The 9/11 No-Plane Question Of Questions

By Robert Singer

Compare the two pictures below. The picture on the left is Flight 175 that doesn’t decelerate or produce any plane wreckage as it disappears in a puff of smoke inside the South Tower. The picture on the right, taken by a news helicopter, shows a Boeing 767 coming out the opposite side of the impact zone of the North Tower.

Whether or not you believe that planes were used on 9/11, you should be asking two questions:

1. Why would anyone bother to fake crashing planes into the WTC towers, requiring them to fake all the crash videos as well when it would be much easier for them to crash real planes into the Towers using the military’s Global Hawk remote control technology?” [1]
2. Why would anyone make the video of Flight 175 available to CNN or why would the engineers in charge of the computer generated imagery (CGI) video fakery fail to see the nose-out blunder on the North Tower?

Before I answer the questions we need to consider the Theory of Controlled Demolition.

There is absolutely no proof, evidence, hypothesis or theory that will prove that a controlled demolition using thermite, Super-Thermite” or nano-thermite, was responsible for the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11. [8]

Even a child can see the picture on the left and in the center have nothing in common with the picture on the right (controlled demolition).

Hiroshima and the North Tower represent a highly unconventional destructive release of energy, with temperatures much hotter than the sun. And BTW, both Hiroshima and the North Tower are EXPLOSIONS, controlled demolition is Implosion.

Steven Jones, who is the “expert” for the 9/11 Truth movement, is a professor of physics with no expertise whatsoever in controlled demolitions. Dr. Jones was asked to leave the university when he embarrassed the physics department at Brigham Young by writing that demolitions of WTC 1, 2 and 7 are the same; however,

WTC 7 was a bottom-up a gravity-assisted collapse with a small debris field, while WTC 1 and 2 were primarily top-down, virtually unassisted by gravity and showered debris in a wide radius as their frames essentially “peeled” outward. FEMA: WTC Study, Ch. 5 (05/02)

Jones’ research, never peer reviewed, does not prove the building collapsed from controlled demolition.Click here and read footnote 9, a thorough debunking of any theory of controlled demolition of the Twin Towers on 9/11.

The Answer to the 9/11 No-plane Question of Questions

The use of Computer-Generated Video Graphics (CGI No-plane fakery) ensured that no one would discover whatreallyhappened on 9/11, let me explain.

The perpetrators of the 9/11 Hoax (the same ones behind the Apollo 11 Hoax) knew that a legitimate investigator or truth seeker has integrity and a duty to report whatreallyhappened on 9/11, even if it has no relevance or importance to the events.

And once he put his no-plane (foot) in his mouth, it became the hyper-straw man by which ALL of his theories could be attacked. [13b]

And speaking of whatreallyhappened, read the transcript of the testimony of Mike Rivero, AKA John Wenckus (CNN Removes Picture of John J. Wenckus) at the NY Grand Jury on 9/11, to find out what he did before he launched his popular website www.whatreallyhappened.com for the CIA.

[Click here to read the entire New York City Grand Jury Indictment on 9/11]

Bugliosi: Good morning Mr. Rivero or is it John Wenckus?

Rivero: Yes, I went by the name of John Wenckus when I worked for NASA.

Bugliosi: You have admitted your part in the conspiracy to produce the faked plane impacts with the World Trade Center using CNN Video Fakery/Cartoon CGI.

What technical expertise qualified you for the task?

Rivero: I spent 25 years as a photo imaging expert analyst for NASA. During that time, I consulted in Hollywood on Sci-Fi projects and created the special effects for Star Trek, Stargate and the ABC hit miniseries “Lost.”

Bugliosi: Please summarize for the Jury CGI Video Fakery and the no-plane issue.

Rivero: The objective of the faked airplane crashes was to prevent discovery of the Metaphysical Catechism (Test).

The Powers That Be( TPTB) suffer from OCD when it comes to their metaphysical struggle with the Earth; they don’t leave anything to chance. A real and present danger existed. What if the Earth prevailed (which it did on 9/11), and the profane (middle class) found out about the conspiracy to use humans to weaken the Earth with environmental damage by living in a consumer society?

Then people would stop shopping, watch The Story of Stuff and then go out and form sustainable living communities like Portland City Repair. If that happened in 2001 the TPTB would have been defeated long before October 29, 2008. The Power of Community, Why was I born? Why are we here?

Therefore the test designers built a “gotcha” into 9/11.

Bugliosi: Explain.

Rivero: They knew a scientist, like Dr. Judy Wood with experience in material science (controlled demolition), would come forward and debunk Steven Jones. Dr. Wood has presented a compelling case for the collapse that explains the 1,400 cars that were toasted in inexplicable patterns and the dip of the Earth’s magnetic field at the precise moment of the supposed first plane “impact.” Furthermore, she calls attention to the presence of Hurricane Erin off the coast of New York on 9/11.

The test of the Earth’s energy was designed to ensure that no one would listen to Dr. Wood.

Bugliosi: How was that accomplished?

