Footage: Military Plane Hitting WTC Tower on 9/11 -13 Witnesses React / 9/11 WTC Drone Attack/Strike Plane / WTC 100% Military Plane Proof – Videos
Monday, October 23, 2017 10:39
Published on Mar 10, 2012
SUBSCRIBE 259K
There are around 16 LIVE reactions of groups of people close enough to see the plane, guess how
many of those people said the plane was either: no commercial plane OR a military plane (grey, no markings). ALL of them.
There is not a single witness who saw the plane who thought or made any suggestion that the plane was a commercial plane let alone a UA plane.
And if there ever is one you can bet your life that it is a paid actor and/or thought it was a commercial plane based on the shape or because they painted the tail blue.
Published on Mar 19, 2013
SUBSCRIBE 259K
FAQ:
1: What happened to the people on the 4 missing airliners? Impossible to know exactly since the CIA had known hijack drills that morning, fake radar data was inserted and real rada data was replaced. The CIA planned to hijack airliners and fly them to military bases in “operation malgom virgo”. They could have done it many different ways. It’s easy to make airliners disappear if you are the government. A good example is MH370, even with working and up to date radar tracking technology, the plane and all passengers are still missing several years later.
If nature can make an airliner disappear, imagine what the CIA can do on a morning with known hijack drills. Obviously they killed all the passengers. If you don’t think the CIA would kill americans, watch “CIA & Satanism” by Ted Gunderson.
2: Why didn’t they paint the belly to be dark blue like UA175?: Impossible to know their reasoning, but they felt it was enough to just paint the tail. You can’t deny the fact that they got away with it.
Even if you don’t believe the video footage shows it was a military plane and that all the witnesses were wrong, the engine that flew out from the supposed U.A. 175 crash did not belong to any of the missing 9-11 planes, no U.A. 767 in history has ever used that engine. The engine is forensic proof, study the pictures and compare it to the model UA175 used. The case is closed.
Here is the web article comparing the engines http://ckpi.typepad.com/christopher_k…
Showing that the “hijackers” were nothing but CIA agents
Published on Aug 5, 2012
SUBSCRIBE 259K
WHISTLEBLOWER – 9/11 “hijackers” were recruited by the CIA and sent to America for training, then obviously set up to be the “faces” of the hijackers. They did not board or hijack any planes on 9/11. Watch “what happened to the missing 9/11 planes” to understand how the CIA made the airliners disappear, or “9/11 intercepted”.
Published on Sep 14, 2012
SUBSCRIBE 6.4K
(2012) Missing Airliners Explained – They did not impact the Towers – Drones did.
MAKE THIS ONE VIRAL, THERE IS NO OTHER 9/11 DRONE VID LIKE THIS. THANKS TO WEARECHANGENJ FOR MUCH OF THE FOOTAGE.
A remade video of an older version, this one contains many new witnesses.
Common questions: How did the shadow government (the conspirators) take over the planes?
Answer: They could have done it by having CIA agents on the plane along with their arab mercinaries and made the people believe it was a hijacking, and then flown the plane manually to a remote base where they got rid of all the passengers and then took the plane apart.
Possibility 2: They just took over the plane from the ground, turned off the transponder and then flew the plane to wherever they prepared it for. (All commercial airliners are designed so that full control can be taken of the plane from the ground).
What about the calls that were made by the passengers?
Answer: If you believe that no such thing as voice morph is possible that can fool relatives and loved ones, watch “The afterlife investigations”. The calls were impossible and many were suspicious, for example, Ted Olson claimed that his wife called him from a seatphone from 1 of the planes, turns out that particular American Airlines plane had no seatphones.
His testimony contradicts what the FBI later concluded in their “investigation” about the calls. Ted Olson was also a Bush administration insider, they could have very well just made him come up with this story to give some credibility to the hijacker theory.
Why are there around 3 people who said the second plane was United Airlines?
Answer: It is expected that the shadow government would have actors ready on phone/running around trying to get some airtime to say the plane was a UA plane, so nothing strange there, and many probably got fooled and said it was a UA plane based on the painted tail, which was infact blue, they just did not bother painting the rest of the plane blue for a reason, I assume they thought that there would be no close-up shots of the belly. But all the close-up shots show the plane had a grey belly, the same shade of grey that the towers had in the shadow.
