No Boeing 767 impacted the South Tower on 911

The most credible eyewitnesses did not see any big plane hit the south tower, because there wasn't one that did.

http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0110/images/m04.jpg

"And then heard this noise that seemed to come from everywhere but didn't...had no idea what it was and then the south tower just exploded, it just it just, it just blew up. And somebody said that was a plane and I was like, "I was underneath it, I was looking at the tower, I had my camera in my hand, I heard the noise, I never saw the airplane."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHrbQ0u3xzk

- - - Updated - - -

I was able capture the orb as it peeked out and then a quick edit occurs to well after the explosion. These guys did not see a plane and were confused as to how the south tower exploded.

There are countless videos with the impact edited out because they weren't going to insert fake plane images into all of them. You can see him pan to the right when the orb caught his eye.




2nd hit missed Campl@net NE apartment (w/ bird) - YouTube

 

Uh huh, did too.

 

Whomever Cloud turned his footage over to added a black blob. Clifton, did not hear nor see a plane. It would have been coming from his left. Clifton, debunks all video fakery shown on 911. Advance to 2:00 for his real-time account. He says it over and over and over and over. He didn't see a plane because there was no plane to see. The blob cannot be seen south of where it magically appeared. He was about a mile east of the towers and slightly north. HE CALLED HIS CO-WORKER.

"I just caught the second explosion on videotape...No, a bomb, I saw it, no plane hit nothin', the building exploded from the other tower floors down."



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2unTcZnY30

 

Jesus,at that distance he couldn't see a blimp...

And a plane DID hit the tower,NOT some BS made up out of whole cloth 'orb'

 

Why do you use footage from so far away? Why is it so grainy? There are plenty of closer shots available that would show the impacts. In fact, there are a few from right underneath the plane that actually show the plane impact.

Also David doesn't think there was a conspiracy. He talks about the plane impacts here. Never stating he didn't see one or both of the planes.

You're taking his sentence out of context, he says "I didn't see the plane". He doesn't say, "I didn't see a plane". That means that he acknowledges there was a plane, but he wasn't looking at the building at the time to see it crash. Nice try though!

 

DUDE! Give... it ...UP!

19 foreign CIA ASSETS had nothing to do with the blobs and orbs filmed on 911 and flew nothing into any building. The evidence is just plain overwhelming that that happened! Bunches of Video, eyewitnesses out the yin-yang, and Millions of EYES ON THAT MORNING watching the news saw the worst COMPUTER GENERATED IMAGERY EVER AIRED ON LIVE TV. Thermite, and explosives pre-planted------not one shred of evidence against those known facts.

Now, there aren't any doubts about the JFK assassination, because it was the driver based on those grainy films. JFK died from one headshot executed by the driver and no one else. OSWALD WAS A PATSY.

Just quit joker. No one HAS BOUGHT that snake oil for decades.

 

You give it up DUDE,your paranoid delusions about 'orbs' and 'blobs' and 'the driver killing kennedy' are simply stuff you made up...NO ONE is buying that trash.

 

I doubled the speed of WB11's last orb showing, and their plane morph. The wingless orb was shown 6-8 times between 9:03-9:26, with the fake image making its debut only one minute after the last orb showing. The live orb and fake plane image cast their own shadows behind the towers, dismissing any nonsense that the orb was added or faked. Since the orb did circle the buildings before impacting the southeast corner of tower 2, the fake plane image at 9:27 was altered to make it turn more north, giving a more plausible (but still impossible) flight path.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIyGEDvG9KQ

 

They certainly didn't have anything to do with the blobs, that's for sure. However, they did fly those planes into the buildings.

What about the scientific study stating that no thermite was found in the dust? There was no det cord, unspent charges, or det transmitters located in any of the rubble. That is what we would call complete evidence. It is undisputable.

Couldn't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) less about JFK

 

No it doesn't. He said he saw it which means he was looking directly at the towers before and when it exploded.

 

The truth on 911 needs no witness other than fake plane images and an orb coming from west of the towers. NO PLANE of any kind could have passed east of tower 1 only two seconds before impacting the southeast corner of tower 2. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE and no one who supports the official lies would say it is either.

 

Well, people who know something about aircraft say you are dead wrong. That's the name of that tune.

 

no planers will never understand reality. They are shunned even by their own movement. Sad, deluded individuals.

[video=youtube;suE77AkSMeE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suE77AkSMeE[/video]

 

Awesome, the orb troll has returned with his bandwidth wasting gifs.

 

Don't feed the Trolls, and truthers and birthers are worse than trolls, that is all you need to know.

 

Liars will never accept reality. That is correct. The truther movement is a sham and you are a part of it by agreeing with the side you claim to disagree with. Sad, deluded individuals like yourself cannot prove a negative, that large planes crashed into any buildings because you can't prove it. Once you enter into a real debate with someone who actually knows what they're talking about, you leave the building.

