Debunking the 9/11 *Anti-No-Plane-Theory* Myths

[CB_Brooklyn]

Debunking the 9/11 *Anti-No-Plane-Theory* Myths

by CB_Brooklyn


From the moment people thought that planes crashed in the World Trade Center, the brainwashing had begun.

The “official” account of Boeing 767s striking the North and South Towers, at 400+MPH and 500+MPH respectively, became glued in peoples’ minds as “fact” because of the “tee-vee”. Good ol’ tee-vee. We all trust the media.

Even in 1938, when Orson Welles directed a special Halloween radio broadcast of the novel “War of the Worlds”, millions of Americans believed Martians were invading earth. Everyone trusts the media! (As a side note, I’d like to advertise a new article by Andrew Johnson: “http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=159&Itemid=59>Mars Anomalies”)

It should come to no surprise how the media affects peoples’ minds and our culture, and the media’s reporting of 9/11 is no exception.

The 9/11 coverup perpetrators had their deceptive propaganda well planned. With their total control over the media they successfully conditioned most into believing their “19 boxcutter-wielding Muslims” story. People were overwhelmed; their brains saturated with the propaganda.

November 10, 2001 - George W Bush brainwashes the world into thinking the idea of “inside job” is crazy: ”Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/11/20011110-3.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K5M0xtxQVQ

But the propaganda didn’t stop there. The coverup perps, the experts they are, knew some people would see through their “boxcutter” deception, so they crafted an alternate propaganda… specifically targeting those already suspicious of the “official” story.

Lenin, the first Communist dictator after the takeover of Russia in 1917, is widely credited with the following quotation, "The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves."
http://www.realnews247.com/fascism_disguised_at_democracy.htm

This alternate propaganda is promoted by government plants within the “truth movement”, along with its fabricated evidence (such as http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=91&Itemid=60>molten metal). Of course, the media carefully publicize this “evidence” as a “wacky conspiracy theory”…

November 14, 2005 - Tucker Carlson brainwashes the world into thinking the idea of an “inside job” theory is offensive. Steven Jones promotes the “alternate propaganda”:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10053445


Yet, the coverup perpetrators use ridicule to keep the “REAL” version hidden…

December 6, 2006 - Steven E Jones brainwashes the 9/11 “truth movement” into thinking the idea of directed energy weapons and no planes is “crazy disinfo”: “Of late, refers often to his association now with Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds. These two are noted for their no-planes-hit-the-Towers theories and for promoting the notion of ray-beams from space knocking down the Towers.”
http://judicial-inc.biz/Steven_Jones_quits_911.htm

Jones is one of many in and around the “truth movement” associated with Los Alamos where Directed Energy Weapons are researched. See here to learn how the 9/11 attacks, the 9/11 cover up, and the 9/11 "truth movement" were orchestrated by people associated with directed energy weapons and the media. Jones also suppressed free energy research in ways that mirror his 9/11 coverup:

9/11 Directed Energy Weapon / TV-Fakery Suppression Timeline
By CB_Brooklyn
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=151&Itemid=60

Timeline of Events Involving Steve Jones, Crockett Grabbe and Steve Koonin
By Russ Gerst
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=162&Itemid=60


If no-planes/TV-Fakery were “crazy disinfo”, why didn’t the media use it to discredit the “truth movement”? Here’s a video of Dr Morgan Reynolds on FOX News: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reQZT9Hzvt8

Certainly if no-planes/TV-Fakery were “crazy disinfo”, the media would have invited Dr Reynolds back. Why didn’t they?

On top of that, why didn’t the media report Reynolds’ or Wood’s court cases, represented by Attorney Jerry Leaphart?

Dr Morgan Reynolds, suing on behalf of the United States of America and demanding a Trial by Jury, has evidence that the Media broadcasted cartoons of an airplane hitting the South Tower.
http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=federal_case

Docket No. 1:07-cv-04612-GBD
Title: Dr. Morgan Reynolds ex rel. USA vs. Science Applications International Corp. et al.
Venue: United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Judge: George B. Daniels


Dr Judy Wood, suing on behalf of the United States of America and demanding a Trial by Jury, has evidence that Directed Energy Weapons were a causal factor in the destruction of the World Trade Center.
http://drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.html

Docket No. 1:07-cv-03314-GBD
Title: Dr. Judy Wood ex rel. USA vs. Applied Research Associates, Inc. et al.
Venue: United States District Court, Southern District of New York
Judge: George B. Daniels

=================================================
UPDATE!!! While composing this article the author became aware of the following:

New York Times
“For Engineer, a Cloud of Litigation After 9/11”
By Jim Dwyer
February 23, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/nyregion/23about.htm


The relevant quote is as follows (emphasis added):

”… one man has sued on behalf of the United States, claiming that Mr. Gilsanz is part of a vast conspiracy to cover up the truth about 9/11, including the “so-called building failures.” The lawsuit maintains that exotic weaponry actually destroyed the buildings, and that the airplanes were mass psychological trickery.”


Wood and Reynolds have filed two separate lawsuits.