There is 1 very common faked “still-image” on the web that shows a semi-high resolution picture of a UA plane about to hit the second tower, this picture has no source and even looks fake. We have 2 clear video sources showing the plane had a grey belly, this just shows that the conspirators had this image faked to give some credibility to the UA 175 theory.
SUBSCRIBE 259K
There are around 16 LIVE reactions of groups of people close enough to see the plane, guess how
many of those people said the plane was either: no commercial plane OR a military plane (grey, no markings). ALL of them.
There is not a single witness who saw the plane who thought or made any suggestion that the plane was a commercial plane let alone a UA plane.
And if there ever is one you can bet your life that it is a paid actor and/or thought it was a commercial plane based on the shape or because they painted the tail blue.
SUBSCRIBE 259K
FAQ:
1: What happened to the people on the 4 missing airliners? Impossible to know exactly since the CIA had known hijack drills that morning, fake radar data was inserted and real rada data was replaced. The CIA planned to hijack airliners and fly them to military bases in “operation malgom virgo”. They could have done it many different ways. It’s easy to make airliners disappear if you are the government. A good example is MH370, even with working and up to date radar tracking technology, the plane and all passengers are still missing several years later.
If nature can make an airliner disappear, imagine what the CIA can do on a morning with known hijack drills. Obviously they killed all the passengers. If you don’t think the CIA would kill americans, watch “CIA & Satanism” by Ted Gunderson.
2: Why didn’t they paint the belly to be dark blue like UA175?: Impossible to know their reasoning, but they felt it was enough to just paint the tail. You can’t deny the fact that they got away with it.
Even if you don’t believe the video footage shows it was a military plane and that all the witnesses were wrong, the engine that flew out from the supposed U.A. 175 crash did not belong to any of the missing 9-11 planes, no U.A. 767 in history has ever used that engine. The engine is forensic proof, study the pictures and compare it to the model UA175 used. The case is closed.
Here is the web article comparing the engines http://ckpi.typepad.com/christopher_k…
Showing that the “hijackers” were nothing but CIA agents
SUBSCRIBE 259K
WHISTLEBLOWER – 9/11 “hijackers” were recruited by the CIA and sent to America for training, then obviously set up to be the “faces” of the hijackers. They did not board or hijack any planes on 9/11. Watch “what happened to the missing 9/11 planes” to understand how the CIA made the airliners disappear, or “9/11 intercepted”.
SUBSCRIBE 6.4K
(2012) Missing Airliners Explained – They did not impact the Towers – Drones did.
MAKE THIS ONE VIRAL, THERE IS NO OTHER 9/11 DRONE VID LIKE THIS. THANKS TO WEARECHANGENJ FOR MUCH OF THE FOOTAGE.
A remade video of an older version, this one contains many new witnesses.
Common questions: How did the shadow government (the conspirators) take over the planes?
Answer: They could have done it by having CIA agents on the plane along with their arab mercinaries and made the people believe it was a hijacking, and then flown the plane manually to a remote base where they got rid of all the passengers and then took the plane apart.
Possibility 2: They just took over the plane from the ground, turned off the transponder and then flew the plane to wherever they prepared it for. (All commercial airliners are designed so that full control can be taken of the plane from the ground).
What about the calls that were made by the passengers?
Answer: If you believe that no such thing as voice morph is possible that can fool relatives and loved ones, watch “The afterlife investigations”. The calls were impossible and many were suspicious, for example, Ted Olson claimed that his wife called him from a seatphone from 1 of the planes, turns out that particular American Airlines plane had no seatphones.
His testimony contradicts what the FBI later concluded in their “investigation” about the calls. Ted Olson was also a Bush administration insider, they could have very well just made him come up with this story to give some credibility to the hijacker theory.
Why are there around 3 people who said the second plane was United Airlines?
Answer: It is expected that the shadow government would have actors ready on phone/running around trying to get some airtime to say the plane was a UA plane, so nothing strange there, and many probably got fooled and said it was a UA plane based on the painted tail, which was infact blue, they just did not bother painting the rest of the plane blue for a reason, I assume they thought that there would be no close-up shots of the belly. But all the close-up shots show the plane had a grey belly, the same shade of grey that the towers had in the shadow.
There is 1 very common faked “still-image” on the web that shows a semi-high resolution picture of a UA plane about to hit the second tower, this picture has no source and even looks fake. We have 2 clear video sources showing the plane had a grey belly, this just shows that the conspirators had this image faked to give some credibility to the UA 175 theory.
No comments:
Post a Comment