Since 9/11 had such relevance when it comes to the usage of the American military everywhere I think It's time to tackle it.

1. Planes tend to leave a wake vortex, a trace of spiralling wind behind them when in flight. Although these are usually invisible, they can be observed with smoke and fire. On the 9/11 plane crash footage, no wake vortex can be observed with the smoke.

2. In the footage the planes seem to penetrate the building without suffering a pushback from the steel, in a more realistic fashion, at least pieces from the plane itself should be blasted away from the building.

3. The chopper 5 live footage shows a wideshot of the towers at first, yet no plane can be seen in the distance. The plane is only added later after zooming in, when in reality it should be visible in the wideshot for around 5 seconds.

4. In that same footage, the front of the plane can be seen completely penetrating the steel building while remaining intact, which is impossible to the point of being ridiculous.

5. The Chopper 5 reporter Kai Simonsen was also experienced in video compositing, AVID systems, and real-time full motion alpha keying. Exactly what's needed to create the plane effect. He seems to have failed to create it due to the helicopter being in motion, and a blackout can be seen in his footage in an attempt to fix his mistake.

6. The Fox News, and CNN footage covering the same event also have similar blackouts that hide the nose of the plane completely penetrating the building and remaining intact.

7. The blackout can't be a signal interruption. It also can't be an automatic gain control, despite people trying to explain the effect in this fashion.

8. Steve Wright made the claim that the life 9/11 footage could not have been composited in this fashion, but this is false and curiously real-life editing of this kind was one of Kai's skills.

9. One of the most popular 9/11 footage is of the second impact done by Hezarkhani. It has been known as the "ghost plane" footage. In it the right wing of the plane can be seen passing the wall but not receiving any damage.

10. Despite recording the same event, Hezarkhani's and Fairbanks' footages have notable differences when it comes to the position of the "engines" as the plane dives into the building.

11. When the flying 175 gets close enough to the South tower, you can see one of its wings dissapear.

12. In the video of Jennifer Obserstein the buildings seem fake, she mentions not hearing any plane nor seeing any plane.

Most of these points are better touched upon in the documentary Great American Psy-Opera by Ace Baker:

https://archive.org/details/scm-595414-greatamericanpsy-opera

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dslF-hh90lg&t=12665s

Now this creates a conflict with the narratives when it comes to the idea that Israel was behind it. The thing is, if there were no planes, then there were no hijackers. The theories about the Israelis being there when the events took place were curiously spread out by CIA like Philip Giraldi. Meaning that 9/11 was yet another case of the Jesuits setting up another multi-million dollar campaign to blame the Jews for everything and destroy their reputation.

Compilation of arguments about the Jesuit control over the CIA.

The Catholic/CIA and Jesuit role in the 9/11 events.

The Vatican built the World Trade Center.