No mention of Wood/Reynolds/Leaphart’s names in the Times article.
=================================================


Let us review…

The media (i.e. MSNBC):
promote the “official” version as “the truth”
ridicule the “alternate” version as the “offensive wacky conspiracy theory”
shun the “REAL” version and court cases

Plants in the ”truth movement” (i.e. Steven Jones):
promote the “alternate” version as “the truth”
ridicule the “REAL” version as “offensive wacky conspiracy theory”



We can now understand why many “truthers” shy away from no-planes/TV-Fakery. Seems the 9/11 coverup perps tricked the “truth movement” with a well orchestrated plan of deception! Will these theories really “damage” the “truth movement”, or has the movement merely been tricked into thinking so?

Many “truthers” often wonder why the mainstream media hasn’t broken the “inside job” story yet. The reason is simple: The 9/11 perps have not been exposed. (Check the “Suppression Timeline” linked above.)

Only after the real 9/11 perpetrators are widely exposed with the media break!

Will “truthers” finally start promoting no-planes/TV-Fakery? If the “truth movement” can’t admit their mistakes, why should the average person? People will simply continue believing what they feel most comfortable with: the “boxcutter” story. They don’t care about the evidence. Why should they? After all, the “truth movement” doesn’t. Or do they???


How many “truthers” have looked at the no-planes/TV-Fakery evidence lately… evidence that anyone can understand?

Below you will find a ton of evidence. Look it through… you maybe surprised!

======================================================
======================================================
======================================================


Article is continued here:
http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=163&Itemid=60

[Ordr]

1. Self-edit.

Mean-spiritedness.

[sabbat hunter]

2. how do you explain then

the people in manhattan, elsewhere that saw the second plane hit the south tower in person?!

[Ohio Joe]

3. I'd like to know the answer to that as well

Seeing as how I grew up in that area and my mother witnessed the second plane hitting as well as several other people I know.

[Ghost in the Machine]

4. Well that's easy.. they were hypnotized by "dream beams" the night before!

Don't you know that they can hypnotize whole cities and states while they sleep? They send out directed energy thought beams (complete with subliminal messages) and brainwash people into thinking they saw something that they didn't. Then they used holographs of planes to cloak missles that were fired from invisible fighter jets. My gosh man! Have you had your head buried in the sand or what? (Ok, this is all sarcasm, for those who don't know)


Ok... I can buy into controlled demolition of the twin towers & building 7. I can buy into a missle strike on the Pentagon. I'd bet money that Flight 93 was shot down..... but there is no way in hell I can buy into the no planes theory at the towers....

The 9-11 Commission Report is full of holes.... and lies. That much is clear, given that the heads of the commission flat out stated that they were "set up to fail" and were hindered in their efforts by official obstruction.

The NIST is a less than full investigation/report also.

We owe it to every person who lost their lives that day, and their families, to get the 100% pure, unadulterated truth as to EXACTLY what happened that day.. and why it happened. Period. Anyone who doesn't think so is a believer of lies and distortion and aren't worth the time it takes to debate with them.

Just my two cents worth

[freeze]

6. Curious

"I can buy into a missle strike on the Pentagon.... but there is no way in hell I can buy into the no planes theory at the towers...."

What are your reasons if you can buy no plane hitting the Pentagon?

[Ghost in the Machine]

12. Too many people saw the second plane hit the tower?

:shrug:

There were hundreds of eyewitnesses and lots of video footage from civillians at the towers. Do you think they were all plants and that all the videos were confiscated and faked?

As for the Pentagon, why did they confiscate all the video tapes from surrounding businesses? Why haven't they released those videos and ended any talk of a missile strike? I find it hard to believe that a minimumly skilled pilot could hold a jetliner a couple of feet off the ground and hit a building, like this one apparently did, without bouncing off of the ground first or something. The Pentagon hit was a much more "surgical hit" and required much greater skill than hitting the towers.

[Echo In Light]

13. They could've dispelled much had they simply showed extensive coverage of Pentagon strike

That they staunchly resisted, coupled with the FBI swiping the "incriminating" videos of surrounding businesses, and, that incredibly shoddy, pieced together clip they re-released a yr or so back of whatever it was that hit the Pentagon... well, one would suppose that this would give even Crusading Coincidence Theorists pause.

[AngryAmish]

8. anecdote

[Ohio Joe]

11. I would grant that but...

I'd still like the question answered.

[planesmyarse]

29. I'd like to know why all the live reporters on the ground didn't see/hear a plane

They all just thought the south tower exploded.

[freeze]

5. What's the logic of the No Plane Theory?

Why not fly remotely controlled 767's into the towers? To me, that seems so much cheaper and easier. Why do something so elaborate as faking a ton of videos and photos if that's even possible?

[wildbilln864]

7. yeppers!

I'v always suspected the planes were taken over by remote control. After all, one of the alledged hijackers booked flights after 911. Why would he do that if he thought he was going to die on 911?
linky :hi:

[planesmyarse]

30. Guaranteed penetration.

Something real planes couldn't give them.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

9. Thanks for the informative post...

...I think "no planes" is now gaining greater acceptance within the truth movement -- it's been a long time coming.

