On 10/10/2014 01:04 PM, salyavin808 wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> wrote :
Salyavin, you're "reviewing the movie without having seen it" just
like Judy. You say:
The only thing I believe about the government is that they are
incapable of planning and executing such a sophisticated and cynical
plot. Rigging buildings to collapse like a traditional demolition but
only after planes had flown into them? And without ever practising!
What would have happened if the buildings fell over when the planes
hit? The nuclear weapons would have been seen exploding! Bit risky for
the plotters.
This is because you don't actually know what 9-11 investigators
allege. We allege it was a conspiracy by a faction in the government
and some corporations. The planes were a cover and they alone would
not have collapsed the building. See, Mr. Science, you don't even
know that the buildings were designed to take a hit by those size
planes. This because a large plane hit the Empire State by accident
back in the 1940s but it also didn't sustain much damage from that.
So they made sure future buildings were also built to take such hits.
Also planes hitting the building would not have made them fall over.
To do that is a bit tricky and they hit too high to do that. Thus it
required demolition to complete the job. It is alleged that Flight 93
was supposed to hit WTC 7 where the operation was run from and it was
also the principal target because it contained documents that the
perpetrators didn't want investigated. When the Flight 93 got shot
down (no it didn't crash) then they had to "pull" the building (as
soon as the operations team got out). Silverstein goofed and said
they had to "pull" building. It wouldn't be possible to set the
building up for demolition under those conditions and that fast. It
was set up in advance.
Most of us know that a large jet liner could not have maneuvered to
hit the Pentagon. There would have been crash debris and a much
larger hole. It was most likely a missile. Some folks claim they saw
a plane but that too may have been the operations plane flying over at
the time (and one was seen in the vicinity).
Do you have any idea how desperate this sounds? Maybe that's part of
it, it's all so ridiculous no one would ever believe it!
Do you know what the word "may" means? It's a theory, Sal. Some people
have claimed to have seen a plane but it might have been an operations
plane (a tanker). Nice cover up. Also many airline pilots have said
that it would have been impossible for even an experienced pilot to fly
that could have hit the Pentagon. So why has the FBI not released the
numerous security videos they confiscated from surrounding businesses.
The wing that was hit was about to start their yearly accounting of
finances and there were alleged trillions of dollars missing. Very
suspicious.
Your knowledge of modern tactical nuclear weapons is a bit lacking.
They would necessarily exposed the perps to any danger setting them up.
But you wouldn't know how the buildings would react if they set them
off, It's all preposterous. I can't imagine what your government has
done to make you so convinced they harbour such evil geniuses.
OMG, such devices were tested and even in the news years before 9-11.
I've spent over 10 years on this subject and have many reference
materials if you want to argue more and get an education.
Believe if you want that some billionaire in a cave in Afghanistan ran
the whole operation but that really sounds wacky! :-D
Ran the whole operation? You mean got some guys to hijack a few
planes? It's too simple isn't it. That's the problem people have, they
can't believe that much destruction was caused by a few maniacs in
hijacked planes.
But it was not that simple. And the alleged fliers couldn't even fly a
Cessna properly let alone a jet. Those planes were remote controlled
and such systems were available in advance of 9-11.
How are things at MI5 these days? :-D
On 10/10/2014 12:09 PM, salyavin808 wrote:
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>, <noozguru@...>
<mailto:noozguru@...> wrote :
There are lots of celebrities who question the 9-11 story. I liked
the time that Mos Def was on Bill Maher and mentioned he didn't
believe the official story. That sort of put Maher between a rock and
a hard place because he like Mos but goes unglued over the 9-11
allegations. Maher even had some audience folks thrown out because
they yelled it was an "inside job."
Oh and BTW, I bought both of the remote viewing episodes from
Courtney Brown. It's more about the process the two remote viewers
went through and very interesting. One point I wonder about though
was if one of them remote viewed the war room for the war game that
day which would have had nothing to do with the false flag.
But keep eating the peanuts and believing your guvmint and the big
corporations who represent the truth.
The only thing I believe about the government is that they are
incapable of planning and executing such a sophisticated and cynical
plot. Rigging buildings to collapse like a traditional demolition but
only after planes had flown into them? And without ever practising!
What would have happened if the buildings fell over when the planes
hit? The nuclear weapons would have been seen exploding! Bit risky
for the plotters.
You got to be on more than peanuts to take any of it even remotely
seriously.
Basically something shit happened and it's hard to take on board so
someone has to be to blamed. Just as with Lady Di, that had to be an
inside job - even though none of it made any sense - otherwise it's
all just so pointless and destructive. Much better if the government
are behind it. Something to get excited about.
On 10/10/2014 11:14 AM, salyavin808 wrote:
Ah, celebrity endorsement. It must be true!
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>, <noozguru@...>
<mailto:noozguru@...> wrote :
Should cause some commotion here:
http://www.infowars.com/twin-peaks-creator-questions-911/
