While the attacks of 911 were definitively the result of an 'inside job', constituting a criminal conspiracy, real aircraft were involved. The video in question makes two claims, both of which shall be addressed.
_______________________________________
The 1st claim is that the plane cannot cut through the steel structure of the building.
It can.
Given enough speed it should. In WW2 relatively slow flying Japanese propeller driven aircraft, made of aluminium and wood, that hit steel battleship armour put airplane shaped holes through the sides of the ships:
The 2nd claim was that the wing of the aircraft should have covered the building as it flew by but appeared to disappear when it made contact.
The answer to this 'problem' is found by understanding the camera's perspective. The buildings we see on the left are actually in the foreground. The aircraft's wing moves behind it because it's positioned in the background along with the Twin Towers. A direct debunking of this point can be found here:
World Trade Center - Holographic or CGI Plane? - Debunked
Besides, there's HEAPS of witnesses and other videos of the second plane hitting the building:
It is more logical to assume there is something 'wrong' with that one video than all the rest of the evidence.
Plus there are photos of plane wreckage in the towers after they collapsed, and part of an engine in the street ....
The no planes video is misinformation. I believe it is being pushed intentionally to smear the truthful evidence of inside help in the attacks. Rational people who research this matter should be able to make up their own minds about the (lack of) strength to these claims.
Related links:
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com.au/2009/07/debunking-september-clues-and-no-plane.html
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com.au/2009/07/debunking-september-clues-and-no-plane.html