Rivero: They used computer-generated video graphics to fake the plane crashes into the North and South towers, a.k.a. the no-plane theory.

Bugliosi: I’m having trouble. What do no-planes have to do with the no-controlled demolition of the Twin Towers?

Rivero: Actually, everything and nothing.

We knew that investigators would quickly realize the physical impossibility of jumbo jets, being largely aluminum, penetrating the steel frames of the towers.

We knew that even an amateur researcher would figure out that digital compositing was used to depict the plane crashes in the news reports and subsequent amateur videos, so then we “had” them.

Bugliosi: I am not sure the jury is following your logic.

Rivero: Everyone on the team realized a legitimate investigator or truth seeker has integrity and a duty to report everything they discover, even if it has no relevance or importance to the events under investigation.

When the investigators reported on the impossibility of a Theory of Controlled Demolition, they would also report that no planes were flown into the Twin Towers. [12b]

Look at this statement from Morgan Reynolds:

“There were no planes, there were no hijackers. I know, I know, I’m out of the mainstream, but that’s the way it is. How could two large wide-bodied aluminum jetliners penetrate massive steel towers and disappear with no deceleration visible, no plane wreckage visible in gashes and none knocked to the ground below the impact zone?”

Reynolds knows he is out of the mainstream and he knows the issue is irrelevant to his discovery that controlled demolition could never explain the collapse of the Twin Towers.

But once he put his no-plane (foot) in his mouth, it became the hyper-straw man by which ALL of his theories could be attacked. [13b]

You can see from the posts below the 9/11 Truthers fell right into this trap.

• The crackpot theories like “no-planes, pods, energy weapons, holograms,” etc., were all looked at by many of us many years ago; we found there to be no truth to any of them and deemed them disinfo.
• The WTC demolitions are proven and the official 9/11 airliner tales are proven hogwash. This article, the beneficiary of work by many other investigators, proves it. I await the replies of Hoffman and other apologists to reestablish the official, albeit impossible, airliner stories. I expect little more than obfuscation. What really happened? I do not know. What is clear is that the government is lying about the four reported Big Boeing crashes.
• I don’t like these theories because they require a level of technology in excess of what’s needed to do the job. Global Hawk + nanothermite = Job Done.
• The no-planers actually create the disinfo they peddle, so they’re otherwise known as disinfo artists. Several of them have grievances with the 9/11 Truth movement, so that is the likely reason they create the disinfo and try to pass it off as “9/11 Truth” to make the movement look bad.

Rivero: The Truthers, who saw “there was no break in the building wall between the port engine and fuselage when the 757 allegedly hit the North Tower,” were threatened with violence and banned from conspiracy theory websites.

Everyone else in the “Truth” community kept quiet and accepted Professor James Fetzer’s explanation:

“It’s Tactical. Even if they (the advocates of No Plane Theory) are right, it hurts the movement. Many feel that there is so much evidence of government complicity beyond the issue of big passenger jets that diverting attention to the one thing most people believe that they “saw” is not to our tactical and strategic advantage.”

Bugliosi: Whoa, that’s a lot to take in.

Rivero: Yes, but, if you think about it, you have to appreciate the lengths TPTB were willing to go to keep anyone from finding out about the metaphysical struggle. Below is a typical no-plane ad hominem attack:

What it boils down to is that not a single legitimate research organization in the 9/11 Truth movement supports any of these crackpot disinfo theories. Not scholars, pilots, architects and engineers, lawyers, firefighters, 9/11 bloggers, Loose Change, you name it. Nobody supports these fringe theories. [all “illegitimate” organizations run by the CIA] [11q]

[ End of Mike Rivero testimony and the answer to The 9/11 No-plane Question of 9/11 Questions ]

Click here to read why Pictures of Mini Nukes at PakAlert Prove 9-11 was a Metaphysical Catechism (Test)

My attempt at 9/11 satire mixed with investigative journalism is 9/11 Breaking News: Nikola Tesla Testifies at NY Grand Jury on 9/11

Robert Singer writes about Secrets, Sentient Creatures and The Federal Reserve at The Peoples Voiceand The Market Oracle ([email protected])

Footnotes:

[1] Global Hawk is complemented by the DarkStar system, a Uav with low-observable characteristics.DarkStar is for use in high- threat environments where ensured, survivable coverage is more important than range and endurance. The complementary nature of the two systems provides a flexible, cost-effective mix for military commanders.

The Global Hawk program is funded by the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office (DARO) and managed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA ->) and the US Air Force. Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical is the prime contractor for the Global Hawk. Raytheon E-Systems (->) is developing the advanced sensor payload. The ground mission control segment is being developed by Hughes Aircraft, and the communications system is being developed by Lockheed Martin Communications Systems (->). Ryan Aeronautical Centre is another contractor. The principal suppliers for Global Hawk include Raytheon Systems (sensors), Allison (turbofan engine), Boeing North American (carbon fibre wing) and L3 Communications (communications system).

[Note: All other footnotes in the article are hyperlinks.]

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2012/09/07/the-9-11-no-plane-question-of-questions