Excellent piece - Thank you for this neatly laid out explanation which should wake up any person who is capable of critical thought and to challenge the beliefs they cling on to....
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
Thanks Norman. I had to correct some spelling typos, but all good now hopefully. Yes, I hope it wakes some people up who are still clinging tightly to the CGI and video fakery nonsense. Frank Goodman keeps circulating that fake video which has had the plane removed from it, as if it legitimate and authentic video footage. This is what we are dealing with. truly disgraceful that people spread such lies, presented as truth.
Frank Goodman, the tool banned me off his FB page today, because he can't handle me wiping the floor with his hero, Simon Hytten (Shack) in his comment sections...
I keep thinking Luc Courchène, the man that filmed the best close up of second plane impact from the base, is one doing the fakery and possibly holographics. MIT graduate specialty...holograms.
Great analysis Mark. Coherent. A missile is plausible. The wings may have 'disappeared' near the S tower when projection was blocked by N tower? My tuppence worth is nuclear demolition. Always been curious as to why first tower to be hit was second to come down. https://www.911history.de
Cheers Mark. Nearer the missile got to the towers the more difficult to get full projection onto it from say a drone or aircraft. That may be one reason why tails and wings started to disappear just before impact. If 3D projection was used there must have been prior test runs in years before 2001 Maybe UFOs were great cover?
Yes, I am totally with you, I am of the same thinking that a lot of the UFO sightings are part of the trialing of this technology before 9/11, even after also. Many thanks for your comments, it is always good to receive people's thoughts and observations.
Yes, I know about the Gelatin in the book. That clip featured there, was actually from our first film, which Chris also used in his follow up film. We covered the Gelatin relationship with the holograms, and also the cryptic side of Gelatin, and the art Group Gelatin.
Saying that, thanks for pointing this out though, and well done that you spotted it, and at least wanted to alert me to it, even though I know about it. Don't let this discourage you from pointing out anything else, as there are things we can miss. 10/10 to you!
If you read my previous articles through my Substack, I have shown the real planes were still airborne at the time of the crashes. I have also covered the passengers in detail. Why don't you have a good read through all the evidence and the "official" telemetry data, and come back with an informed comment. I asked you last time to jump on and discuss but you didn't want to. Why is that David? Yet you leave smarmy comments on my comments section. Come and discuss the evidence with me, instead of spamming my comments section.
You refuse to read the articles Mark has mentioned. It is obvious in the replies you give. Thus I am not sure how you can be expected to be taken seriously when you cannot even converse like an adult...and by adult I mean come back with something other than the one sentence above, however you did nothing of the sort, you did not impugn or repudiate anything Mark said with any kind of information, evidence, documents, interviews, studies, books, photographs...etc....etc....
Reading your comments, I am incline to call you "signature reduction"
I don't believe I have knowledge! You don't even bother to read any of the background articles and information/evidence I have written and linked to about all this. So why you spamming my comments section? You won't even have the balls to jump on and chat with me and discuss the evidence? You said you was past discussing 9/11? Yet you make smarmy comments? Well back it up and jump a Zoom call with me and discuss what your problems are with my research? Or you just here to make smarmy comments and waste my time, of something that is very important.
and if so the next step David is to discuss it logically using common sense, articulating your concerns about where Mark may be wrong, confused about the topic at hand, but no you just keep up with the useless conversation that is not going to provide any kind of conclusion, consensus or ever an 'agree to disagree'
You have no information/data to counter what Mark has put forward, furthermore what Mark has provided through his work has allowed me on my own to conclude what is most like true or not....and the reality is Mark did not create the information and data he uses to put forth what are nothing more than facts for people to think over conclude and deduce what is most likely closer to the truth than not.
Many thanks for your interjections. You are correct, he offers nothing in return, yet I am wrong on all counts. Like you say, I have never said I am right, I am student, and in my pursuit of this area have come across a lot of "official" information on all areas of the planes. Whether ACARS data, ELTs, ATC, and withheld Radar data for AA77. I have merely present evidence.
I even offered David, twice to jump on a Zoom call, but told me he does not discuss 9/11, as he is done with it. Yet, hijacks the comments section with smarmy comments? Why does he do this if he does not want to discuss 9/11? I never invited or asked him to follow me or subscribe to me.
