9/11 Video: Plane Hitting South Tower

Fast-forward to 2:00 if you're in a hurry. Gut wrenching.




Do you believe this video is fiction?



In a world that is obliging you to accept fiction as reality you shuold be skeptical about any evidence they produce, and this is an evidence produced by the PTB, that you believe to be original and real, yet you were not allowed to see it in 21 years.
You know that todays is possible to create a vid like this one.
This is the reality I'm worried about, not whether the WTC had been hit by planes or not.
 

Mike

qui transtulit sustinet
In a world that is obliging you to accept fiction as reality you shuold be skeptical about any evidence they produce, and this is an evidence produced by the PTB, that you believe to be original and real, yet you were not allowed to see it in 21 years.
You know that todays is possible to create entirely from scratch a scene like this one.
This is the reality I'm worried about, not whether the WTC had been hit by planes or not.
I believe hundreds if not thousands of people witnessed the second plane crash into the south tower with their own naked eyes. There was already film of it. Why would the PTB bother to create a new video two decades later? What would be the point?
 
I believe hundreds if not thousands of people witnessed the second plane crash into the south tower with their own naked eyes. There was already film of it. Why would the PTB bother to create a new video two decades later? What would be the point?

So what was the point of confiscating all the cameras and vids so practically forbidding them to be shown in their original form?

I sense that such new evidence will continue to surface in the future, I feel like in 1984 when it's been repeated ad nauseam that 2+2=5

It's made to keep alive the fictional narrative and the shocking
 

Mike

qui transtulit sustinet
So what was the point of confiscating all the cameras and vids so practically forbidding them to be shown in their original form?

I sense that such new evidence will continue to surface in the future, I feel like in 1984 when it's been repeated ad nauseam that 2+2=5

It's made to keep alive the fictional narrative and the shocking

What parts of of the narrative are like 2+2=5 to you?

From me the actual fictions were these:
- Saddam Hussein was partly or wholly responsible for the 9-11 attacks
- Iraq had weapons of mass destruction
- The USA needed to invade Iraq in order to prevent future attacks
 
The Republican Party had plans to get rid of Saddam Hussein before 9/11 even happened. It was in the Republican Party platform. Saddam Hussein was an ally against Al Qaeda.
 
What parts of of the narrative are like 2+2=5 to you?

From me the actual fictions were these:
- Saddam Hussein was partly or wholly responsible for the 9-11 attacks
- Iraq had weapons of mass destruction
- The USA needed to invade Iraq in order to prevent future attacks

The Terror they pretended to fight never existed, this is the 2+2=5. You can't imagine how much damage could do any random people in the West in a single day, with primitive tools. Yet there have never been a large scale sabotage or destruction, only a few catastrophic events that normal people could not pull out without tech and intel help . . .
Also because muslims don't need it, since in Europe they are going to prevail simply by sheer demographics and do not wish to be accused of such atrocities while silently achieving it.
The PTB firstly need to create confusion, so people can't have a clear view or a strong opinion on what's going on; then they provide a narrative to resolve the confusion. Then perpetuate the narrative with periodical supposed new evidence while continuously repeating the same mantra.
And they succeeded, since seems settled that 9/11 was an attack against amarican imperialism and globalism, while in reality it's been an attack by the globalists (sacrificing one of their symbols and playing the part of the victim) against the american people, with the following Patriot Act and more.
 

Mike

qui transtulit sustinet
The Terror they pretended to fight never existed, this is the 2+2=5. You can't imagine how much damage could do any random people in the West in a single day, with primitive tools. Yet there have never been a large scale sabotage or destruction, only a few catastrophic events that normal people could not pull out without tech and intel help . . .
Also because muslims don't need it, since in Europe they are going to prevail simply by sheer demographics and do not wish to be accused of such atrocities while silently achieving it.
The PTB firstly need to create confusion, so people can't have a clear view or a strong opinion on what's going on; then they provide a narrative to resolve the confusion. Then perpetuate the narrative with periodical supposed new evidence while continuously repeating the same mantra.
And they succeeded, since seems settled that 9/11 was an attack against amarican imperialism and globalism, while in reality it's been an attack by the globalists (sacrificing one of their symbols and playing the part of the victim) against the american people, with the following Patriot Act and more.
There is no adversary called "Terror" and undoubtedly the GWOT was a cover story to start stupid "forever wars" for the benefit of Israel's national security and to make profit for the military-industrial complex. However I do think Al Qaeda was real and they pulled it off - yes it was 19 hijackers with boxcutters, turning four planes into missiles. It's not implausible because suicide bombing is indeed a practice of Islamicists, and no one was expecting this new twist, so no one was prepared. OBL used to talk about attacking America and the Towers had been already targeted previously by Islamicists. In CIA terms, this is called "blowback". If you would like to imply that most Muslims wouldn't do this, then I will agree. But not all Muslims are moderates.

