37 Comments
User's avatar
TriTorch's avatar

9/11 Rev, can you give me your take on this one:

Another News Helicopter Was Filming the Second Tower Before the Invisible ! Plane Hit It https://old.bitchute.com/video/i9NlardEWMue [56seconds]

I know we spoke before of holographic projections for the planes, but from this angle there isn't one. Thoughts?

Expand full comment
Qlqxxqq's avatar

I saw that clip, it’s beyond a smoking gun!

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Check out my answer to TriTorch

Expand full comment
Qlqxxqq's avatar

Wicked!

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

The issue with video is the more you download and upload and download and upload, the video loses quality. That is what happened with this video.

In the original video there was, what seemed to be a "ball" of some kind heading towards the tower. It was clearly visible.

I just don't have a link to the video where it is discussed and shown, so I'll add that link later to my answer, as I have it in my library.

Many years ago, Richard D Hall did his 3D analysis of Flight 175 and it allowed him to debunk the CGI narrative once and for all.

In his discussion with Andrew Johnson, Mark Conlon and Dr Morgan Reynolds, they were all of the opinion that the backdrop of the Hudson river affected how the "plane" was picked up by the video camera, making most of the projection disappear.

All the other videos had the clear blue sky for a backdrop, that made the illusion more stable.

You also need to realise, between 2005 and 2010, a number of people edited flight 175 out of the videos, to help push the bullshit "no plane" narrative, with videos showing no plane, in order to fully push the video fakery / CGI nonsense.

9/11 Planes: 3D VIPT vs Video Fakery and CGI

Is seeing believing, or believing seeing on 9/11?

Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/911-planes-3d-volumetric-image-projection

Expand full comment
TriTorch's avatar

Good to know and interesting, thank you

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

I've uploaded the clip and discussion to my FB page.

Link: https://www.facebook.com/NormanSwanepoelTheRevisionist/videos/1749198122364388

Expand full comment
Qlqxxqq's avatar

Dam! I did not know these facts!

Expand full comment
Qlqxxqq's avatar

Wow, what an excellent investigative report! Well done sir! In my humble opinion, Curt Weldon is completely intellectually dishonest, period. Can’t be trusted. He’s the government insider to infiltrate the 911 communities to report their findings. Why would we ever need the assistance of a government lackey! I think we should apply Occam’s razor with Richard Gage and his intellectually dishonesty concerning Dr. woods. Thx for sharing.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Gordon Duff, senior editor of Veterans Today, discussing Black Ops, National Security & 9/11.

Duff also describes how Nano-Thermite does not exist, except for “6 grams of nano-thermite were made on the ISS according to sources supplied by Christopher Bollyn, ONLY as a failed propellant” and that Steven E. Jones knows nano-thermite does not exist, Jones works for the Defence Intelligence Agency, as well as Richard Gage.

Video: https://rumble.com/v6rm9n1-nano-thermite-does-not-exist.html

You can download the Refutation of Richard Gage’s Game in 2008 AND 2023: https://truthsummit.info/media-files/DrJudyWood-refutation-RichardGage-claims.pdf

The molecular dissociation of the thermite & nuke theories

People are so easily led by perceived "experts".

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-controlled-demolition-of-thermite

9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline

"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline

Expand full comment
Qlqxxqq's avatar

I remember the entire nano thermite discussion put forward by a college professor. It’s turned out he was another “Curt Weldon” creating a false narrative, going in directions that were misleading, misdirected, away from real research. Also From what I remember, they tried to say it was an accumulation of thermite that was causing those red hot fires in the basement that the fireman couldn’t extinguish. I truly appreciate your efforts to inform the sheep.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

There were NO FIRES in the basements and the rubble pile was COLD.

The 100 days of "smoke" at ground zero.

The COLD rubble pile at the World Trade Center...

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-100-day-fuming-and-molecular

The mostly EMPTY basements of the Twin Towers.

Most people have been led to believe the lie that the basements were full of rubble.

