I must admit that I have been somewhat skeptical about the idea that a flock of UAVs was really what hit the north tower. But I have to say in general, eyewitnesses to the first hit, as well as the Naudet video, seem more convincing that a real "plane-like" flying object hit the north tower than for eyewitnesses to the second tower.

And a cluster of fast-flying UAVs in "plane formation" might be enough to convince eye-witnesses that a plane struck the tower-- and help plant the plane meme.

I just had a realization for why they did this for the first and not the second hit.

For the first hit, they would not expect anyone to film the UAVs in enough detail to see what they were. And that is what happened.

Whereas for the second hit, LOTS of cameras would be ready to tape a flock of UAVs that headed for the tower-- SHOULD THEY APPEAR. And the perps didn't want random videographers taping something so incriminating. (A key point is if there was no plane, there was no reason for random videographers to film the tower, and random videographers would get caught off guard by the explosion and only capture the explosion. Whereas only perps would know the tower was going to explode and be ready to tape it.*)


But in fact NOTHING appeared to hit the second tower, because the second hit was done with video fakery and most likely pre-planted explosives (a different possibility-- very small UAVs, entomopters, dispersed along the south wall of the south tower wall, waiting for the right time to strike the wall).

The point is for the first hit, they could get away with the large flock of UAVs, with the second, they couldn't and used other means.


They sold the plane myth with UAVs for the first hit, and TV for the second hit.


*An interesting point is this may be why they had so many videographers (over 20) in on the second hit-- because it would be too suspicious if only one or two cameras "caught" the second plane. That's why they made so many different fakes, I bet.