I knew from his comment about the passengers being a hologram, that he has never read all the research I have presented regarding the passengers, or else he would not make such a smarmy type of a comment.
I think you are right that he is merely here to waste my time, and be disruptive in my pursuit to get to the bottom of what really happened involving the planes, or no planes on 9/11.
Thanks for your comment and support, it is much appreciated.
I doubt that very much! Plus, you don't seem to have read much of the evidence I have posted, or else why would you ask me such questions, and make smarmy comments about the passengers being holograms? Plus, you don't actually answer a question when I ask you a question, you just deflect a lot. So do you want to pop on a Zoom call with me, and we can discuss your problems with my research? As you seem happy making these smarmy comments, and engaging, considering you told me last week you were past engaging about 9/11 now?
The point is, why do make such comments like the "asking if the passengers holograms too"? Surely, you have seen all my research I did on the passengers? I even released CCTV footage from Dulles Airport, and I even identified many passengers at the airport on 9/11. So explain WHY you would make such a comment about passengers being holograms? Where can I find YOUR research which embeds your beliefs? Have you read all my research on the ACARS, Radar, ATC and ELTs? So why you making smarmy comments here in my comments section if you have read or bothered to read my ALL my research?
You said last week after your other smarmy comment, when challenged, that you don't discuss 9/11 anymore, but you seem keen to pass useless smarmy comments here. By the way, I am not here to convince you of anything, I certainly never asked you to subscribe or follow me. So what exactly is your business here?
A Zoom chat would be useful, as you said you have read as much as I have, so let's see exactly what you have read? Let's discuss the technical data like the ACARS and DCC radar etc, let me see what you say you know which informs your belief, which allows you to pass your smarmy comments on my posts?
Excellent piece - Thank you for this neatly laid out explanation which should wake up any person who is capable of critical thought and to challenge the beliefs they cling on to....
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
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
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
Thanks Norman. I had to correct some spelling typos, but all good now hopefully. Yes, I hope it wakes some people up who are still clinging tightly to the CGI and video fakery nonsense. Frank Goodman keeps circulating that fake video which has had the plane removed from it, as if it legitimate and authentic video footage. This is what we are dealing with. truly disgraceful that people spread such lies, presented as truth.
Frank Goodman, the tool banned me off his FB page today, because he can't handle me wiping the floor with his hero, Simon Hytten (Shack) in his comment sections...
9/11, among other things, seems like a practice run for Project Bluebeam.
It certainly seems that way CK.
I keep thinking Luc Courchène, the man that filmed the best close up of second plane impact from the base, is one doing the fakery and possibly holographics. MIT graduate specialty...holograms.
Great analysis Mark. Coherent. A missile is plausible. The wings may have 'disappeared' near the S tower when projection was blocked by N tower? My tuppence worth is nuclear demolition. Always been curious as to why first tower to be hit was second to come down. https://www.911history.de
Many thanks! Yes, it could well be missile like object with cloaking imaging. Thanks for the link.
Cheers Mark. Nearer the missile got to the towers the more difficult to get full projection onto it from say a drone or aircraft. That may be one reason why tails and wings started to disappear just before impact. If 3D projection was used there must have been prior test runs in years before 2001 Maybe UFOs were great cover?
Hi,
Yes, I am totally with you, I am of the same thinking that a lot of the UFO sightings are part of the trialing of this technology before 9/11, even after also. Many thanks for your comments, it is always good to receive people's thoughts and observations.
About 2/3 down the page, the WolfClanMedia clip, did you notice that at about 3:53 there are mentions of "gelatin" on the book page shown?
Hi,
Yes, I know about the Gelatin in the book. That clip featured there, was actually from our first film, which Chris also used in his follow up film. We covered the Gelatin relationship with the holograms, and also the cryptic side of Gelatin, and the art Group Gelatin.
Saying that, thanks for pointing this out though, and well done that you spotted it, and at least wanted to alert me to it, even though I know about it. Don't let this discourage you from pointing out anything else, as there are things we can miss. 10/10 to you!
I'm not that easily discouraged, Mark. But thanks for your kindness in being concerned. :^>
Very well put together,thank you Mark for this information.
Many thanks for your feedback.
Mark Conlon, I CANNOT THANK YOU ENOUGH! Jackson Rip Holmes
Many thanks Rip, I appreciate your kind comment.
I assume all the crews and passengers were holographic?
