More Damning 9/11 Video Fakery Exposed

“Darkness to Light”

I have been talking for a while about the “videographic” theories of 9/11 fakery, that convinced me about 4 years ago that 9/11 was largely a psy-op on this world.

Well, that whole story just got bigger. Something that everybody missed. Until now.

Let me begin by thanking the member here, who – when this blog started – asked me the “shake-up” question needed to begin a seriously scientific approach to 9/11. This is the question he asked.

“Did you see the planes hit the buildings?”

I waffled with a standard response of some kind, and he asked it again.

“Did you see the planes hit the buildings?”

It’s a very simple question, but it “puts us in our place”, by forcing us to remember that we accept ALL of the 9/11 narrative on authority, and not on evidence that we, ourselves, obtained. We accept both the evidence and its interpretation on authority.

We are not being scientific about it.


Now I’m going to show you a new “piece” of the video hoax which I had not seen before, plus another one that has been already very damning to the official narrative. Both of them are explained in a short Twitter copy of a video.

A quick word of thanks to barkerjim for alerting me to this, and to The Burning Platform for getting out the word. And some commenter on TBP, named Hardscrabble Farmer, who submitted it.

This is one tweet for the ages. Watch it while it’s still up.

Here is my earlier response.

Wolf Moon | Threat to Demonocracy
Reply to  barkerjim
September 14, 2022 11:34

OK, this is excellent. The SECOND glitch is new and completely damning.

The “entry wound” is filled with errors. I saw a different video analysis of it which explains both the “slicing” problem described in this video, AND additional problems of the entry that are not described here. Beyond THOSE, I found my own problems with the entry, which I hold in reserve as nukes of my own, in order to prevent CIA from putting out “reactive disinformation”.

Notice how DHS has added 9/11 analysis to their “violent extremist” rhetoric. DOJ-NSD, CIA, and DNI (who basically run DHS) know that we know.

Now – as far as reactive disinformation, I can tell you this.

“They” (the whole gang) are VERY sensitive on South Tower fakery. They know they’re caught in multiple ways. They have put out a new “amateur video” in response to the actual amateur video without a plane. That video surfaced way late, and originally they covered it up by using shills to allege that it was a “plane removed” doctored video, but that response failed.

I’ve looked at the new fake amateur video long enough to figure out why it’s phony. They can’t actually “re-do” the bad entry, because any new videos will conflict with the old ones, so they are forced to include most of the same mistakes. IMO this video may have just been an old fake video that was kept in reserve and then freshened for re-release (there is a newer – IMO – cinematic video trick used).

Bottom line is that there is now 100% reasonable doubt. Thank you to Tonawanda for reminding us of that basic American judicial concept.

The jury is back. 9/11 Truth is winning. And THEY – all of them – are SKEEEERED BIGLY.

Here is the video without the plane, which I mentioned.

This video led me to other logical nukes which prove that the South Tower is a hoax. At first, they depended on this video, but then I realized that they don’t. It was in trying to validate this video that I found them.

I’m waiting for others to find them independently before I dump.

If you want to see some other posts done here about 9/11, the following list is useful. These are in reverse chronological order (most recent at the top).

9/11 Truth-Fest

(still from video, don’t click, see below!) I’ve spent a lot of time on Gab today, and I’m just blown away at the extent to which people are now ultra-red-pilled on 9/11. The amount of evidence pouring out is overwhelming. I’m seeing stuff I’ve NEVER seen before. Re-evaluating all of this evidence, knowing what we …

For Whom The Bell Tolls

I leave this as an open question, although this thread is ultimately concerned with somebody named Barbara Olson, who died on 9/11. I believe that the method of Barbara’s murder is now demonstrated. Introduction The key to solving 9/11 is realizing that it was a CLINTON-centered operation which was launched AFTER the Clintons left the …

Occam’s Razor, Tool of Deception

I was originally going to entitle this post something else – something cuter and more grandiose about “my life-long sword-fight with Occam’s razor“.  Hence the opening image.  However, that goal was WAY too big for a blog post.  I could literally write a book on it. The fact is, I have MANY issues with Occam’s …

Darkness to Light: Eckert’s Law

As I’ve said before in the VLWC series, we discover nothing new, but we do rediscover what has been hidden from us by time and craftier people.  Over and over, the truth is hidden and revealed. Somewhere, a Soviet KGB analyst rediscovered this timeless principle, marveled at it, and filed it away for his next …

There was another post I was going to write, about my journey from 9/11 “true believer” to “scientific skeptic”, but never did.