You can doubt or dispute these core claims about 9-11 if you like, but in doing so IMHO you create more puzzles than you solve and wind up with a less plausible narrative. If the alternative narrative is less plausible (and honestly they're often far less plausible) than the official narrative, what good is it?

Who exactly the hijackers were and who helped them is an open question. I would not be surprised if Israel helped, but I am not sure. It would be a really risky thing for them to do. These attacks truly enraged Americans and I am not sure any Jews even with all their characteristic chutzpah would play with fire like that. I prefer to think that the neoconservatives opportunistically misdirected the rage through their lies rather than directly planned the attacks themselves. But it's not inconceivable that the Israeli intelligence services withheld information or even had a role in assisting the hijackers. They had pulled similar stunts back in the 1980s, allowing US Marines to die in Lebanon. And of course there is the USS Liberty attack. So yeah I suppose it's possible they had a hand in it.
 
Last edited:
We don't need to have the case closed, so Im not trying to impose any narrative or explanation. It's the urge of an explanation that drives far from the truth, and common people urge to have an explanation to stop to think about it and continue in a world where everything is in its right place.
But the investigator shall not accept any explanation that can't stand up.
 

Gawn Chippin

Arachnocronymic Metaphoron
...I do think Al Qaeda was real and they pulled it off...
"Allegedly" like the attack on Pearl Harbor, it was allowed to happen, in oarder to serve certain interests. The truth lies in the evaluation of this following reaction to the second hit:



Was the school visit show timely coordinated with knowledge of an impending attack or were boath events purely coincidental? Wouldn't prior knowledge have been better concealed, if Bush had instead not been filmed whatsoever?
 

Mike

qui transtulit sustinet
"Allegedly" like the attack on Pearl Harbor, it was allowed to happen, in oarder to serve certain interests. The truth lies in the evaluation of this following reaction to the second hit:



Was the school visit show timely coordinated with knowledge of an impending attack or were boath events purely coincidental? Wouldn't prior knowledge have been better concealed, if Bush had instead not been filmed whatsoever?

Unfortunately the video you linked is unavailable. I'll say something going purely by memory. The impression, which is just an impression, that I got in that moment from GWB Jr. is that he looked like a deer caught in the headlights. In the first hours, no one knew how many things were going to get blowed up and the president seemed to be behaving in accordance with that uncertainty, prudently flying in the skies above the fray in Airforce One. If all of that was part of an act, it was one that seemed convincing to me.

I don't rule out some people having foreknowledge but let's be clear about one thing. There are not a lot of people in the American government who would betray their country in the way of knowingly allowing foreign terrorists into the country who are intent on murdering thousands of Americans. Former assistant secretary-of-state Larry Wilkerson helped Colin Powell tell lies to the UN about Iraqi WMDs and after the fact he clearly feels ashamed about that. It's not credible to me that he knew anything in advance about 9-11. Cheney's persona is more reptilian so maybe he did. The neocons, especially the Jewish ones, have no special love for regular Americans and other humans. But the American citizens who knew in advance were a very small number of heartless and treasonous people, if there were any at all, IMHO. If it were a larger conspiracy keeping it a secret would be impossible.
 
POTUS of course had been kept out of the plot. He must have been worried also because of his own responsibilities, since he declared that the US were at risk of a terrorist attacks few days before, so he failed to protect.
And because it was known the risk of an attack I find incredible that the biggest military power had zero air defences ready in NY, DC and Pentagon.
Zero fighters already in flight, zero AA batteries (neither a mobile battery moved in temporarly). And also no scramble ready.
 
Last edited:

Gawn Chippin

Arachnocronymic Metaphoron
Unfortunately the video you linked is unavailable...
To whom? I'm presently in nanny state Germany and can still view it.
If the country you're in is somehow making a nuissance of itself through tamperring with your access to it, simply sign up with the Proton e-mailing service and then click on Tor where you'll be re-directed.
If it's only a matter of Microsoft Edge or Google's browsers interfering, you gain access, through using the following: www.brave.com
 
Last edited:

Mike

qui transtulit sustinet
To whom? I'm presently in nanny state Germany and can still view it.
If the country you're in is somehow making a nuissance of itself through tamperring with your access to it, simply sign up with the Proton e-mailing service and then ckick on Tor where you'll be re-directed.
If it's only a matter of Microsoft Edge or Google's browsers interfering, you gain access, through using the following: www.brave.com
Just for the record I am in the USA and the video is not available to me. We all should be moving to Rumble, Odyssey, Bitchute, whatever, for all political videos, though I myself have yet to make this change. The random blocking and comments moderation is preposterous and YouTube i.e. Google does not need to know what we like to watch anyway.
 

Gawn Chippin

Arachnocronymic Metaphoron
...If it were a larger conspiracy keeping it a secret would be impossible.
Files on the Kennedy assassination are still being withheld, as well as the contents of John Podesta's laptop.
Simultaneously, attention is paid to certain groupings, while certain secret societies seem impenetrable:


...There’s time enough to valorize the work of Scott B., an undercover fed who breached far-right death squads and squashed their national web of terror cells...
 
Top