- - - Updated - - -

Right. You cannot prove an orb was a plane, nor can anyone else. The gifs showing the orb are irrefutable.

 

Are you claiming that the orb was traveling 500 mph when it passed east of T1 only two seconds before T2 exploded?

 

No, because claiming there is an orb at all is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Why would they even use an orb? How outside of your own brain do you have to be to think that instead of a plane there is an orb? There are a ton of pictures, a ton of video showing the second plane crashing into the tower. Just the mere thought that someone can be in such denial as to think that there was no plane is just mind boggling.

Then, to take a step further, you claim that there is NO evidence to the contrary. Are you serious? There is nothing but evidence to the contrary. If you think your point is ever proven using nothing but .gif's, then you are wrong, on all levels. Scientific method doesn't follow .gifs.

 

There was an orb filmed by 4 tv networks that passed east of T1 only two seconds before T2 exploded. THAT WASN'T A PLANE OF ANY KIND.

 

No, there wasn't. There wasn't at all.

 

Aaawww, how come you deleted it? Deciding to go with something different than your "I know you are but what am I" defense?

 

No, because claiming that an orb was a plane is the most ridiculous thing you've ever made. Why would they even use a plane? How outside of your own brain do you have to be to think that instead of the orb that is there throughout many broadcasts, there is a plane? There are a ton of pictures, a ton of video showing the most absurd fakery crashing into the towers. Just the mere thought that someone can be in such denial as to think there was a real plane is just mind boggling.

Then, to take a step further, you claim that there is NO evidence to the contrary. Are you serious? There is nothing but evidence to the contrary. If you think your point is ever proven by never using the fake blobs you call planes then you are just a chicken on all levels. Video proof substantiated by witnesses is the correct path to 911 truth. NO BOEINGS CRASHED IN NY ON 911.

 

Huh, I made something?

Because it would make more sense than attempting to use CGI (which isn't even capable of what no planers claim it is) to use images of a plane, plant explosives, and risk getting caught. Using an "orb" throw their whole plan into chaos. Why do something so stupid? Just use a physical plane.

Because no news footage shows an orb, it shows nothing other than a plane. No planers copy the footage several times, degrade it's image, use footage from miles away to destroy any chance at identification.

I know you are but what am I? Also, no there isn't. There aren't any pictures or video showing any fakery. All of the footage shows a 767 crashing at full speed into the twins.

wtf? Is that English? I think there are 3 double negatives, and no subject.

I'm chicken on all levels? Which levels might those be again?

But I proved you wrong. The person you quoted said he didn't see THE plane, not he didn't see A plane. That word changes the entire structure of the sentence. He isn't saying that there isn't a plane, just that he didn't see it before it hit the tower.

You're lying, it's that simple.

 

Basing an opinioin so absurd as yours on degraded video is absurd. I can see a plane because I know what to look for. You do not, nor are you willing to because it interferes with you delusions. Too bad.

There was no otherway to deliver that much jet fuel or damage the structure near the top.

You cannot plant a tank of jet fuel big enough to produce that fireball by way of the elevators.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNLVxWUbPDU

I've shown a handful of people the orb and all said without hesitation that it wasn't a plane. The same type of replies would come from 90 percent of folks viewing this damning footage for the first time. They have no reason to deny reality or pretend that it could be a plane and that is what separates the few trolls online from the real world of 'believing what you're seeing'. Once a person understands the weird object passed east of the first tower only two seconds before the second tower explodes, their minds would confirm that it couldn't be a plane. Had it been a plane it would've either crashed into the side of T2 or flew past both towers. One could easily think the chopper clip was in slow motion but no, the orb was floating at a pace of 70-100 mph.

911truthncDotOrg 2 years ago
I found it very strange. She watched the explosion then acted like she wasn't positive about what she just witnessed. "It seems like it was in the other building from here". I am paraphrasing. No emotion at all.

It definitely does NOT look like an airliner.

zrocks2001 2 years ago
thats the ball she didnt even acknowledge that she saw a plane approaching she just saw an explosion in the other building.

imo there were bombs planted and a missle which is probably hard to see naked eyes if your not looking for it.

it sure didnt look like a plane

CuteCatFaith 2 years ago
It really looks small. It just doesn't look like a big commercial jet liner. She doesn't say, "Here comes a plane!" Bill Blackolive in Texas will be speaking on Mike Palacek's radio broadcast later this month. It has been postponed. Please read GUESTS OF THE NATION by Palacek. Thank you for posting this. Can anyone explain why the HOME RUN systems were not used to stop ANY of the "planes?"

CuteCatFaith 2 years ago
I went hysterical, which is incredibly rare for me. Shock reactions differ. Anyway, she doesn't say, wow, here comes a plane! Why do you think none of the HOME RUN systems kicked in on any of those planes? I hope you read GUESTS OF THE NATION by Mike Palacek.

Blake00711 1 year ago
She didn't even know that another aircraft had hit the south tower