[Laurier]

10. Yes, as the "truth" movement scrapes the bottom of the barrel of lunacy,

it is not at all surprising that "no planes is now gaining greater acceptance within the truth movement".

In the real world, however...

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

15. Very compelling presentation...

...that "bottom of the barrel of lunacy" line really speaks.

You've turned me, man -- thanks for showing me the light. I'm OCT all the way now, 19 Arabs with box cutters, just like they said.

[CB_Brooklyn]

14. Read the Full Article

Be sure to continue reading article at the last link I posted.

Learn of the 1999 Washington Post article that details the military's hologram project.

Learn of the NYPD official who said the South Tower strike "looked like an evil magician's trick".

Learn that very few people reported seeing airplanes, and even fewer reported hearing them.

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=163&Itemid=60

[Twist_U_Up]

16. Ive seen this all over the net. GJ CB Kick nt

[Laurier]

17. Yes, it's on the Internet so it must be true!

:rofl:

[Laurier]

18. Keep spreading the "no planes" conspiracy theories. Seriously.

Keep spreading the "no planes" conspiracy theories. Seriously.

They are very effective in causing potential conspiracy fantasists to realize just how crazy most of the conspiracy theories of the *cough* "truth" movement are, and very effective in causing those potential conspiracy fantasists to instead embrace reality.

The "no planes" theories might even be the most effective tool for repelling people from the *cough* "truth" movement in the history of ever.

So, keep it up!

[Twist_U_Up]

20. Wow, you sure showed the "crackpot conspiracy theorists" with your nanapoopoo rhetoric.

You're a Great American!!

[AZCat]

21. Why do you assume that the poster to whom you responded...

is American? You are aware that DU has quite a few non-American members, right?

[defendandprotect]

26. Let me suggest that you review the investigations . . .

there is quite an interesting one where "witnesses" to the Pentagon plane are interviewed and
indicate the ROUTES they saw the Pentagon plane take ---

In fact, at least two of the witnesses are police officers ---

The interviews make it quite clearer what actually happened ---

and what it looks like is that the plane passed OVER the Pentagon and that the explosions were
fired off simultaneously, making it look as though the plane had hit the Pentagon ---
though it had not.

[defendandprotect]

19. In the case of the Pentagon, it seems clear now that a plane was flown OVER

the Pentagon with simultaneous explosion happening ---

to witnesses it appeared as though the plane had hit the Pentagon --

investigators believe the plane simply flew over it ---

Maybe the same thing happened with the WTC towers . . . plane seen coming in from one direction
passing nearby WTC towers ---

However, I don't have this feeling that large numbers of people saw the second plane hit
the WTC towers . ..

[SDuderstadt]

22. Fricking unbelievable

"However, I don't have this feeling that large numbers of people saw the second plane hit
the WTC towers . .."

You're kidding, right? Do you ever bother to look for evidence that contradicts your goofy theories? There were a large number of eyewitnesses who saw the plane hit the second tower, as well as direct eyewitnesses who saw the plane hit the Pentagon. The planes "flew over" the WTC and the Pentagon, indeed. And you wonder why no one takes you seriously.


http://www.questionsquestions.net/WTC/review.html

[defendandprotect]

23. The "eyewitnesses" who are taped .... seem to have more connections to MSM ...

than to reality ---

You're repeating stuff that indicates you are far behind in catching up with and understanding newer investigations -- or ignoring them.

My guess is --- IGNORING . . .

[SDuderstadt]

24. Oh, bullshit, D&P...

As usual, you offer up total nonsense and conjecture, with vague, unsourced references and silly phrases like "seem to have more connections to MSM", as if that actually means something. What proof do you have of this? Hint: goofy CT sites don't count. Exactly what stuff am I repeating that "indicates (I) am far behnd in catching up with and understanding newer investigations"? You mean sourcing eyewitness accounts from people who actually saw the planes hit the WTC and the Pentagon isn't good enough for you?

Actually, you are right about one thing. I am, in fact, ignoring goofy CT's with absolutely no basis in fact. Nor, can you seem to provide any actual evidence of them. I'm calling you out on your bullshit. Let's see your evidence. Quit stalling.

[defendandprotect]

25. As usual, we see profanity and personal attack from you . . .

That you supposedly have no clue as to the reference I made re "eyewitnesses" being traced to MSM
actually proves what I've just said ---

And, presume I'm one more person putting you on IGNORE . . .

Ta-ta

[SDuderstadt]

27. What a crock, D&P...

"bullshit" is profanity? It's an apt description of your nonsense. The link below is to oral histories from 503 firefighters, medics and EMT's, many of whom witnessed the plane hit the second tower. Please show they are "connected to the MSM", if you can. I asked you for proof of your claim and you folded...as expected.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_full_01.html

[planesmyarse]

28. Nice post CB

No planers keep growing because everybody see the videos are fake and everyone knows giant soda cans can't melt through steel.