Firstly, we don't 'do' or use perp-coined terms like "no-plane theory" here, it's media fakery.
Then please read my comment re "missiles" (drones, RC, whatever) on 9/11 here: viewtopic.php?p=2370971#p2370971
Maat wrote:...I not only thought [that] was a long abandoned "truther" hangout (e.g. Brianv's & Simon's post here) but frankly never made any logical sense to me for a media hoaxed, CGI movie event to disguise the demolition of buildings in what was obviously a totally contained & controlled physical area in Manhattan.
I've suspected for some time that that red herring was deliberate bait for 'conspiracists' to promote so that the entire 'false flag' theory would be more easily dismissed as nonsense by real military people with direct knowledge of military protocols & ordnance. Remembering it was an essentially civilian (NYPA, FBI, NSA etc.) op, so I could see no way that any literal 'military' input would have been considered a viable option, regardless.
simonshack wrote:... And yes, Maat - I would now definitely avoid any mention of my speculative AGM missile theory, as put forth in September Clues back in 2008. Whether right or (most likely) wrong, it is quite simply an unnecessary topic to mention/address in any presentation of our myriad of solid, collective findings. "KISS" is the way to go. I've always strived to simplify every aspect of this research - so I highly appreciate every advice and effort from everyone to "keep it simple". As Hoi rightly says, we are no media experts - but that doesn't mean we don't understand that communicating our findings has to be kept as sharp and simple as possible.
I fully concur with the substance of the last paragraph of your above post, Maat. I'm impressed by how much (perfect) sense it makes. ...
See also: viewtopic.php?p=2355579#p2355579 [1st page on this topic to which I've moved these posts].