Who knows? Maybe it’s still coming.


saved for posterity, you Twitter communists

5 1 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

pat frederick

whoa…mind blown.
I suspected but couldn’t delve into the videos and stories. there were too many emergency personnel claiming they heard/saw explosions for this not to be real. but to finally see it.
thanks to both of you!!

Last edited 1 year ago by patfrederick
pat frederick

long ago, I watched a video presentation by a stewardess who picked apart the conversations the passengers were having with loved ones…i took notes because what she was saying then was chilling. but she mentioned an incidence where another plane’s wing being sheared off during a landing when they came too close to a metal fence, and she asked us to reconcile that with the planes hitting buildings…


Exactly. Airplanes are giant aluminum cans. They would crumple in an impact like that.

Gail Combs

And I regularly STOMP aluminum cans FLAT…

Remember birds have very lightweight fragile bones so they are not too heavy to fly.

Here are just five of several similar bird strike photos.

Bird Makes Huge Dent Into Nose Of Boeing 737 Airplane |
comment image&f=1&nofb=1

Bird strike leaves huge dent in passenger jet as it lands at Heathrow …comment image

Pilot lands safely after bird strike destroys plane’s nose
comment image?quality=90&strip=all
comment image?w=1440


The part that still makes my eyebrows rise, is the seismic graph info in one of the discussions. The buildings were 1000’s of tons of concrete and steel and yet didn’t make much of a seismic disturbance. Supposedly building 7 had all of the impact of a jack hammer.

pat frederick

what does that imply?


That most of the buildings somehow turned to dust. You can almost see it in some of the videos. The how is an issue.
I posted some of that in the first 911 post.

Last edited 1 year ago by barkerjim

Wolf, I can tell you between the time of the ‘impacts’ of the ‘jets’ and the actual building ‘falls’. there was a lot of time. Maybe those films would be better to watch.

I know that at 1 PM was when we were let go from our office, and both towers had shred like salt prior. Was like a film to me.

PS, I had been privy witnessing to the implosion of the Alladin Casino

Again, I had a fifty yard line view of both…due North. And suddenly…no Tower 1 left, only sky…then 2 times…no Tower 2 left…now air and sky instead of buildings I had seen all my career. I had designed interiors of two floors in the South Tower and had friends working at WOW…all restaurant folks!

When you suddenly see sky, especially working for an architects’ office, it is a shock. Still embossed on my memory. We tend to look at buildings as permanent fixtures, yet we know that Jericho can come tumbling down.

That is maybe what you would want to watch…the very long aftermath in slow motion. We watched that day, and although I thought something was amiss, I did not pay enough attention to understand what I might be seeing.

I am still in contact with my colleague. Maybe I will have a chat with him!


Fascinating and disturbing.


Wolf, I worked as a design consultant on the Alladin Casino in Vegas years ago.

The owners were trying to save the building, yet for many reasons it was too large a footprint and possibly too many toxic materials to save.

One month after I stayed there with a team to assess the place and meet the owners, here is the implosion video.

At about 23 minutes you will see the implosion.

I would expect, there may be some signatures from each engineering firm that orchestrates this type of event. This one does have some flashes. It may be as easy to find a maintenance engineering firm attached to the Trade Towers. I saw no flash bangs when the Trade Center went down, yet, sleuthing may surface an entire history of groups responsible for tying them to whatever happened.

Last edited 1 year ago by WSB

Wolf, Many Thanks for posting my first messages! Here is copy and paste of 9/11 report by Jack Kelley…to close the memorial of Our Lady of Sorrows

“”Unknown time apparently around 5:30 PM, Source-based Reporting

Jack Kelley: “Apparently, what appears to have happened is that at the same time two planes hit the building, that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck packed with explosives underneath the building which also exploded at the same time and brought both of them down.”

USA Today Anchor: “Now that’s the first time we’re hearing that. So two planes and explosives that were in the building, is that correct?”

Kelley: “That is the working theory at this point. That is still unconfirmed, but that is what the FBI is going on at this point.”


This makes the range of possibilities much clearer and plausible.


Wolf, I think your proposal is TOO COMPLEX. I have followed for a year…a “liker” rather than a lurker. The Port Authority committee that studied the 1993 bombing discovered that the towers had a structural weakness…that if the bomb had been put in a different basement location the whole building would have come down. As a result the basement parking area was closed. This was told to me in the autumn of 2000 by a member of the committee.


See report of Jack Kelley about 5:30 pm on this page


Pre-ignited implosion. That has always been my understanding.


You’ve just reminded me posting about seismic graphs.
Wasn’t there one that showed a big bump/tremor/shock, whatever they call it, just *prior* to the plane hitting the building.


This is all I could find, beyond me though, need a scientist to understand it.


Barkerjim’s observation and your theory fit like hand in glove. Wow.

Gail Combs

Here is a bit more wolfie:

Seismic Evidence Implies Controlled Demolition on 9/11
(Care of Yandex & NOT DDG)


André Rousseau is a Doctor of Geophysics and Geology, a former researcher in the French National Center of Scientific Research (CNRS), who has published 50 papers on the relationships between the characteristics of progressive mechanical waves and geology.

Dr. Rousseau is an expert on measurement of acoustic waves.

Rousseau says that the seismic waves measured on September 11th proves that the 3 buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. Specifically, in a new scientific article published by the Journal of 9/11 Studies, Rosseau writes:

The seismic signals propagating from New York on September 11, 2001, recorded at Palisades (34 km) and published by the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University (LDEO), have here been subjected to a new critical study concerning their sources. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that the nature of the waves, their velocities, frequencies, and magnitudes invalidate the official explanations which imply as sources the percussion of the twin towers by planes and the collapses of the three buildings, WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7.


First of all, we show the contradictions in the official explanation between the seismic data and the timing of the events. Then we point out that it is strange that identical events (percussions of identical towers on the one hand, and collapses of identical towers on the other hand) at the same location would have generated seismic sources of different magnitudes. We demonstrate that only strong explosives could be the cause of such seismic waves, in accordance with the observed low frequencies. According to the nature of the recorded waves (body and surface waves), we can propose a location of each explosive source. According to the presence of shear waves or the presence of Rayleigh waves only, we hypothesize a subterranean … explosion.


Near the times of the planes’ impacts into the Twin Towers and during their collapses, as well as during the collapse of WTC7, seismic waves were generated. To the degree that (1) seismic waves are created only by brief impulses and (2) low frequencies are associated with energy of a magnitude that is comparable to a seismic event, the waves recorded at Palisades and analyzed by LDEO undeniably have an explosive origin.Even if the planes’ impacts and the fall of the debris from the Towers onto the ground could have generated seismic waves, their magnitude would have been insufficient to be recorded 34 km away and should have been very similar in the two cases to one another.


There si more at the link.


I haven’t got a link to it, but anyone else who saw it may remember it.
It was a continuous piece of film, I think perhaps taken from a helicopter.
First part was at low magnification showing a wide area of sky, think the building was in the shot, but no aircraft was visible in the sky.
Then it switched to a higher magnification, smaller area of sky in the picture, and showed an aircraft flying in towards the building.
So it went from no plane visible in a wide area of sky, then in the time it took for the cameraman to switch magnification, to a plane being in the picture.


Bingo! first try looking for it…


Were you looking for JUST the helicopter footage ?

OR the WHOLE VIDEO about “‘UNDENIABLE’ Truth” ?

(this is pushed like “Flat-Earth”, IMO)


The video I posted here is not the one I originally saw, but it’s about the the same thing. This guy breaks it all up and tries to explain it.
The one I originally saw was much simpler, it just showed the whole video and pointed out the implausibility of the plane not being in the wide shot and suddenly appearing in the close up.


That’s footage. What I saw was with my own eyes mile north, and there was something that looked like the size of a commercial jet hitting the second tower.


A few are their angles sum showing the approach (about 15 minutes):


In answer to your question, the search term I used was…
“911 no plane visible in wide angle shot”


On September 11, 2001, two planes were flown into the World Trade Center in Manhattan..
I do not believe that those planes caused the damage that led to the collapses of the two towers (or WTC-7, for that matter).


On July 17, 1996, TWA flight 800 “exploded” just off of the South Shore of Long Island.

Despite numerous eyewitness’ testimony from people who had never met each other before, at various locations with a clear view of the crash site, and near identical description of the event from those eyewitnesses, the narrative was essentially for those individuals not to believe their lying eyes, nor for anyone else to believe them, while an “official story” was being crafted over the next decade, or so.

Now (since 9/11/01), a similar thing is happening.

One may be able to use modern technology to edit or create video. As technology improves over time, so do the skills of those who use that technology.

But they can NOT do the same for the eye.

The best they can do is “sleight of hand”, or manipulation of the mind, to make one believe that they either saw something that they didn’t, or that they didn’t see something that they did.

But when ones camera and ones eye sees and records the same thing, changing either the facts, or ones mind, becomes difficult, if not impossible.

And when it happens among multiple individuals, it is UNDENIABLE.

While I don’t even remember if cellphones were around in 1996, I assume if they were, they probably were not equipped with cameras, let alone video-capable cameras, and the part of Long Island where flight 800 happened is a regular working class neighborhood (i.e. not a “touristy” area); whereas in 2001, cell phones were in wide use, many of which were equipped with cameras and capable of recording video, and in lower Manhattan there is a high-density population, especially during normal working hours, and is also loaded with tourists with cameras.

MOST eyes were on the NORTH Tower after the FIRST plane hit, as the amount of smoke rolling off of it was MASSIVE.




comment image

comment image

(for those thatsaid that they could not see the SECOND plane in the video that was posted by Wolf on 9/11, and again today, it is because the video was taken from the OTHER SIDE of the towers, near the bridges shown in the last graphic, in the lower part of the upper-right frame)


Gentilly, my dear friend, allow me to say, in all modesty: … B.S. …


Exactly. For the landing gear to follow those trajectories, almost half of the plane would have had to penetrate the opposite side of the building.


Here’s another video for you…
(8 1/2 minutes; roar of the second planes engines just before impact starts at approximately three minutes and 40 seconds):

(EDIT: link to site where I took this video from):!

Last edited 1 year ago by Nor'easter

Yes… When I referred to the plane being flown INTO the building, I do not for a second think that it sliced through like a hot knife through butter.
But I would not dismiss the possibility of doing at least some damage to some of the steel (from impact), and absolutely through the “holes” in the structure (essentially like the center “hole” in a tic-tac-toe board with multiple tic-tac-toe boards fastened together to make a grid structure). Kind of like ramming something through a die.

I was trying to research this a bit and I came across a site with an article that featured the initial “no-plane video” that you posted on both the 9/11 post and this post (although I cannot play the video from that site).

The article is awkwardly titled :

“Fact Check: Video Does NOT Prove No Planes Were Involved In 9/11 Attacks — There Are Other Angles, Images, Videos”

Fact Check
May 16, 2022 by: Ed Payne

(seems it came from a Facebook post on May 11, 2022):
comment image

It includes short bio on author Ed Payne (CNN PLUS his tech skills) :

Ed Payne is a staff writer at Lead Stories. He is an Emmy Award-winning journalist as part of CNN’s coverage of 9/11. Ed worked at CNN for nearly 24 years with the CNN Radio Network and CNN Digital. Most recently, he was a Digital Senior Producer for Gray Television’s Digital Content Center, the company’s digital news hub for 100+ TV stations. Ed also worked as a writer and editor for WebMD. In addition to his journalistic endeavors, Ed is the author of two children’s book series: “The Daily Rounds of a Hound” and “Vail’s Tales.”

And a couple of videos including this (15 minutes; several show the plane):

SO… I guess between “FAKEbook”, CNN, Ed Payne and his digital editing capabilities, and considering that the YouTube video is still available, as is the entire article on the site that I linked, it SCREAMS “FAKERY !”.

If I could only reconcile all of that with the eyewitness testimony I would be able to put it to bed… But, alas, it was not to be !


If it was taken from the opposite side, why did we suddenly see the hole in the building that the plane supposedly went through?


That’s what I was about to ask.


Just to be sure we are on the same page:

THIS video (which Wolf posted on 9/11, and again here):


(FYI: WTC-1 is the NORTH tower. It is the one with the large antenna on top; WTC-2 is the SOUTH tower)

was taken from the Lower East Side of Manhattan (the person taking the video is moving in a SOUTHERLY direction).

The location is seen HERE (near where there are TWO “bridges” shown, going between Brooklyn and Manhattans “Lower East Side” (“LES”):

(Sorry about the link… click to open…)
Look at the frame in the upper right of the graphic.
At the bottom of THAT FRAME ALONE is TWO BRIDGES, connecting Brooklyn to LES (Manhattan).

In the video, you can see the railings on the Manhattan side of the bridge (to the left of the screen).

If you draw a line THROUGH the site of the Twin Towers,
you will see the DIRECTION that the SECOND plane CAME FROM (compare to “Directional Arrows in all the graphics).

THAT is why you can’t see the second plane in THAT video.

As far as the “hole” that appears… I don’t know…


(See my reply to TheseTruths below)


Wolf. I have been trying to find a video I saw several years ago and have not been successful.

The video explained (in intricate detail) eyewitness sightings of the planes. The video showed that what eyewitnesses saw were holograms.

In fact (IIRC) it showed the flight path of tracking planes/objects located in precisely the correct location to project the holograms. The tracking data (again IIRC) was taken from more than one such record. Maybe this is all too fantastic. But it is why I told Singingsoul about my two friends with personal knowledge of technology existing years/decades before it was known by the public. In fact, one of these guys said he saw stuff in the 60’s which was unknown to the public until after 2000.

This is all over my head. But this is also why in response to Singingsoul I suggested that the issue was about CGI, meaning (to me) holograms. And the video I saw suggested that the technology was extant but not known publicly (and I am guessing still not known, if it exists).

Not relevant but interesting, you can see why the evil people would want to use unknown technology to magically fool the little people. Use the magic while it is still unknown how the magic works.

I see now I was confusing the hologram video with the quite different issue of bogus video, and apologize for the confusion.

The bogus video issue seems to be presented as requiring no valid eyewitness accounts. Again, I have no idea what I am talking about, except to the extent of recognizing a possible reconciliation. Witnesses saw something, not planes but images of planes.

Last edited 1 year ago by Tonawanda

Might this be it ? :

John Lear : Holograms Used in 911By Kerry CassidyMarch 7, 2014

(I did not read this, but the word “HOLOGRAM” caught my eye while I was looking for something else !)


TY so much. That is the idea I was talking about. The video in the article has been taken down by YT.

I spent a long time looking for the video on several search engines and cannot find it.

IIRC it was 45 minutes or so, and VERY detailed. It included flight tracking data from actual sources (more than one). It also included the information Lear talks about in this article, that it was impossible for the plane to be going as fast as it was.

There are a bunch of search results which include “hologram,” but none I found were detailed or very long.


YW !


I still do not see anything here that mimics what I saw due North from the windows of my office’s conference room at 24th and 7th Ave. 23rd Floor. Perfect, unobstructed view from the North.

I did see a fuselage with two wings rounding around the South Tower. It was not a missile, as far as I could see. It was the shape of a commercial jetliner. The second building to be hit that day…and then the ‘jet turned North to hit the south side of that building.

The jet or whatever it was, made a turn North. Apparently to create more damage, both ‘projectiles’ penetrated on opposite sides.

I did NOT see the impact on the South side of the second tower, but did see the explosion at that floor level on the north side of THAT building.

