lightninboy
Well-known member
UA Flight 93
1996 Boeing 757-222
N591UA
AA Flight 77
1991 Boeing 757-223
N644AA
UA Flight 175
1983 Boeing 767-222
N612UA
AA Flight 11
1987 Boeing 767-223ER
N334AA
http://aviation-safety.net/database/dblist.php?Year=2001&lang=&page=2
Fleet lists
http://www.geocities.com/~aeromoe/fleets/
Thus, in all probability, the oldest trick in the manuals of covert military ops was used: smokescreens. In reality, the towers were most likely enveloped in thick smoke (military obscurants) as they collapsed - and no real footage exists of that brief event. Thankfully - for all normal people of this world - the 9/11 planners hired a poorly skilled animation crew : in their efforts to simulate reality, their crass 'artistry' and countless mistakes provide ample and repeatable proof of the trickery - forever engraved in the TV archives.
The 9/11 TV broadcasts were designed to 'sell' a fictitious terror attack to the world-- by replacing the real-life events of the day (the WTC demolitions) with fake imagery.
WHAT ABOUT THE "AMATEUR" VIDEOS ?
All the other videos (endlessly replayed on TV) were released only later. They have all been extensively analyzed by scores of video analysts; each and every video snippet of "amateur imagery" has been methodically dissected and compared - and empirically proved to be nothing else than computer-generated fabrications.
HOW WERE PRIVATE VIDEOS IMPEDED ?
NO private photography of the real-life events was allowed: thus, the imagery aired by the TV networks feared no comparison and was passed off as reality.
Down below documentary "September Clues" did frame-by-frame analysis of all 911 footage, and come to conclusion the planes NEVER EXISTED, they were simple 2d cutouts over-imposed over live footage, there was a number of inconsistencies and mistakes due to this, there is even some footage where they literally FORGOT to include the planes, there is footage of the gashes clearly being made by demolition charges in the shape of a plane without a plane ever hitting it.
Once you see this video, you can never ever believe that there were planes in 911.
Whats about the airplanes victims and witnesses?
Back in 2009 "September Clues" had brought the series of remarkable discoveries in the collection of victim stories. What began as an insightful look at the CNN.com 9/11 Victim Memorial, the original source of the death reports, turned into realization after realization that the entire body of victims - from the airplanes, to the Pentagon, to the World Trade Center - had all been created at the same time by an "identity generating" software program which creates 'digital' people with (oft improbable) fictitious names.
http://www.ufo-blogger.com/2011/05/911-planes-never-existed-september.html
Dulles Airport is only 20 miles from the Pentagon. So it is insane to believe that the "hijackers", who started from Dulles Airport, waited until they were some 300 miles away from their target, the Pentagon, before hijacking the aircraft, turning it around and retracing their path back to the Pentagon. This would give the US Air Force over 40 minutes to get fighter aircraft up to investigate, and if necessary, shoot them down.
http://guardian.150m.com/pentagon/small/911-flights.htm
No-Planes" is easily dismissed by those who cannot - or will not - take the time to undertake that work, leading them to dive for the 'safety' (but irrationality) of 'hugging planes'.
The So-Called Planes
Well, there were four of them, we are told. Here are the established facts about them (based on what we have been told):
AA11, Tail Number N334AA, no entries in the BTS Database for 11th September 2001, de-registered 14th January 2002
AA77, Tail Number N644AA, no entries in the BTS Database for 11th September 2001, de-registered 14th January 2002
UA175, Tail Number N612UA, does have entries in the BTS Database for 11th September 2001, de-registered 28th September, 2005
UA93, Tail Number N591UA, does have entries in the BTS Database for 11th September 2001, de-registered 28th September, 2005
What is immediately curious about this is:
a) The lack of entries, in the BTS Database, for the American Airlines flights is indicative that they did not actually exist. Therefore, before proving that AA11 hit the North Tower, and that AA77 hit the Pentagon, their very existence needs to be proved. And no such proof has ever been forthcoming. But that doesn't worry the UNTruthers. However it does worry the No-planers.
b) The fact that American Airlines decided to de-register both of their craft on the same day is indicative of a 'sudden realisation' that 'maybe they ought to do that'. After all, they should have done it by midday on the 12th September, 2001 (by law). (If the 'planes' were real, that is). Or could it be that N334AA & N644AA carried on in service, were old, and were, indeed, de-commissioned in January 2002 in case some 'plane-spotting Anorak' noticed?
