I started this blog for one reason: to make what I discovered during my research available to the general public.
If this is your first visit to this site, be prepared to have your sense of reality altered. After you review the information I have to present, you will know – as I do – that no planes crashed anywhere on September 11, 2001.
No planes crashed anywhere on September 11th. It’s a fact.
Exhibit A
Being an engineer, all I needed was a nudge to see the truth. If a picture is worth a thousand words, then this was the picture that started it for me:
Half in, half out… can I get a damage report? Let’s see… the plane appears to be fine – same goes for the tower. Notice how there’s no hole in the tower between the engines and the fuselage. This picture is representative of a pixel crash, not a plane crash.
Like I said, this picture was the “nudge” that did it for ME. As an engineer, that’s what got me thinking about what would really happen if a plane were to actually strike the World Trade Center. Even with equations, I wouldn’t be able to convince most people that this image can’t possibly be real. This is why I do my best to steer clear of that and appeal to people’s common sense.
Exhibit B
Speaking of common sense, consider these image sequences from CBS. The left hand side was first shown approximately 2 minutes after the live “event.” The right hand side was shown approximately 7 ½ minutes after the live “event.”
To save space, I’ve lined up every 12th frame (0.4 seconds) starting 4 seconds prior to a breach of the north face of WTC2: 
If you can’t see what I see, let me help. Look at only the top frame set: 
Now, imagine you’re holding the camera for the screenshot on the left. How far left do you suppose you’d have to walk to be able to see the “plane” on the opposite side of the other tower, as shown on the right? Do you think 45 degrees would do the trick? Maybe 30? How about 20? Well, according to my calculations, the difference between these two camera angles is only about 6 degrees. Even Kevin Bacon should know that 6 degrees isn't THAT much.
Remember, these two frames represent the exact same moment in time. Given the speed of the plane and the distance of the camera, these would have to be two different planes for these videos to be real.
Did five planes crash on 9/11? Of course not. No planes crashed on 9/11.
Exhibit C
What could be more unbelievable than a 767 flying through the steel structure of WTC2 and coming out of the other side with a fully intact nosecone? How about the fact that there are no steel columns missing on the exit side?
Rock breaks scissors, scissors cut paper, paper covers rock – and aluminum TRANSCENDS steel?
Here we have yet another sequence of physically impossible images. Several videos clearly show a fully-intact “plane” exiting the north face of WTC2. For these images to be real, steel beams would have to be shorn, just as they seemingly were on the entry face. However, there are clearly no sections of steel beams missing from the picture on the right.
You’ve Been Programmed
These three exhibits are just the tip of the iceberg. Read on through the rest of my articles and you will learn even more about the most important fact regarding 9/11:
No planes crashed on 9/11.
If you still doubt that fact after seeing the first three exhibits, ask yourself why.
The answer twofold, yet simple: Repetition and Fear. The Repetition factor is obvious. The mainstream media replayed these fake videos relentlessly for weeks after 9/11. They interviewed what seemed like hundreds of people who eventually started to tell the same stories.
The Fear factor is not as obvious. I’m not talking about the fear of terrorism. I’m referring to social fear – the fear of holding an opinion contrary to popular opinion. Millions of people have simply chosen to “go with the flow” in the absence of any contradictory evidence. "The Earth is Flat - because everyone else thinks it is."
Luckily, you don't have to get on a ship and start sailing to prove them wrong. All you have to do is take a closer look.
Was it the videos that made you believe in planes, or the words that were being spoken in the background? Was it the overwhelming testimony of all the “eyewitnesses,” or was it your conversation with your co-workers?
You may ask: “What about all the eyewitnesses? Are you calling them ALL liars?”
As a matter of fact, I am.
There’s a plethora of them to choose from, and yes – they are ALL lying. As a matter of fact, even eyewitnesses that say they didn’t see the plane are lying about something. Perhaps more appropriately, they are “selling” lies. If they’re not selling planes, they’re selling confusion, which is just as effective by the time they pull together all of their “video evidence.”
