9/11 CONSPIRACY | Conclusive Evidence the 9/11 Planes Were NOT REAL |


I claim no single part of this video as my own. Original video: 911PlanesHoax Extra tags: Believe Your Own Eyes – 9/11 – No “Planes” Were Ever Used.mp4 The …


19 Responses

  1. Diamond Dowg says:

    So if by some crazy chance, that this is right, how do you explain the plane wreckage and luggage at the crash sites? And how do you explain all the 4 missing planes and all the missing people if they didn't actually crash into the towers?

  2. Kearnsy74 says:

    What makes me doubt that the planes were real more than anything is the impossible plane speeds at sea level altitude

    Commercial jets WILL NOT be able to fly at low level altitude at 550 MPH, they're NOT designed to do that, they would break apart and fall to the ground

  3. cornskid says:

    No skyscraper hit by a Jumbo Jet has ever survived

  4. Sooo… what you're saying is that the planes should have blown up on impact and not damage the steel structure at all??

    Come on.

  5. dimitryklush says:

    Where the WTC planes real? I don't know… What I know is a simple fact, that 15 years later and with dozens of supposedly functioning cameras, there is still no footage of the Pentagon "plane" except for the four out of sequence frames that show (SURPRISE!) no plane.

  6. Guys the plane was NOT silent. Go watch a couple of other videos of the second plane hitting the tower, on several of the videos that were closer you can clearly hear the plane approaching.

  7. Kearnsey 74 right, so we can expect a grand jury to indict bush and cheney ( assume you think it was them?) any day now.. Lets indulge your fantasy for a moment. There he is in the dock. The presecution submit their evidence. Its a bunch of videos made by people with sillynames in basements. Yes your honour, and in this video bush nearly says the word conspiracy! Definite proof then. Open and shut case. And im deluded? Lmao.
    The reason these daft films get thumbs up is because thats where all the retards who believe this crap go to watch them.
    Thats not the way it works. If you think the nist and MIT reports are wrong, you have to prove that. Publish a peer reviewed paper that shows why the reports are wrong. In scientific detail. If consensus is reached, then you have evidence.
    Until such time i shall continue to wallow in my appalling ignorance. Come judgement day you can put us against the wall. Dont hold your breath. On second thought, yes do hold it.

  8. Jeez people, you don't need to be a physicist to know this is a ridiculous idea, planes disappearing into building, lol, come on. Circumstantial evidence of that day is so strong by itself that you can prove nothing was real, just from witnesses (who either saw nothing and talked about explosions, or saw a windowless plane-like "thing"), but you don't even need circumstantial, all you need is physics, and unless the "extremists" know how to control space-time, in which case we're toast anyway, then it's all made up. Oh, and try and find the so called families of the 3000 people, good luck with that. You'll find maybe 1%, and they won't talk. More-so, no building before that day or after "collapsed" due to fire, but on that day three? In a perfect demolition way, lol. And the firefighters reporting explosions in the basement and still in a class action suit, come on. WAKE UP.

  9. People, it's very simple. If you truly want the truth, there it is in millions of homes on American peoples VHS tapes. There were 5 live broadcasts that day, and if you don't believe the ones now are real (from either side, those on the truther side who know they have been doctored later that day for nightly news and those on the commission side who use them to prove their Islamist mastermind conspiracy), go and find people who taped the live broadcasts and find all 5 different feeds. Once you see them and you know they are the real thing, there is no more denial, you will have to face facts, the 5 do NOT match, they have the same 17 second delay and insert, and two are so ridiculous as to make you grind teeth. One shows a heat signature of something, they forgot to insert the plane (it's probably the only one that shows what actually hit the second tower, and it matches with eye-witnesses who did see something, where most saw nothing but heard a huge explosion). The other is just bad animation, clear for anyone to see.

  10. ythinder says:

    Utter crap, if a object such as an airliner travelling at 500+ mph hits s solid object it will be deatomised. NASA 'flew' a Phantom jet fighter attached to rails into a brick wall at 500mph and it was vapourised into dust…..and what more proof do you need than eyewitness accounts of people that were there that said aircraft hit the towers? You probably think they were paid by the government to say that because youve been watching too many Hollywood movies

  11. kinetoscopes says:

    So did the news lie?Unlikely

  12. alan Tony says:

    Sad to read all the misguided souls who believe planes hit those towers and get soo upset about it. Let go of your emotions and use logic.

  13. Jessica Ely says:

    I'm just curious if the planes really didn't crash into the WTC than how did the buildings collapse.
    Don't give me the garbage of the government planted dynamite when the WTC was built. The government couldn't of predicted that the Middle East would have terriorists that hated the US all the way back in the 1970's. The government wouldn't of killed thousands of innocent Americans.
    Another thing the amount of dynamite needed to wipe out the WTC would of also wiped out the entire city.

  14. mdmyer says:

    So what happened to the real flights then? Not saying I believe the 9/11 commission, just an honest question.

  15. HARRY DaDUDE says:

    no plane. no hijackers. osama would not be blamed. osama will still alive until today.

  16. Tim Becker says:

    well I have watched many air crash investigations and there have been cases where aircraft have have lost there flaps and speed brakes that landed at 250? so I would say hes wrong about the speed.

  17. Alan Clark says:

    The real physics involved here is the overwhelming difference in the forces – the entire energy of a large aircraft flying at great speed – hitting a relatively small area of a building which was, after all, half glass.
    At the first moment of impact – when the nose touches the South Tower – a circular orange glow appears for a short period – this is almost certainly the forward scanning radar beam emitted from the aircraft being refracted by the photochromic glass – this is quite enough for me to believe the image I'm looking at to be an actual aircraft because I've never seen ANY evidence for film fakery folk to know anything about how planes work!

  18. have anyone been to an airshow ? cover your ears my friends i believe americans will revolt once the govt is exposed,and surely it will happen soon.this will be a good thing and nothing to be afraid of.

  19. Pamela Shore says:

    But there is wreckage from the plane's and an Eyewitness account from a gentleman Stanley, I can't remember his last name. He was on the floor where the cockpit came in. He saw it.

Leave a Reply

© 2016 Pakalert Press. All rights reserved.