photographs on the ground, the ones not corrupted by Photoshop, tell all. In this respect the David Handschuh photo is the ultimate proof:

Handschuh was at the base of the building when it was detonated. He caught that detonation at the split second after it occurred. Even so, does anyone see a plane in that image or any components of such a plane?
That detonation shows the lateral movement of matter from inside out. This proves that the explosion was the result of set charges placed in the building. The lateral movement of material from inside the building out is hard proof against any claim of a real plane strike, which, as a result of the laws of physics, could never creation such massive motion in the opposite direction.
Look carefully at the explosion. the fire and smoke are exploding in almost a 90-degree angle to the building, straight out, never in.
Yet, there is another hard proof of the plane crash hoax. Look at the Handschuh image closely. There is a detonation on the opposite side, including one that appears to be at a lower level than the purported plane crash site.
Here is the image lightened up with tint added:
Clearly, there is a simultaneous detonation occurring on the opposite side, possibly at the same level and also at a lower level.
Through his minions Larry Silverstein and Frank Lowy, among others, the filthy Zionist mole David Rockefeller blew up his own buildings. To achieve the actual setting of charges (and their detonation) in secrecy he used foreign agents, that is IDF demolition moles, from the Israeli entity as his proxies.

reposted from : http://tellmenow.com/2014/05/video-proof-showing-no-planes-hit-the-wtc-on-911/


About Author


(176) Readers Comments

  1. There is only one other explanation, other than the official version and that is if detonators had been placed in strategic positions within the buildings, timed to explode when or seconds before the planes hit.
    No planes is ****. The passengers all had families. THEY know the planes were real.
    However, a similar explanation to the OKC Bombing, I
    believe is true.
    Timothy McVeigh’s Ryder truck full of racing fuel and **** could not have caused the massive damage.Detonators must have been placed inside. McVeigh was a patsy who would not have been told the big picture. Every time he was seen on TV he looked like one of the Walking Dead; drugged, no doubt, and his execution; he dropped his appeals or was threatened into dropping them, came conveniently on June 11th, 2001; 3 months to the day before 9/11. Wouldn’t want that elephant in the room still there on September 11th.
    It doesn’t mean 9/11 was an inside job, of course, there’s that possibility, but al-Qaeda could have placed detonators inside the WTC. The Pentagon is more of a problem, but with much less damage, there’s always someone who would do it for the money!
    But no planes still equals no brains!

  2. This is totally FAKE NEWS! Everybody with access to the internet can use google maps can search for the whitehall building in NY, switch to 3D view, and you see that the building which should be behind WTC according the video, is just behind the whitehall building. So its proofed FAKE!

    • Treu, its the 21 West Street Building, which is just behind The Whitehall Building. Its not far behind the WTC! Proofed Fakenews!

  3. I don’t buy the ‘no plane’ theories anymore. For a week I really was into this idea.

    It’s a partly inside job with planes. Osama Bin Laden, terrorists, controlled demolition… yes

    No planes: NO.

    ONE of the reasons:

    Many witnesses have actually seen planes. And they are not at all ‘crisis actors’.

    Some videos are really appealing and showing from one angle the author seems right, but it is really focused to get his point. And to make himself feel important, true discoverer and make money from You Tube views.

    • Can you give an example of a witness who saw a plane and is not a crisis actor?

  4. What happened to the passengers?

    • What passengers?

  5. I have my doubts about the planes, but haven’t looked into enough evidence one way or another. Therefore im not gonna argue that case. The biggest subject that I have really looked into,( both for and against the both sides), is what was left at the bottom after the towers collapsed. According to police, firemen, emts, and others at the scene, the tepuratures( under street level and with debris from the whole tower) were extremely high. Glowing puddles of molten steel, molten rock and concrete, were witnessed by the people at ground zero. There are pictures of glowing steel beams being pulled from the wreckage. Not to mention the blocks of concrete and steel that were together into one big rock so to say. Pictures from space showed these hot spots under each of the demolished buildings. There are pictures of a completely melted crater of bed rock. The temperatures needed to do this are much, much higher than fires burning with jetfuel, office furnishings, kerosine, deisel all put together.A fire, falling all those stories being covered with tons of concrete and “dust” somehow was still burning over 3 thousand degrees months after the collapse is imposible. Im not exactly sure of the specific high temperatures there but am sure they were very high. The story now is that the wtc buildings were build over ice age created craters. This is supposed to explain the huge crater of evaporated bedrock. Look it up and take a look at these pictures. The only way to create vaporized rock, pools of molten steel, concrete. Ect, and to turn the majority of a huge skyscraper to dust(steel and all) is exactly what was proposed as a demolition scheme for the buildings when it was built, a nuclear demolition. Look into it. It seems extreme, but it is true. Wtc 1,2 and 7 were taken down from underground nuclear demolition.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *