The Planes on 9/11 (Twin Towers)
911Revisionist
- 13 / 15
1
FBI Special Agent John DeSouza on 9/11 Black-ops & Ritual Sacrifice
9:04

FBI Special Agent John DeSouza on 9/11 Black-ops & Ritual Sacrifice

The 9/11 Plane & No Plane debate settled Most probably the best distraction of WHAT happened on September 11, 2001 Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-the-plane-no-plane-argument Dr David A. Hughes interview with 9/11 Revisionist Narrative vs. evidence; Morgan Reynolds; Mark Conlon; Shanksville; the Pentagon; Curt Weldon; survivors on Stairwell B; Richard Gage; Camp 2 propaganda techniques; the 9/11 Memorial Museum. Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/david-hughes-on-the-importance-of
2
Bob Runyon Discusses The Plane Physics on 9/11
1:32:30

Bob Runyon Discusses The Plane Physics on 9/11

I was delighted to speak with 9/11 planes researcher Bob Runyon, to discuss aspects of the anomalous crash physics involving Flight 175 on 9/11. 9/11 Planes Research (Mark) was also co-host of this podcast. We both enjoyed our time speaking with Bob, and hope we can catch-up with Bob again soon. We would sincerely like to thank Bob for making the time to chat with us, as it was 4 a.m. in the morning for Bob in the USA when we recorded this podcast. Bob's Substack - https://substack.com/@bobthefreeradical 9/11 Planes Research Substack - https://911planesresearch.substack.com 9/11 Revisionist Sustack - https://911revision.substack.com/
7 comments
3
EXPLAINED: Flight 175 Flash Frame
6:16

EXPLAINED: Flight 175 Flash Frame

From: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
2 comments
4
Creating the plane shaped holes in the Twin Towers
5:35

Creating the plane shaped holes in the Twin Towers

A clip from 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
 1.35K  views 4 comments
5
C-SPAN 2006 - Top 10 Reasons Why the Hijackers are FAKE
8:37

C-SPAN 2006 - Top 10 Reasons Why the Hijackers are FAKE

There is a hell of a lot of things that I do not agree with what Fetzer has to say about 9/11, but on the planes, we agree. The Fantasy Flights on 9/11 One of the biggest hurdles for 9/11 truth seekers and normies Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-fantasy-flights-on-911 The Suspension of Newtonian Physics A Plane conversation with Dr Morgan Reynolds & 9/11 Revisionist Article & Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-suspension-of-newtonian-physics 9/11 Truth Movement Planes Propaganda - Podcast - 7th March 2025 When the 9/11 truther planes narratives do not fly Podcast: https://rumble.com/v6q6eo8-when-the-911-truther-plane-narratives-do-not-fly.html The 9/11 Hoodwink at Shanksville, PA No Jet Fuel, or a plane at the Flight 93 Crash Site Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/hoodwinked-at-shanksville-on-911 The PentaCon on 9/11 When a missile AND a plane did not hit a target Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-pentacon-on-911 Poem: Ghosts In The Flight - Don't believe your eyes Article: https://robdubya.substack.com/p/poem-ghosts-in-the-flight Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
 1.2K  views 2 comments
6
9/11 Planes, Passengers & Phone calls
16:18

9/11 Planes, Passengers & Phone calls

Excerpt from a very well done documentary "Sept 11 - The New Pearl Harbor", just over 10 years ago... *Only a few issues with it though, the destruction mechanism of the towers they go through is fatally flawed and explained by a 9/11 investigative scientist that actually took the results of an independent forensic investigation in 2007 to NIST for a request for correction (RFC). It allowed the scientist to file a whistleblower case for science fraud against 23 NIST subcontractors and the case was filed as high up as the US Supreme court in 2009 and none of the "9/11 truther celebrities" want you to know about it. Read the court papers here: https://drjudywood.com/wp/court-case-qui-tam/ Then they theorise about the flights being switched for drones / military planes, which has been proven not to be the case by other researchers, since this documentary came out. Mention of the so called molten metal has also been shown to be something completely different, as to what was sold to the public. The theories of "thermite", "molten metal" sold to truth seekers by architects for an engineered truth and Richard Gage, has never been filed as a request for correction against NIST either.
 1.17K  views 2 comments
7
Searching for Planes on 9/11
3:07:45

Searching for Planes on 9/11

MES Livestream 28: https://youtu.be/6TOMyJj8T-Q Join me as I investigate the 4 alleged plane crashes on 9/11. I also go over Morgan Reynolds' and John Lear's legal challenges against NIST for their cartoon plane physics report. March 16, 2024 TODAY at 1 PM PST / 3 PM CST / 4 PM EST / 10 PM CAT Stream notes and playlist: https://peakd.com/hive-113182/@mes/livestream-28-911-planes
7 comments
8
November 12, 2001 - The crash of AA flight 587 in NYC
4:45