c) Similarly (b) applies to United Airlines, except that their own 'realisation' took more than three more years. Or could it be that 4 more years of service were squeezed out of N612UA & N591UA, before someone decided that 'some plane-spotting Anorak' might just notice? (Actually one did, and pasted up a photo of N591UA taken during 2003. But that disappeared very quickly)
The Bureau of Transport Statistics' entries are automatically computer-collected. Adding false entries is readily possible of course. Deleting entries is much more problematic, because all references and linkages to it have to be accurately removed, in order to coincide. How often have you clicked a link in a Webpage and been returned "Error 404. URL not found"? Here the target has been deleted, but the link (the reference) still remains, which indicates its prior existence. That's the problem with deletion. Other linkages indicate a 'prior existence'. In the case of AA11 & AA77 'other linkages' cannot be found. Either the deletion was unbelievably thorough, or there never existed anything to delete.
The No-Planes Position is that flights AA11 & AA77 are not even proved, whereas it is accepted that flights UA93 & UA175 existed, and took off. No-planers do not, necessarily agree that both of these flights contained any passengers. On balance they accept that UA93 most probably contained passengers. And, in all probability, all of them.
Shanksville
While, on the one hand No-planers accept that UA93 existed, and took off, they do not agree that it crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. A critical analysis of the "Shanksville hole" completely refutes any contention of a commercial airliner crashing there.
As for Flight 93, the information in Loose Change, 2nd Edition is considered likely to be correct. In other words that UA93 landed in Cleveland Ohio, reporting "a bomb on board". It is likely that any passengers were taken to the disused NASA Hanger and 'never seen again' (until their DNA was examined. This explains how there was actually some DNA available for pathological examination).
The North Tower hit
The North Tower was probably hit by 'something'. Some 'flying object'. But this was certainly not a commercial airliner.
The major piece of impact evidence comes, of course, from the Fireman's Video taken by the Naudet brothers. This has been very carefully assessed.
The South Tower 'hit'
Unlike the case of the North Tower, the word 'hit' is here in quotes.
This was the one everyone saw on television, so it must have been a plane.
No. What you 'saw' on television was a 'cartoon'. A Computer-Generated Image. Known as a CGI for short. Its called "Cartoon175" in No-plane-speak.
http://www.veronicachapman.com/links/NoPlanes.htm
1996 Boeing 757-222
N591UA
AA Flight 77
1991 Boeing 757-223
N644AA
UA Flight 175
1983 Boeing 767-222
N612UA
AA Flight 11
1987 Boeing 767-223ER
N334AA
http://aviation-safety.net/database/dblist.php?Year=2001&lang=&page=2
Fleet lists
http://www.geocities.com/~aeromoe/fleets/
Thus, in all probability, the oldest trick in the manuals of covert military ops was used: smokescreens. In reality, the towers were most likely enveloped in thick smoke (military obscurants) as they collapsed - and no real footage exists of that brief event. Thankfully - for all normal people of this world - the 9/11 planners hired a poorly skilled animation crew : in their efforts to simulate reality, their crass 'artistry' and countless mistakes provide ample and repeatable proof of the trickery - forever engraved in the TV archives.
The 9/11 TV broadcasts were designed to 'sell' a fictitious terror attack to the world-- by replacing the real-life events of the day (the WTC demolitions) with fake imagery.
WHAT ABOUT THE "AMATEUR" VIDEOS ?
All the other videos (endlessly replayed on TV) were released only later. They have all been extensively analyzed by scores of video analysts; each and every video snippet of "amateur imagery" has been methodically dissected and compared - and empirically proved to be nothing else than computer-generated fabrications.
HOW WERE PRIVATE VIDEOS IMPEDED ?
NO private photography of the real-life events was allowed: thus, the imagery aired by the TV networks feared no comparison and was passed off as reality.
Down below documentary "September Clues" did frame-by-frame analysis of all 911 footage, and come to conclusion the planes NEVER EXISTED, they were simple 2d cutouts over-imposed over live footage, there was a number of inconsistencies and mistakes due to this, there is even some footage where they literally FORGOT to include the planes, there is footage of the gashes clearly being made by demolition charges in the shape of a plane without a plane ever hitting it.
Once you see this video, you can never ever believe that there were planes in 911.
Whats about the airplanes victims and witnesses?