When I began to look into the background of the “eyewitnesses” who “called in” to the various networks, I invariably found that even those people who appeared to be “common folk” were anything but. They were either tied to the media or big business. Feel free to read through any one of my “eyewitness” report cards and bounce these stories against your personal “common sense.”
The Big Picture
So where does logic take us when we realize that no planes crashed on 9/11? For starters, that means there were no hijackers – which means every single detail about these hijackers has been fabricated out of nothing.
No plane crashes means that all the damage was caused by something other than planes – pre-planted explosives – Hollywood style, with plenty of smoke. Did they use mini-nukes or microwave weaponry to bring down the towers? My money is on microwave weaponry, but I really don’t care.
I also don’t care about other questions you may have, like what happened to the people who were supposedly on those planes. Two of these flights didn’t even exist. Well, if they can fabricate flights, why would they stop there? Of course, some of the people on these planes had to exist – but would it be unreasonable to assume that they could easily make up a hundred or so names?
Dave Sturgeon, a school teacher, was 58 years old. He was survived by his wife, Barbara, and two children, Todd and Ellen. He was on his way to visit his brother in California.
There. I just made one up. If I needed four – I’d have put his whole family on board with him. I’ll just come up with a grieving mother who can show up to attend the 9/11 commission hearings.
Go ahead, call me insensitive. By nature, logic is insensitive. By all means, get good and angry – and then consider this:
The media has put all of this in front of you. 9/11 was a “made for TV” movie. Fiction on TV doesn’t end when you turn on the Nightly News, it only becomes more creative.
And who benefits? It’s actually harder to come up with a list of who doesn’t benefit.
You can hardly turn the channel today without seeing terrorism. CSI, 24, the Nightly News – it’s everywhere. The only question I have about state-sponsored terrorism is whether the state is Nevada or Maryland.
The department of Homeland Fraud - today’s terror threat level is green, which means they’re in your wallets. Oil companies, security companies, defense contractors. And why stop at just the US economy? Who’s making weapons for the other side? Who’s paying for their military endeavors?
Global terrorism benefits everyone – except taxpayers.
Annoyances
I apologize for all the side-effects that this newfound knowledge may cause you. I can only speak for myself on exactly what they may be. In my case, I can’t watch many shows on television that I once enjoyed.
I can’t watch the Nightly News on any channel without becoming disgusted by how stupid they expect me to be. And then there’s that pussy, Bill Maher, says that conspiracy theories about 9/11 can’t be true because they assume two things: that our government is competent and that they can keep a secret.
Well, Bill – as difficult as it may be for you to comprehend, those two occurrences may be improbable, but the videos we were shown on television are IMPOSSIBLE. Impossible trumps improbable every time.
This is the aspect that most people who rush to use Occam's Razor to defend the OGCT (Official Government Conspiracy Theory) forget to incorporate. No matter how simple a series of events may seem, if the result depends on one or more events that are deemed to be impossible, that theory must be discarded.
Besides, the only role the government played in 9/11 was spending our money and lying - and we all know that's just business as usual for them. How ironic that a man who once hosted a program called “Politically Incorrect” has now become so political and so incorrect.
Carlos Mencia goes so far as to suggest that airport security should let all American-looking people walk to their seats and only check “Ragheads.” Carlos, if you’re reading this – know that I think you’re “Dee-Dee-Dee.” Get a clue. Planes had nothing to do with 9/11.
No planes crashed on 9/11.
They blew up the towers. They showed us some movies. They hand-picked some storytellers. They made up some hijackers. And over five years later, they’re still trying like hell to sell this lie.
Who is they? Start with the media/eyewitnesses, and work your way back. It’s that simple.
I don’t understand why so many people are busy worrying about HOW they blew up the towers. I have no clue why people are so worried about what the so-called leaders of the 9/11 truth movement are up to.
If you want to be productive, spread the word that no planes crashed on 9/11. Make that common knowledge, and I promise you – the rest will take care of itself.