November 12, 2001 - The crash of AA flight 587 in NYC

9/11 The Plane / No Plane debate settled. Most probably the best distraction of WHAT happened on September 11, 2001 Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-the-plane-no-plane-argument ✈️✈️ 9/11 A Plane Story ✈️✈️ Movie: https://rumble.com/v3k3t3e-911-a-plane-story.html You live in a time where your perception is being managed. Just like with Covid from 2020 to 2023, people outsourced their thinking way too easily. 9/11 was an attack on human consciousness.
9
1992 - US Military Black Budget Projection Technology
41:47

1992 - US Military Black Budget Projection Technology

Where did the planes go on 9/11 The FBI and NTSB have no records to prove that plane wreckage was found Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/where-did-the-planes-go-on-911 Poem: Ghosts In The Flight Don't believe your eyes Article: https://robdubya.substack.com/p/poem-ghosts-in-the-flight
6 comments
10
American Airlines Flight 11 was still airborne AFTER it allegedly crashed
5:59

American Airlines Flight 11 was still airborne AFTER it allegedly crashed

American Airlines Flight 11 was still airborne AFTER it allegedly crashed into the North Tower on 9/11. This short video made using FAA and NORAD communication recordings includes the relevant communication segments which is edited together. According to this official recording from FAA and NORAD communications that Flight 11's last coordinates were located 5.77 miles away from the North Tower after the crash. Flight 11 was heading towards JFK Airport which is off-course and its route towards the North Tower. Flight 11's last coordinates were (4038N 07403W) which locates Flight 11 heading in the direction towards the Washington area. Source: https://youtu.be/s0MS2bLm8og
11
Debunking Ace Baker - "The Key" CGI & Video Fakery Plane Compositing Theory
15:15

Debunking Ace Baker - "The Key" CGI & Video Fakery Plane Compositing Theory

Out of the Archives While I agree with this video analysis by Saultrain, that 'Luma Keying' compositing was impossible. I don't agree "real" planes were used or involved in the crashes at the WTC, Pentagon or Shanksville, although many eyewitnesses did see planes in the sky and crash, so this rules out CGI and video fakery. Some type of 'image projection' technology was used to broadcast an image of a plane in the sky. This hypothesis is the only explanation that can explain all the anomalies captured in the video evidence record of 'Flight 175' regarding the missing wings of the plane for 6 frames, the impossible crash physics and impossible speed the plane was travelling at in the videos. Video Notes: In the video entitled "07 The Key" conspiracy theorist Collin Alexander, a.k.a., Ace Baker, claims that, "The key to solving 9/11 is something called a 'key'". The "key" he's referring to is a video editing tool called a "luma-key" which he alleges was used by the TV news media to insert a fake CGI plane into the live broadcasts of the twin tower attacks on 9/11. Despite his efforts, his ill-conceived theory ultimately fails, i.e., it can't replicate what is seen in the live footage of the 2nd plane impacting the WTC. I demonstrate in this presentation that the live footage itself contains a dead giveaway that a luma key could not have been used. In my video, I paraphrase Ace's answer to the flame-over-nose problem which, as explained, proves his theory impossible. To be fair, below is a link to Alexander's "9/11 Research Blog" where he gives you his answer to the problem in his own words (yes, HE'S ADMITTING THAT I'M RIGHT ABOUT THE LUMA KEY FLAW). Also note that he admits he was wrong about no plane being in the wide shot. This Blog entry is from 2009. His latest YouTube upload of "07 The Key" was published May 29, 2012 (three years later). He's made no correction to the video, not even in the description. Ace Bakers blog: https://acebaker.blogspot.com/2009/08/ (What do you call someone who continues to propagate information--as truth--that he KNOWS to be false? I think most would agree that "liar" is an accurate label.) Original YT source has been removed by YouTube Follow the work of Mark Conlon - 9/11 Planes Research https://911planesresearch.blogspot.com
11 comments
12
Where did the planes go?
1:27:00

Where did the planes go?