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-mostly-empty-basements-of-the

Revisiting the basements of the WTC.

Most people have been led to believe the lie that the basements were full of rubble.

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/revisiting-the-basements-of-the-wtc

Expand full comment
Qlqxxqq's avatar

Thanks for correcting my assumption bro 😃truly. I like speaking truth not narratives that turn out to be lies pushed on me. Makes us all look bad and turns off the sheeple looking for the truth. I’m all in on being corrected, I can only grow from my mistakes.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Watch Dr Wood's presentation, study her book and then you'll KNOW what happened at the WTC.

Dr Wood 2012 presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWNzq9OWGmY

Read Dr Wood’s book: Where did the towers go? https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/

There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11

1. Problem solving skills

2. Group Think

3. They just can't handle the implications

Were the towers destroyed by a gravity collapse? The evidence says no.

Were the towers destroyed by explosives? The evidence says no.

Were the towers destroyed by thermite? The evidence says no.

Were the towers destroyed by nukes? The evidence says no.

The answers to these questions can easily be found by studying the evidence.

The problem is NOT a shortage of evidence.

The problem is nobody wants to LOOK at the evidence and think for themselves.

Instead, everyone wants to be TOLD WHAT TO THINK by "experts" in the MSM, alternative media, the scientific community, the government, and the "truth" movement, but these "experts" spend the whole time covering up and muddling up the evidence.

Here is a 20-minute video that most can follow: https://rumble.com/v5jnndx-understanding-the-911-evidence.html

Expand full comment
Qlqxxqq's avatar

I’m going to take the time and follow up, thx for the links making it rather easy. I’m grateful.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Sorry for giving you so much "homework", but there is and has been so much disinfo sown by the 9/11 truth movement, that it takes one weeks and months of going through all the narratives,to separate all the bad from the good info.

That is the whole purpose of my substack, to help people easily navigate through the mess and the cover-up of the cover-up of the events on September 11, 2001.

Expand full comment
Qlqxxqq's avatar

I’ll watch the video this weekend, the book , I found a library I can borrow it from. Thx again.

Expand full comment
John Williams's avatar

This Ex-Congressman doesn't want the truth out, that is why he keeps pushing the 9-11 truth, Architects and Engineers cover up team to dissuade the he American people from the truth. He is a Syop ! He forgets how corrupt Richard Gage is, because the government created that group under Steven E. Jones to push a conspiracy theory that last a long time to keep people ever talking and nothing happened to get a real investigation or have true justice serve on those who were behind it. What another Government Shrill.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline

"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline

Expand full comment
CK's avatar

Patrick seems to be quite interested in Dr. Woods’ work, hopefully he will have her on his show.

Expand full comment
Todd Proctor's avatar

I too believe directed energy was used on 911, but I doo ok have a question for you. There are many eyewitness (or you might say earwitness) testimonies on the day of the attacks by people inside the buildings saying they heard multiple loud explosions that sounded like detonations going off throughout all different floors of the towers prior to their collapse. What do you make of this? Does directed energy do this? The dustification is the biggest proof to me of directed energy use, but the explosions prior seem to also point to controlled demolition. A good friend of my grandfather’s worked on the Star Wars program in the 80’s which turned into the beginnings of the directed energy weapons program. And so I am familiar with how it works, but I am sincerely curious if you think both directed energy and controlled demolition may have both been used, or if there is a component of directed energy that I have never heard of that caused loud explosions to happen prior to dustification??

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Todd - Does everything that goes bang, mean it's a bomb?

What happens when you put a raw egg, that's still in it's shell, in a microwave for too long?

It explodes... Does that mean the egg was a bomb?

I take it you've never listened to this presentation of Dr Wood?

Dr Wood 2012 presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWNzq9OWGmY

She discusses the sounds of explosions in quite some detail.