Conclusion
My work here is as complete as it needs to be to prove that the only plane we saw on 9/11 was nothing more than various CGI images of a plane disappearing into WTC2. It shouldn't take a genius to connect the dots and realize that if they faked that "crash," then the other "crashes" were also just "stories."
In my opinion, there is no benefit in pursuing any other aspects of 9/11 until this fact becomes common knowledge. I would urge any of the upcoming talented video creators to use any of the concepts and/or imagery from my articles to help in making this common knowledge.
If you were to build a house of cards with all the lies and disinformation floating around about 9/11, this is the one card that will bring the entire house down. That is why I have never strayed from my efforts to prove this, regardless of how easy it would be to prove other falsehoods.
Of course they blew up the towers. Of course nothing crashed into the Pentagon. Of course nothing crashed in Shanksville. Of course the 9/11 Truth Movement is infested with people spewing even more lies than the original story.
None of that means anything... until you can prove that it all began with a Hollywood explosion.
Now get out there and spread the word. If anyone needs anything more from me, ask me in the comment section.
For Your Review
"Eyewitnesses"
Just Plane Fact
Media Madness
16 comments:
So, you take a look at a few pictures, run a couple of numbers, and BLAMMO, hard evidence? You showed a pictured of one of the planes "half-in, half-out" of one of the towers. I'll admit, that was damn bizarre, I would have thought there would be heavy initial damage, then again, I've never seen a plane crash into a building as up close as the picture was, have you?
You also show two pictures, side by side, from different angles, one that shows an object, one that doesn't. You proceed to slap some more equations out there (Even though you claim to try to appeal to the peoples' 'common sense') to make it seem less than what it actually is. You said the difference in degree between the two angles was only 6 degrees. That wasn't hard to believe of course, it's quite obvious it wasn't as wide a margin as you assume people would think, but what were the camera(s)' distance? After all, a difference of 6 degrees could mean 10 feet, or 1 mile, depending on the distance from the object. In this instance, it's also obvious that the distance in tremendous, as a building can be seen hugging the right side of the frame of the left picture, yet has completely disappeared in the picture on the right! ZOMG, not only are they putting in planes, they're putting in fake buildings too!
I'm not sure why people think they're so clever when they find pictures that 'point to the truth.' Do you really think the government is THAT STUPID? That, should they try to cover up things of this nature, such as the "half in,half out" picture, they wouldn't have touched it up perfectly? That would be a mistake that not even the lowest budget effects companies would make. Some people will say yes, the government is that stupid, and that just disappoints me, because now these people don't realize how idiotic they are being. You're not an idiot though, because you know EXACTLY what you are doing. You're trying to convince people of your intelligence, so they're more inclined to believe you, and then you throw out these equations so that said people, even though they may not know their meaning, will use said equations in typical 'conspiracy' conversations or debates, when really you yourself don't lay out the big picture either.
I try to find an unbiased, fact-for-fact website/video/interview/documentary for this topic, and yet I've failed again. Interestingly enough, I was referenced from YouTube, where I saw yet another biased, smudging the facts video. Disappointing.
Wow, I just came across your site... awesome research. Please release some more of your eyewitness scorecards when you get the chance.
a very good analyses stilldiggin!
especially the nose-out that did not leave any exit hole.
comment #1 - nice try!
but you forgot to say "what about the thousands of eye-witnesses?"
that is one of the major moron talking point catch-phrases is it not?
ha.
Seek professional help for your delusions, poor kid.
StillDiggin! dude, it's so good to know you're still out there, I thought something dire had happened to you (courtesy of the perps). You have done great work, you're way of presenting the trump evidence is convincing to me, maybe not enough to people who refuse to believe against the bushies. They will absolutely believe in the impossible in order to defend the OGCT and the bushies as if it was defending themselves, probably an artifact of conservaturd guilt. The other factor that will keep them defending it all is there unwavering conditioned hatred of them (the 'terr'sts', foreigners, mainly just dark skinned people).