RECORDED AUGUST 2021 This is Mark Conlon’s behind the scenes conversation he had with Chris Hampton, who was making a new film in relation to the airplanes on 9/11 and what really happened to them, as they clearly did not crash at the named targets we were told. Mark discusses his new research he had been doing following the 2018 film - 9/11 Alchemy "Facing Reality", which he helped Chris with research regarding the no-planes and hidden technology. In this conversation he discuss what most likely happened to the airplanes on 9/11. This conversation covers different research to his other body of research about no-planes, and the video fakery/cgi psy-op cover-up and the 3D volumetric image projection technology. A note from Chris Hampton (Wolf Clan Media) below; "Where did the airplanes go" documentary interview. Behind-the-scenes sneak peek at some of the research that is going into the new 9/11 documentary. Mark Conlon and I recorded this interview in September 2021 for the documentary...” Follow the work of Mark Conlon - 9/11 Planes Research - https://911planesresearch.blogspot.com
9 comments
Refutation of the 9/11 "truther" narratives
3:56:15

Refutation of the 9/11 "truther" narratives

A special presentation refuting 10 points of contention against DEW on 9/11 Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/refutation-of-the-911-truther-narratives Please read this article before watching the presentation I did on 10.02.2024. - https://911revision.substack.com/p/cowards-for-911-truth Get the popcorn - It was 4 hours long, refuting the following 10 points put forth against DEW being the mechanism of destruction on September 11, 2001. I dissect all 10 points he raises to try and refute DEW, which you can read about in this book. https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/ Let’s go! This is the initial background on 9/11 and then perception management. Timestamp 5 min 30 Below is the points raised against DEW, with my reply and reference to Dr Wood’s book and the discussion in the presentation with a timestamp for the full 4 hours broken down… 1.) Debris Pile Height: The claim of a too-low debris pile is debunked by recognizing that 90% of the Twin Towers' mass fell outside their footprints. Chapter 9 - Pages 171 to 196 (Timestamp 35 min23 to 57:30) 2.) Damage to Core Box Columns: DEW would need precise targeting features, making it implausible for the observed straight and horizontal breaks in core columns. Chapter 12 - Pages 247 to 256 (Timestamp 57:30 to 1h12:33) 3.) Fall of the "Spire": The assertion that steel "turned to dust" is challenged by the spire falling after being "shaken," likely by explosive charges. Chapter 8 - Pages 131 to 169 (Timestamp 1h12:33 to 1h31:30) 4.) "Toasted" Tops of Vehicles: Damage to vehicles is explained by partially unignited thermite falling through the air, not by DEW. Chapter 11 - Pages 213 to 246 (Timestamp 1h31:30 to 1h48:30) 5.) Once-Molten Iron Microspheres: The presence of molten iron spheres is explained by thermitic materials, not addressed by the DEW hypothesis. Chapter 15 - Page 321 to 339 (Timestamp 1h48:30 to 1h54:32) 6.) Molten Metal: DEW cannot explain observations of molten metal pouring from WTC 2 with temperatures exceeding those from jet fuel or office fires. Chapter 17 - Pages 349 to 394 (Timestamp 1h54:32 to 2h13:23) 7.) Active, Unignited Nano-Thermite: Discovery of nano-thermite in the dust supports the explosive/incendiary hypothesis, not explained by DEW. Chapter 7 - Pages 122 to 130 (Timestamp 2h13:23 to 2h21:08) 8.) Persistent Extreme Heat: High temperatures at Ground Zero contradict DEW proponents' denial of such temperatures. Chapter 13 - Pages 257 to 296 (Timestamp 2h21:08 to 2h47:56) 9.) Craters Observed in WTC 5 and 6: Holes in WTC 5 and 6 are attributed to falling steel, not exotic weaponry as suggested by DEW proponents. Chapter 10 - Pages 197 to 212 (Timestamp 2h47:56 to 3h08:15) 10.) Eyewitness Accounts of Multiple Explosions and Building 7: Numerous eyewitness accounts align with controlled demolition, not explained by the DEW hypothesis. Chapter 7 - Pages 95 to 130 - Timestamp 3h08:15 to 3h23:07 (Building 7 mentioned as well) Then for some closing thoughts, that are thought provoking… Timestamp 3h23:07 to 3h56:15
6 comments
14
Understanding 9/11 for dummies
37:05

