When the 9/11 truther plane narratives do not fly
Getting the 9/11 truther plane propaganda in focus
This is a podcast that 9/11 Planes Research and I had, building on my last two 9/11 plane related articles - Why the remote takeover of planes on 9/11 is IMPOSSIBLE and The Fantasy Flights on 9/11. (Watch it on Rumble here)
It is a long podcast, close to 3 hours, but it’s important to give it a listening to, as we go deep into the 9/11 truth movement and the re-pivot of even more disinformation and propaganda, especially when it comes to the alleged planes on 9/11.
The podcast focus:
The International Center for 9/11 Justice - a brief background
The re-pivoting
Aidan Monaghan
Remote Controlled Planes
Critical Analysis Paper
Evidence Ignored
Video Evidence: Missing Wings
Get the popcorn ready and let’s jump into it.
I highly recommend downloading Morgan Reynolds’ & John Lear's 2007 Request for Correction (RFC) to NIST and affidavit testifying to the impossible plane physics and start sharing it far and wide, as the 9/11 “truth” movement does NOT want people knowing about it.
As discussed in the podcast, here is the interaction I had with a retired airline Captain:
Pilot: "Retired airline captain, 33.5 years in aviation, Icelandic"
9/11 Revisionist asking questions:
Airline Captain 😳😳😳
Do I have some questions for you 😊
1. Can a plane fly at between 494 and 586 mph at 1 368 feet?
2. Can a plane doing about the same speed in question 1 and come down horizontally with the ground and slice through 5 lampposts without disintegrating or changing course?
3. Can a plane basically disappear into the ground where EVERYTHING just disintegrates in such a manner that not a chair, shoe, any luggage, or any trace of the plane can be found?
4. The link below – American Airlines flight 587 from 12 November 2001 – Is the assumptions in this video correct or false?
Pilot: 9/11 revisionist asked: I try to give my opinion:
1. between 494-586 mph? Aircraft FAA approved manual of the planes I have worked on has speed limits in form of Indicated airspeed at these altitudes:
757: 350 KIAS (knots indicated speed) is 402 mph.
767: 360 KIAS is 414 mph.
These speeds are maximum - unless the system has been tampered with, above these speeds you will have an aural warning very loud all the time.
It is a real distraction even for a seasoned pilot.
To answer, I think these speeds would be much above the speed when something breaks (although Jet airplanes have a built-in margin for over speed).
2. Difficult…, let’s say aircraft weight 100 tons, I would believe that 5 lampposts collision would not alter the airplanes course (impact force) however could there be a disaster following due to damages.
3. No
4. An airplane on these speeds, banking to change course, the G-forces would, in my opinion have the airplane break up.
9/11 Revisionist:
Now, the examples I was giving was the official narrative about 9/11 - and those planes on 9/11 were making insane banking manoeuvres both "planes" "hitting the towers" and if you look at the banking the "plane" that hit the Pentagon apparently sliced through the lamppost and number 3 was the "plane" that crashed at Shanksville.
Do you think an aluminium could slice through those massive steel beams?
What is your opinion on the 9/11 narrative?
Pilot:
1. you can bank an airplane and continue to bank, as if going to Roll the airplane. I believe you cannot bank the plane to make a course change unless to overstress it at these speeds.
2. insane banking manoeuvres at these speeds - NO - Breaking
3. I mean No - it would be breaking.
9/11 Revisionist: Regarding the official story of the “plane” hitting the Pentagon picture:
- No sliced off pieces of the plane found.
Pilot:
- Keep in mind I have only years of experience and a simulation to these extremities would only be a calculation.
- I think cannot be simulated as of now, as just a years ago, simulators were not having enough data to be able to do simulation, e.g., full stall (before always emphasised on avoiding full stalls.
- Full stalls must be practised, whether a light plane or a jet.
9/11 Revisionist: Referring to the pictures of a plain hitting a massive concrete block at over 500mp/h
- And this is what we are supposed to believe?
- An aluminium plane slicing through solid steel beams leaving a hole like the roadrunner cartoons....
Pilot: I think i am of an opinion that is like yours
9/11 Revisionist:
- I really like you.
- now we just need to get into WHAT happened to the 8 buildings at the world trade centre complex.
- And that is going to warp your brain 😂😂🙈
Pilot: This is just the tip of the iceberg 😊
Thank you for reading, thank you for watching, listening and still caring.
If you like reading my articles and would like to buy me a coffee, please follow the link to my PayPal, as substack does not allow for payments to my country yet.
If this is the first article of mine you’re reading, please rewind to my first article and work your way through all of them, as you’ve missed out on a lot of valuable 9/11 and “9/11 truther movement” information.
Remember DO NOT get your hands on this absolutely scary book by Dr Judy Wood.
And whatever you do, don’t watch the 1h “9/11 Essential Guide”.
Free PDF book downloads by Andrew Johnson:
9/11 – Finding the Truth and also 9/11 – Holding the Truth
Come join the discussion on Telegram, find me on X and check out my Rumble channel.
If you found the chat informative and you'd like to share it, here is the Rumble link.
Link: https://rumble.com/v6q6eo8-when-the-911-truther-plane-narratives-do-not-fly.html
The Suspension of Newtonian Physics on 9/11
A Plane conversation with Dr Morgan Reynolds & 9/11 Revisionist
Article & Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-suspension-of-newtonian-physics
Thanks very much for sharing! Really appreciate and love your and Mark’s work. I don’t suppose there any chance you can provide time stamps of all of the sections within the video? Thanks