What is a 'No planes vote'?

[astro3]

I'm baffled that anyone felt able to vote over the 'no-planes' issue. Four fundamental positions have been advocated in the last five years, with the debates mainly involving what went into the 2nd tower.

1. hijacked planes with passenges flew into buildings.
2. Military planes, designed to resemble the hijacked planes, were flown by remote control into the buldings.*
3. A missile, with a hologram somewhow 'wrapped round it' to look like a plane, impacted into the WTC (Dave Shayler's publicly-stated view - see http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/2nd-hit.html#16, scroll down to 'amputee planes, videos show parts of planes missing')
4. Nothing flew through the air, New Yorkers did not see any planes going into the towers, and the videos are all faked. Somehow gashes appeared in the towers to look as if planes had impacted. This spooky view is associated with Gerard Holmgren and Nico Haupt.

It isn't very evident that these options can be reduced to a yes/no choice.

* I advocated this operation-Northwoods type view, expressed by the June 2003 U. of Barcelona (Mataro) Image-analysis report, which confirmed that it was a Boeing 767, but said it was the slightly longer 767-300, not the 676-200 which had taken off i.e. the civil aeroplane; with its undercariage modified (www.nineeleven.co.uk/archive/9keys.htm, section 6).

[Bicnarok]

its simple, either planes or whatever flew into the 2 towers or they didn´t and it was a hologram.

those were the two options as far as i understood it.

[Patrick Brown]

[Bicnarok]

I think the possibility of some other aircraft, drones shaped similiar to boeings or whatever could have been used. The video footage available shows very "unboeing" planes.