Understanding 9/11 for dummies

Ever since September 11, 2001 people have been outsourcing their thinking. Listen to what Professor Morgan Reynolds' 2009 Qui-Tam case was about. Discussing air pressure, drag, aerodynamics and then let’s also look at the fraudulent NIST aeroplane impact report as well as the planted aeroplane fuselage and debris at the WTC complex… And by the end of the video, SAIC and their “specialisation in impacts and explosions” and you’ll see they gave NIST fraudulent impact reports pertaining to the “planes” that supposedly hit the towers. People also seem to struggle wrapping their brains around what the buildings were built with and that there is no way in hell, aluminium can cut through steel, like a hot knife through butter... Just exactly what did those "planes" have to go through? Anyone that believes jet fuel, explosives, thermite, buried nukes, mini nukes were used, most probably also still believe in fairies, unicorns and santa claus. Open up your mind, LOOK at what is being presented to you in this video and be sure to put on your thinking cap, because a large proportion of people have fallen for the trap of the cover up, believing that the 9/11 "truther" movement are actually looking to expose the truth of WHAT happened to 8 buildings with a WTC prefix on September 11, 2001 - Americans, WAKE THE FUCK UP! Ask yourself the question, WHAT are all the 9/11 "truther" talking heads really doing, whilst asking for donations and talking absolute bullshit? Why, after nearly 22 years, do we still have such a strong cover-up with regards to the events of September 11, 2001? Why does the 9/11 "truther" movement and Wikipedia not want you to know about the 2009 US Supreme Court Qui-Tam cases? Top 5 Facts About September 11th, 2001 - Look into the work of Dr Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson and STOP outsourcing your thinking to the psy-op, that is the 9/11 "truther" movement.
15
9/11 Let's argue about planes or no planes
1:44:32

9/11 Let's argue about planes or no planes

Excerpt from the EXCELLENT documentary by Wolf Clan Media – 9/11 Alchemy: Facing Reality You need to watch the full 3h docci on Odysee or Rumble, as YouTube does not want you to see it. Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
 1.14K  views 7 comments

Refutation of the 9/11 "truther" narratives

Save
1 year ago
854
911 truth

A special presentation refuting 10 points of contention against DEW on 9/11

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/refutation-of-the-911-truther-narratives

Please read this article before watching the presentation I did on 10.02.2024. - https://911revision.substack.com/p/cowards-for-911-truth

Get the popcorn - It was 4 hours long, refuting the following 10 points put forth against DEW being the mechanism of destruction on September 11, 2001.

I dissect all 10 points he raises to try and refute DEW, which you can read about in this book. https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/

Let’s go!

This is the initial background on 9/11 and then perception management. Timestamp 5 min 30

Below is the points raised against DEW, with my reply and reference to Dr Wood’s book and the discussion in the presentation with a timestamp for the full 4 hours broken down…

1.) Debris Pile Height: The claim of a too-low debris pile is debunked by recognizing that 90% of the Twin Towers' mass fell outside their footprints.
Chapter 9 - Pages 171 to 196 (Timestamp 35 min23 to 57:30)

2.) Damage to Core Box Columns: DEW would need precise targeting features, making it implausible for the observed straight and horizontal breaks in core columns.
Chapter 12 - Pages 247 to 256 (Timestamp 57:30 to 1h12:33)

3.) Fall of the "Spire": The assertion that steel "turned to dust" is challenged by the spire falling after being "shaken," likely by explosive charges.
Chapter 8 - Pages 131 to 169 (Timestamp 1h12:33 to 1h31:30)

4.) "Toasted" Tops of Vehicles: Damage to vehicles is explained by partially unignited thermite falling through the air, not by DEW.
Chapter 11 - Pages 213 to 246 (Timestamp 1h31:30 to 1h48:30)

5.) Once-Molten Iron Microspheres: The presence of molten iron spheres is explained by thermitic materials, not addressed by the DEW hypothesis.
Chapter 15 - Page 321 to 339 (Timestamp 1h48:30 to 1h54:32)

6.) Molten Metal: DEW cannot explain observations of molten metal pouring from WTC 2 with temperatures exceeding those from jet fuel or office fires.
Chapter 17 - Pages 349 to 394 (Timestamp 1h54:32 to 2h13:23)

7.) Active, Unignited Nano-Thermite: Discovery of nano-thermite in the dust supports the explosive/incendiary hypothesis, not explained by DEW.
Chapter 7 - Pages 122 to 130 (Timestamp 2h13:23 to 2h21:08)

8.) Persistent Extreme Heat: High temperatures at Ground Zero contradict DEW proponents' denial of such temperatures.
Chapter 13 - Pages 257 to 296 (Timestamp 2h21:08 to 2h47:56)

9.) Craters Observed in WTC 5 and 6: Holes in WTC 5 and 6 are attributed to falling steel, not exotic weaponry as suggested by DEW proponents.
Chapter 10 - Pages 197 to 212 (Timestamp 2h47:56 to 3h08:15)

10.) Eyewitness Accounts of Multiple Explosions and Building 7: Numerous eyewitness accounts align with controlled demolition, not explained by the DEW hypothesis.
Chapter 7 - Pages 95 to 130 - Timestamp 3h08:15 to 3h23:07 (Building 7 mentioned as well)

Then for some closing thoughts, that are thought provoking…
Timestamp 3h23:07 to 3h56:15

Loading 6 comments...