I had an enlightening conversation recently with the oldest friend that I've known for 32 years, about 9-11, and he has chosen to believe in certain impossibilities in order to defend the OGCT, primarily for the two reasons I mentioned above. He defended the fire theory about the WTC collapses because where he works now, he works with metal and fire everyday and that sh*t gets hot and metal can melt, and, and, and it could have caused it, he says. I should have mentioned to him about the 20 hour glowing red hot inferno the 32 story building in Madrid suffered in 2004 (or 2005?) that did not collapse (the metal steel skeleton did not collapse anyway), but I just didn't think of it at the time. He thought that the 9-11 TV Fakery I mentioned was bullsh*t, but he has not seen the evidence for it, and would not analyze it whatsover if he ever even saw it. He also said that if Barrack Obama was elected President, he would leave the country (actually he said if the dark skin people take over he would leave, he is white, yes he used the n.... word, not dark skinned people). It's really unfortunate he thinks that way, I didn't think he was that much of a rabid racist, even though he has been using the n.. word for a long time. Our friendship has drifted away for a long time (I have seen him only a few times in the last ten years since I've been married). I don't think he believes it as profoundly as he says it, but I could be wrong. Anyway, people that think like he does are very unlikely to use their brains and break out of the conditioning to go against the OGCT, even my own parents don't want to budge on it. Although I more less had my Mom convinced a year and a half ago or so that the OGCT was mostly false, she reverted back to the conditioning partly because of my Dad when I had a shouting match with them about it about 10 or 12 months ago. The dark side conditioning is strong my friends.
Despite the fact that even if the majority in America believe the OGCT is false (this is definately true just about all other countries in the world today), this majority holds no real power to stop the perps. Hopefully in my lifetime, we will.
Another very important point I want to bring up is the method of the WTC destruction, I think it really does matter whether it was demolition or beam weaponry. I think it is far scarier if it was beam weaponry, this would make the perps far more powerful than any other group ever, how could anyone defend against it? Invisible, you could never know the timing, instantaneous destruction of a building or area from great distances (perhaps)?
If they have this technology now, wouldn't it have already been used extensively in Iraq, Iran or anywhere else they choose? If they had it fully operational, they would have already destroyed all possible opposition to their lust for ultimate power and control over all of humanity. Unless you argue, it was an extremely expensive (in terms of the energy necessary to create such beams) one time first shot and it may not be feasible to recreate it as yet. I hope you don't mind me saying that I hope you are totally wrong about this one, but if you are not, we have a lot more to fear if they get the 'death star' fully operational, if you know what I mean.
Anyway, keep pluggin' away at the truth, please go after the media 'eywitness trail' as far as you can take it, it should prove to be the best weapon to fight the media lies in the future when it comes to the OGCT.
GW
before even the brittle engines, much less the wings, encountered the steel columns the front fuselage portion of a REAL 767, which is a fragile aluminum tube with a smooth rounded plastic nosecone would squash against the massive steel/concrete wtc like a beer can.
granted it would have happened so fast that no one's eyes/brain could have actually processed the squash occurring in real time but giant pieces of squashed and torn lightweight aluminum would have deflected off the wtc in many directions - especially the giant yet fragile tail assembly.
where are all the smart guys to explain exactly in what manner the smooth rounded lightweight plastic nosecone penetrated the massive hardened steel columns that had only 2' space between them?
did the smooth rounded lightweight plastic nosecone pierce thru the massive hardened steel columns like an arrow?
or did it bludgeon it's way thru like a hammer?
or did it flow between and around the columns like liquid mercury?
or were the laws of physics suspended for that brief moment on 9/11/01?
or were we all fooled by easily produced video fakery.
ha.
I suppose I should humor Anonymous Commenter #1 with a reply.
Thank you very kindly for your mathematical insights. For those of you who aren't aware, as a circle grows in diameter, so does it's perimeter!
If you were to cut both a small and a large pizza into 12 equal slices of 30 degrees, the edges of the large slices would be longer than those of the small pizza.
Amazing!
