Mark, I'm not sure who wrote the imbedded paper, but how can the planes be flown into the buildings at 500mph at that atmospheric pressure, remotely controlled or not? Seeing an image of a plane melting into a building that is nearly but not exactly correlated in time with an explosion breaks the laws of physics unless it is a projected image and not a plane. If that is you speaking to Jerm, then I agree with you.
I was a remote hijacking guy back in 2006 I really felt that was the method used fast forward 19 years and I can see that it's just a smoke screen to lead people away from the hologram technology. I must add though that I got some heavy electronic harrasment round that time for spreading the remote hijacking theory but it was early days and I belive the powers that be just didn't want anyone going against the 19 hijackers narrative. Keep up the good work mark
Hey Paul, I toyed with the idea around 2006-07 too. I also, was taken-in by Simon Shack's BS too. I guess progress and keeping our minds open, gets us closer to truth in the end.
I think a lot of people were taken in by Simon shack also back then in the early 2000s I didn't know that there were plants in the truth community I thought everyone was looking for the truth, I was very naive back then mark lol.
The GPS spikes that Adrian Monaghan showed could've been because of the News Stations traffick? I mean every single one wanted a piece of the pie. They all tried to send chopper i assume.
I think you make an excellent point regarding the GPS spike activities. I think you are spot on! I will mention this in a video discussion I have planned with 9/11 Revisionist, where we are discussing Aidan's hypothesis, and evidence. I will post the video on my Substack. Many thanks for taking the time to point your excellent observation. Definitely credit you in the video.
Hi. Thank you for your efforts and time. What about the uninterrupted auto pilot system? I'm totally with you however I'm just trying to read as much information as possible. Thanks again.
There is no way, they would have been able to incorporate an uninterrupted auto pilot system at that time without detection, and to interact with all the other inner working of the plane. It certainly was not ready back in 2001 for all aviation use, as some researchers say. It was very limited. The remote controlled planes theory, doesn't really fit with impossible speed of the planes a low altitude either, or disappearing wings in the videos, and impossible crash physics. Plus, we had no ELTs for any of the 4 plane crashes, which is impossible. I think the remoted controlled planes is a distraction from more assertive evidence, which is mainly being ignored by that crowd. I asked Dan Hanley to explain the ACARS data, but he doesn't want to know. I had to ask myself, what type of truth seeker is that?
I will hopefully publish something on the auto pilot at some point, as it needs addressing, and why they are pushing it, and ignoring more powerful evidence instead.
Here are some additions of where I have had run ins with some of these characters...
Getting the 9/11 planes propaganda in focus
Video: https://rumble.com/v63458t-getting-the-911-planes-propaganda-in-focus.html
Exposing Capt Dan Hanley - 9/11 Pilot Whistleblowers
https://rumble.com/v5bkihm-exposing-capt-dan-hanley-911-pilot-whistleblowers.html
The TRUTH vs Stand-Down PSY-OPS
Make people believe that someone or some group external to themselves is going to "save" or "rescue" them
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-truth-vs-stand-down-psy-ops
Going in Search of Planes in NYC on 9/11
Revisiting 1st Responders’ Accounts
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/going-in-search-of-planes-in-nyc
Mark, I'm not sure who wrote the imbedded paper, but how can the planes be flown into the buildings at 500mph at that atmospheric pressure, remotely controlled or not? Seeing an image of a plane melting into a building that is nearly but not exactly correlated in time with an explosion breaks the laws of physics unless it is a projected image and not a plane. If that is you speaking to Jerm, then I agree with you.
Hi Mark "revisiting 9/11 betty ong and the mystery of black betty" the site is called heresy central.
I was a remote hijacking guy back in 2006 I really felt that was the method used fast forward 19 years and I can see that it's just a smoke screen to lead people away from the hologram technology. I must add though that I got some heavy electronic harrasment round that time for spreading the remote hijacking theory but it was early days and I belive the powers that be just didn't want anyone going against the 19 hijackers narrative. Keep up the good work mark
Hey Paul, I toyed with the idea around 2006-07 too. I also, was taken-in by Simon Shack's BS too. I guess progress and keeping our minds open, gets us closer to truth in the end.
All the best, Mark. :-)
I think a lot of people were taken in by Simon shack also back then in the early 2000s I didn't know that there were plants in the truth community I thought everyone was looking for the truth, I was very naive back then mark lol.
The GPS spikes that Adrian Monaghan showed could've been because of the News Stations traffick? I mean every single one wanted a piece of the pie. They all tried to send chopper i assume.
Hi Attila RZA,
I think you make an excellent point regarding the GPS spike activities. I think you are spot on! I will mention this in a video discussion I have planned with 9/11 Revisionist, where we are discussing Aidan's hypothesis, and evidence. I will post the video on my Substack. Many thanks for taking the time to point your excellent observation. Definitely credit you in the video.
First i have to apologize for my late reply, i have issues with Notifications on my phone.
Wow, That's great Mark. I'm so happy that I've been a small help to you guys
Hi. Thank you for your efforts and time. What about the uninterrupted auto pilot system? I'm totally with you however I'm just trying to read as much information as possible. Thanks again.
Hi, thanks.
There is no way, they would have been able to incorporate an uninterrupted auto pilot system at that time without detection, and to interact with all the other inner working of the plane. It certainly was not ready back in 2001 for all aviation use, as some researchers say. It was very limited. The remote controlled planes theory, doesn't really fit with impossible speed of the planes a low altitude either, or disappearing wings in the videos, and impossible crash physics. Plus, we had no ELTs for any of the 4 plane crashes, which is impossible. I think the remoted controlled planes is a distraction from more assertive evidence, which is mainly being ignored by that crowd. I asked Dan Hanley to explain the ACARS data, but he doesn't want to know. I had to ask myself, what type of truth seeker is that?
I will hopefully publish something on the auto pilot at some point, as it needs addressing, and why they are pushing it, and ignoring more powerful evidence instead.