Back in 2009 "September Clues" had brought the series of remarkable discoveries in the collection of victim stories. What began as an insightful look at the CNN.com 9/11 Victim Memorial, the original source of the death reports, turned into realization after realization that the entire body of victims - from the airplanes, to the Pentagon, to the World Trade Center - had all been created at the same time by an "identity generating" software program which creates 'digital' people with (oft improbable) fictitious names.
http://www.ufo-blogger.com/2011/05/911-planes-never-existed-september.html
Dulles Airport is only 20 miles from the Pentagon. So it is insane to believe that the "hijackers", who started from Dulles Airport, waited until they were some 300 miles away from their target, the Pentagon, before hijacking the aircraft, turning it around and retracing their path back to the Pentagon. This would give the US Air Force over 40 minutes to get fighter aircraft up to investigate, and if necessary, shoot them down.
http://guardian.150m.com/pentagon/small/911-flights.htm
No-Planes" is easily dismissed by those who cannot - or will not - take the time to undertake that work, leading them to dive for the 'safety' (but irrationality) of 'hugging planes'.
The So-Called Planes
Well, there were four of them, we are told. Here are the established facts about them (based on what we have been told):
AA11, Tail Number N334AA, no entries in the BTS Database for 11th September 2001, de-registered 14th January 2002
AA77, Tail Number N644AA, no entries in the BTS Database for 11th September 2001, de-registered 14th January 2002
UA175, Tail Number N612UA, does have entries in the BTS Database for 11th September 2001, de-registered 28th September, 2005
UA93, Tail Number N591UA, does have entries in the BTS Database for 11th September 2001, de-registered 28th September, 2005
What is immediately curious about this is:
a) The lack of entries, in the BTS Database, for the American Airlines flights is indicative that they did not actually exist. Therefore, before proving that AA11 hit the North Tower, and that AA77 hit the Pentagon, their very existence needs to be proved. And no such proof has ever been forthcoming. But that doesn't worry the UNTruthers. However it does worry the No-planers.
b) The fact that American Airlines decided to de-register both of their craft on the same day is indicative of a 'sudden realisation' that 'maybe they ought to do that'. After all, they should have done it by midday on the 12th September, 2001 (by law). (If the 'planes' were real, that is). Or could it be that N334AA & N644AA carried on in service, were old, and were, indeed, de-commissioned in January 2002 in case some 'plane-spotting Anorak' noticed?
c) Similarly (b) applies to United Airlines, except that their own 'realisation' took more than three more years. Or could it be that 4 more years of service were squeezed out of N612UA & N591UA, before someone decided that 'some plane-spotting Anorak' might just notice? (Actually one did, and pasted up a photo of N591UA taken during 2003. But that disappeared very quickly)
The Bureau of Transport Statistics' entries are automatically computer-collected. Adding false entries is readily possible of course. Deleting entries is much more problematic, because all references and linkages to it have to be accurately removed, in order to coincide. How often have you clicked a link in a Webpage and been returned "Error 404. URL not found"? Here the target has been deleted, but the link (the reference) still remains, which indicates its prior existence. That's the problem with deletion. Other linkages indicate a 'prior existence'. In the case of AA11 & AA77 'other linkages' cannot be found. Either the deletion was unbelievably thorough, or there never existed anything to delete.
The No-Planes Position is that flights AA11 & AA77 are not even proved, whereas it is accepted that flights UA93 & UA175 existed, and took off. No-planers do not, necessarily agree that both of these flights contained any passengers. On balance they accept that UA93 most probably contained passengers. And, in all probability, all of them.
Shanksville
While, on the one hand No-planers accept that UA93 existed, and took off, they do not agree that it crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. A critical analysis of the "Shanksville hole" completely refutes any contention of a commercial airliner crashing there.
As for Flight 93, the information in Loose Change, 2nd Edition is considered likely to be correct. In other words that UA93 landed in Cleveland Ohio, reporting "a bomb on board". It is likely that any passengers were taken to the disused NASA Hanger and 'never seen again' (until their DNA was examined. This explains how there was actually some DNA available for pathological examination).
The North Tower hit
The North Tower was probably hit by 'something'. Some 'flying object'. But this was certainly not a commercial airliner.
The major piece of impact evidence comes, of course, from the Fireman's Video taken by the Naudet brothers. This has been very carefully assessed.
The South Tower 'hit'
Unlike the case of the North Tower, the word 'hit' is here in quotes.
This was the one everyone saw on television, so it must have been a plane.
No. What you 'saw' on television was a 'cartoon'. A Computer-Generated Image. Known as a CGI for short. Its called "Cartoon175" in No-plane-speak.
http://www.veronicachapman.com/links/NoPlanes.htm