I do believe that watching both buildings come down looked like a classic implosion, however we were always told the pair of buildings were designed to come down in an orderly fashion if ever in distress. What that has to do with a horizontal severing of a jet, I have no idea.

And I still cannot reconcile the strength of metals against impact, speed and force. Never have a seen a modeling of the events.

The third building coming down that evening is just bizarre.

Last edited 1 year ago by WSB

May I also add that the wind direction from North to South for at least three weeks was Divine Intervention.

New York weather normally does not have that extreme N to S direction…and it took the caustic toxins away from humanity on the island for quite a bit of time. Will never forget that.

We only started smelling metallic, rather sickening aromas of the metal about a month and a half afterward as the fires were being alleviated.

What a Godsend.


You might be able to find close to what you were looking for somewhere in this 15 minute video:


Most people have probably figured this out already, but I just figured this out today.

The story about the terrorists going to flight school and asking just to learn takeoffs and NOT landings, is a clever psy-op. Supposedly, the FBI was informed but never followed up. And the Patriot Act needed to be passed because the FBI and CIA were not sharing information and thus the towers came down.

I completely believe that the terrorist actors went to flight school and acted bizarrely. So bizarrely, in fact, that no terrorist would engage in the intensely stupid betrayal of their intentions unless they wanted to be “discovered.” (And isn’t it amazing, what an immediately satisfying feeling of intellectual superiority there is in figuring out instantaneously how stupid those stupid terrorists were?)

The flight school owner knew right away that “something” was up, and told the FBI. But the dumb FBI never looked into it properly. Gosh o’golly! Dumb, dumb FBI, we are all smarter than YOU, and we would have looked into it!

But what is the totally 100% accepted, unquestioned premise? This: that these guys were in fact terrorists on a mission from OBL, who was totally responsible for these deeds which evaded our national security. The terrorists made a real stupid mistake, the FBI made a really stupid mistake, mistakes which our brilliant selves would never make when it comes to dastardly terrorists who are totally responsible!

Here is another psy-op which I have seen our side fall for every single time. Stupidly fall for:

Here is how this psy-op works, and has always worked. A fake, phony “conservative” or “Republican” is treated unfairly and unjustly by a leftist or the left or the media. The “unfairly and unjustly” part are true. Our side, knowing how unfair and unjust leftists are to our side, spring to the defense of the bogus liar. And in the process, the bogus liar is deemed BY US to be on our side.

Look at the comments to the Post article. Success for the psy-op! Look at her bravely standing up to our enemies! Meanwhile, the truth about Haley is erased.

A variation on this psy-op was pulled by Bush with “compassionate conservative.” The intense debate was about his use of the word “compassionate” (“conservatism IS inherently compassionate!” — how dare he?) when in reality this was Bush getting our side to implicitly accept that he was a conservative, just using the wrong tactic.

Brainwashing, psychological manipulation, bully tactics. The Awakening cannot be finished soon enough.

Last edited 1 year ago by Tonawanda
Valerie Curren

Seen on Gab…may be accurate…or not…

comment image


Very disturbing in its very obviousness.

Valerie Curren


Valerie Curren

from Gab

comment image

No Plane, or Titanium Parts which do not burn found at Pentagon, what I see is a vechicle headwin at the Pentagon seconds before the explosion.

Replying to this gab:

[video src="" /]

comment imageDarrel Trump
Sep 2

If 9/11 was a lie by the Government and it kill thousands of people and if you take into consideration of the wars that stem from it millions of people, just think what Operation Warp Speed effects on the number that is going to die. Your Government is your enemy.
చհìէҽ འąҍҍìէ

Sep 2

I’m sure those planes hit lol that's like saying Biden is the real president


From “The dancing Israelis” video, at about the 6:10 mark, is a “wide angle view” of the SECOND PLANE:

From “The 911 ConspiracyTheory Explained in Under Five Minutes” video: starting at the 2:15 mark, WHY DID George W. Bush, when making a statement about flying planes into buildings, make a motion with his right hand like he was throwing a PAPER AIRPLANE ?

comment image