Luckily I have also written two articles on the sounds of explosions, thus I would suggest you read them so long, and then also make time to listen to Dr Wood's 2012 presentation, that changed my outlook on the events at the WTC on 9/11.

Was every BOOM on 9/11 a bomb?

Not everything that goes boom is a bomb.

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/was-every-boom-a-bomb-on-911

The Sounds of Explosions on 9/11

Was every BOOM a BOMB?

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-explosions-on-911

Expand full comment
Todd Proctor's avatar

Thank you!! Listening right now…

Expand full comment
Todd Proctor's avatar

I have another question. I’ve read that almost immediately after the towers were dustified, cleanup was organized and the dust and rubble was taken to China. Have you heard of this? I think this could be an important part of the puzzle because a planned attack using directed energy would leave its fingerprint in the remains (to those who know how to analyze / test the molecular vaporization of the dust and rubble). Is that why they so quickly sent the debris to China of all places? To get rid of evidence that could prove directed energy was used? We all know that the perpetrators are part of a global operation and that China is firmly their template for the rest of the world…and that that would be a perfect place to disappear the evidence??

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

The shipping off to China is a lame talking point for the lack of rubble, that was reported on, on September 12, 2001 by ABC....

Myanmar Provides a 9/11 Lesson for Critical Thinkers

Showing you just how easily people are duped, who don't know any better

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/myanmar-provides-a-911-lesson-for

Then on September 13, 2001 - The site was locked down for journalists and citizens and NO pictures or video was allowed to be taken by anyone.

Thus allowing the US MIC contractors to fully control the narrative that was fed to the MSM, including the bullshit story of high heat, fires and more at the site, as they had to run cover-stories to explain the ongoing transmutation of metals, "fuming", that looked like smoke, rising up from the debris for close to 100 days.

The 100 days of "smoke" at ground zero.

The COLD rubble pile at the World Trade Center...

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-100-day-fuming-and-molecular

Expand full comment
Todd Proctor's avatar

…like how they they locked down Lahaina after…

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

In a way, possibly...

It's important to differentiate between "Hot DEW" and "Cold DEW" - the tech. that destroyed the WTC generates little to no heat, whereas in the Maui and California fires, it's a bit different - with much more evidence of heat, but anomalous fires.

It's important not to speculate and mix together different bits of evidence because it looks similar.

Some folks do this to a much greater extent.

The other important evidence to study is that relating to Hurricane Erin on 9/11.

Hurricanes and September 11, 2001?

What do hurricanes have to do with the 9/11 attacks?

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/hurricanes-and-september-11-2001

Expand full comment
Morten Nielsen's avatar

Huricane Erin - How can we know if that story was bluf like the airplanes were?

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Read my article and see why hurricane Erin isn't bluff...

Hurricanes and September 11, 2001?

What do hurricanes have to do with the 9/11 attacks?

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/hurricanes-and-september-11-2001

Expand full comment
Morten Nielsen's avatar

I don't see any evidence in your article that Huricane Erin and it's path was real. We need hard verifiable evidence before we can know.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

10 universities and NASA tracking it and actually confirming they were doing experiments with it, isn't hard data?

Even the official data from National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Hurricane Center 'Best Track' figures & Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW-CIMSS) showing the recorded path of Hurricane Erin from September 2001, isn't enough for you?

Bro, really - Your comment is stupid!

Expand full comment
Morten Nielsen's avatar

I knew you would reply something along these lines. You are way too uneducated and uncritical. I am not going to waste any time debating with you. My comment was for other readers.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

That I would comment with facts, after you made a stupid comment?

All the references, especially the pages in Dr Wood's book, with her references, are in the article.

You too lazy to go to her website and follow the links to her references?

So much for calling yourself a "truth seeker" and doing your own reading / research.

Expand full comment
Depswah's avatar

Thanks for another great article.

Blessings ~

Expand full comment
Pete Ross's avatar

Justa coincidence -

The White House Kamikaze

https://youtu.be/1jPTPW4HTj4?t=276

Expand full comment