BTW, that building that "can be seen hugging the right side of the frame of the left picture" is the Empire State Building. Maybe you've seen/heard of it before?
FYI, the camera "filming" the left hand screenshots would have been located atop the Trump Tower, 4.3 miles away.
This, in conjunction with assumptions regarding "plane" speed and distance from the edge of the North Tower will help you place the fictional plane in space.
The distance of the second camera doesn't matter at all, only the difference in angle relative to the first camera.
Now, I could wait for you to draw the diagram or I could do it myself. Stay tuned for an update to my "Flight Path Discrepancy" article.
As far as your efforts to defend "our government," you need to understand how miniscule of a role they played on 9/11.
Essentially, they did nothing but offer up their reaction (and probably a small, specialized segment of their military/NASA).
I suspect they were instructed by their owners to "stay out of it."
Our government is just a finger on the metaphorical hand of the people who control the goings-on in this world.
To imagine that our government could both plan and execute an endeavor so intricate is laughable.
As far as you not being able to see the "plane" in the right-hand frames, I suggest a visit to your eye-doctor.
For reference, these images were pulled from the following 2 videos:
Left Frames - CBS Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mdkyk1up4ZA
Right Frames - CBS Part 3:
http://www.livevideo.com/video/079BE547B1534C3A83C0A2D8922576F8/september-11th-as-it-happened-.aspx?m_tkc=2876516
b.j. edwards
I just visited your blog. I've always wanted to ask one of you guys what it feels like to have to argue against all laws of physics.
Does the money help your creativity? I'm still waiting for the inevitable headline: "Gravity: Fact or Fiction?"
That "Things I've Learned..." article is priceless!
I loved that part where it makes fun of how ludicrous it would be for them to place explosives in the towers AND fly planes into the exact same spot... while managing not to damage the explosives.
I mean, that's exactly right. Why the hell would they need planes?
You and I - we'd make a great team!
Whaddaya say?
It's astonishing that someone could convince themselves of something based on a few YouTube videos. Have you gone off your meds?
""astonishing that someone could convince themselves of something based on a few YouTube videos.""
~the phony conspiracy smasher
---
based on a few youtube vids?
these analyses of alleged ua175 are based upon the CNN vids that CNN presented to the world and purported to be authentic.
they are NOT authentic representations of what would actually occur should a REAL 767 really impact a wtc.
h is for ha.
by the way, here is a link to the REAL conspiracy smasher
I would simply ask before making any final judement: who would be behind a scheme such as this? what is there to gain? how many people would be necessary to pull it off and to be kept silent about it?
I am trying desperately to find where I can post a comment to Fred's post at
http://www.911researchers.com/node/511#comments
Whole bag of tricks: Low tech, or high tech? Demo vs Media Hoax
Submitted by Fred on Tue, 2007-05-22 07:33.
I will put my real name and my email address here in the hopes that someone will email me and show me the proper place to register and reply to "Fred."
Jeannon Kralj
archiek1@prodigy.net
Thank you
At the bottom of Fred's article, it says "Login or Register to post comments."
Click on Register.
After registering, you will receive a password via email, so that you can log in and post your reply to Fred.
Perhaps the second plane in the Fairbanks video is a reflection on a windshield.
Google and type in "Marion, Florence or Leavenworth"
Hey I just found the site, and found it very interesting. I don't know what to think of the no planes theory just yet, but it's definitely a growing possibility in my mind.
I wanted to point out something that I don't think anyone else has commented on and was looking for the appropriate people to share it with.
In the CNN Michael Hezarkhani video, has anyone noticed that the top of the trees directly below the explosion in the shot start to jiggle as the debree rains down?
Remember, these trees are all the way across town in Battery Park, and yet the debree causes the trees to shake in just this one spot.
It also seems that a small portion of the material actual falls into or in front of the trees.
Is anybody else seeing what I think I'm seeing?
Is it possible that this is a scale model, or that a 3d artist has mistakenly made the trees jiggle in a misguided attempt to make the scene more realistic?
Post a Comment