If you read my previous articles through my Substack, I have shown the real planes were still airborne at the time of the crashes. I have also covered the passengers in detail. Why don't you have a good read through all the evidence and the "official" telemetry data, and come back with an informed comment. I asked you last time to jump on and discuss but you didn't want to. Why is that David? Yet you leave smarmy comments on my comments section. Come and discuss the evidence with me, instead of spamming my comments section.
Come on, you can’t actually believe this.
You refuse to read the articles Mark has mentioned. It is obvious in the replies you give. Thus I am not sure how you can be expected to be taken seriously when you cannot even converse like an adult...and by adult I mean come back with something other than the one sentence above, however you did nothing of the sort, you did not impugn or repudiate anything Mark said with any kind of information, evidence, documents, interviews, studies, books, photographs...etc....etc....
Reading your comments, I am incline to call you "signature reduction"
I don't believe I have knowledge! You don't even bother to read any of the background articles and information/evidence I have written and linked to about all this. So why you spamming my comments section? You won't even have the balls to jump on and chat with me and discuss the evidence? You said you was past discussing 9/11? Yet you make smarmy comments? Well back it up and jump a Zoom call with me and discuss what your problems are with my research? Or you just here to make smarmy comments and waste my time, of something that is very important.
I’ve read every bit as much as you, I’m sure.
and if so the next step David is to discuss it logically using common sense, articulating your concerns about where Mark may be wrong, confused about the topic at hand, but no you just keep up with the useless conversation that is not going to provide any kind of conclusion, consensus or ever an 'agree to disagree'
You have no information/data to counter what Mark has put forward, furthermore what Mark has provided through his work has allowed me on my own to conclude what is most like true or not....and the reality is Mark did not create the information and data he uses to put forth what are nothing more than facts for people to think over conclude and deduce what is most likely closer to the truth than not.
David what exactly is your purpose on substack?
Many thanks for your interjections. You are correct, he offers nothing in return, yet I am wrong on all counts. Like you say, I have never said I am right, I am student, and in my pursuit of this area have come across a lot of "official" information on all areas of the planes. Whether ACARS data, ELTs, ATC, and withheld Radar data for AA77. I have merely present evidence.
I even offered David, twice to jump on a Zoom call, but told me he does not discuss 9/11, as he is done with it. Yet, hijacks the comments section with smarmy comments? Why does he do this if he does not want to discuss 9/11? I never invited or asked him to follow me or subscribe to me.
I knew from his comment about the passengers being a hologram, that he has never read all the research I have presented regarding the passengers, or else he would not make such a smarmy type of a comment.
I think you are right that he is merely here to waste my time, and be disruptive in my pursuit to get to the bottom of what really happened involving the planes, or no planes on 9/11.
Thanks for your comment and support, it is much appreciated.
I doubt that very much! Plus, you don't seem to have read much of the evidence I have posted, or else why would you ask me such questions, and make smarmy comments about the passengers being holograms? Plus, you don't actually answer a question when I ask you a question, you just deflect a lot. So do you want to pop on a Zoom call with me, and we can discuss your problems with my research? As you seem happy making these smarmy comments, and engaging, considering you told me last week you were past engaging about 9/11 now?
You doubt that very much. I’m okay with that.
I do find it quite odd about your wanting a Zoom call so bad. That isn’t going to make me disbelieve all that which I’ve seen.
The point is, why do make such comments like the "asking if the passengers holograms too"? Surely, you have seen all my research I did on the passengers? I even released CCTV footage from Dulles Airport, and I even identified many passengers at the airport on 9/11. So explain WHY you would make such a comment about passengers being holograms? Where can I find YOUR research which embeds your beliefs? Have you read all my research on the ACARS, Radar, ATC and ELTs? So why you making smarmy comments here in my comments section if you have read or bothered to read my ALL my research?
You said last week after your other smarmy comment, when challenged, that you don't discuss 9/11 anymore, but you seem keen to pass useless smarmy comments here. By the way, I am not here to convince you of anything, I certainly never asked you to subscribe or follow me. So what exactly is your business here?
A Zoom chat would be useful, as you said you have read as much as I have, so let's see exactly what you have read? Let's discuss the technical data like the ACARS and DCC radar etc, let me see what you say you know which informs your belief, which allows you to pass your smarmy comments on my posts?