Oh dear it's unbelievable one can believe such things. My remote controlled live whales scheme pales in comparison :)
Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Berry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: No Thermite ? > Well I must say at first I didn't believe it, but when you look at the > evidence the planes were clearly switched. > > It starts off with the boarding of some of the flights, there were oddities > with different gates and such, very confusing, the details of one of the > planes was given, it was boarding at 2 different gates, the one it usually > boarded at and another one. > http://911wideopen.com/mirror/twin11-1/twin-11-mod.htm > There were also reports of two of the planes landing safely at an airport, > yes really. (according to the Mayor anyway: > http://www.rense.com/general68/says.htm) > > The transponder signals were turned off over an airport and turned back on, > but it would not have been possible for the plane to have pulled off the > flying required for it to be where the signal turns back on. > > Then there is the fact that people at the commercial airport would likely > have noticed the modifications (the pod which is clearly visible in all > shots all on the same side). > And then people saw not an airline plane but what they described as a cargo > plane, with no windows, painted up to look like the right flights only not. > > Then there is the fact that at least one of the planes meant to have crashed > was found to still be in service. (If I looked hard enough I could find that > article no doubt) > > The fact that the crash sites at the Pentagon and Pennsylvania simply didn't > fit, there wasn't a Boeing's wreckage, however there were wreckage parts > that could not have come from a Boeing. (A turbine that some say is the > Honeywell APU but Honeywell says isn't) > The building shows no damage from the wings, jet engines or tail. > > People at the Pentagon say they could smell Cordite. > Witnesses reported that debris rain down for minutes after the crash. > Care to calculate how high (and how directly upwards) metal debris would > need to be thrust upwards to rain down for minutes, the photos indeed show > an increase of Debris in latter photos, were Debris being sprinkled from > above? (is the idea that debris can be so high as to take minutes to fall > any less absurd?) > > Yes, there were eye witnesses that say a plane hit the Pentagon, but there > were also video cameras which were immediately taken from the hotel across > the road and other locations never to be seen again, there were also other > eye witnesses that gave other accounts. > The employees at the hotel were told never to discuss what they had seen. > (Employees watched the film several times in shock and horror before the > tape was confiscated) > > There were ham radio operators that did pick up a transmitter from the WTC > that day which ended after the hits, it was seemingly being used as a > navigation aid, also the infra red laser (not seen by people but picked up > by cameras) is plainly visible, it even projects on the smoke, why else > would someone be projecting an infra red laser normally used for painting > targets at the building?). > > They have previously flown large aircraft of such size by wire with no one > on board, successful landings and takeoffs. > > Eye witnesses at Pennsylvania say they saw a small white jet hit low objects > before going over a hill followed by the crash. > > The pilot of one the of the planes had taken part in a mock attack on the > WTC in the 80's by the Pentagon, quite the co-incidence. > > BTW no Arabs were on the flight manifest on the plane that was meant to hit > the pentagon, the autopsy report doesn't bother to invent any either. > http://www.sierratimes.com/03/07/02/article_tro.htm > > The families of those on the flights indeed reacted differently to other > victims families, for one they don't question the official report, even > though many of the other victims families do, along with at this point in > time a majority of people according to Zogby polls. > > Also it is well established that they couldn't have made the calls that were > meant to be have made. (people had experimented and confirmed it) > > Watch Loose Change, 2nd edition: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WsyEqKQRBY > > On 2/22/07, leaking pen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Umm, so, if there were no suicide pilots, who was flying? >> >> On 2/21/07, John Berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > That's my point exactly. >> > >> > What I am saying has solid evidence to back it up, and you counter with >> > 'Bush is a twit'. >> > Which while obviously true, no one is claiming he did any of the >> technical >> > stuff, members of the intelligence community did that. >> > Further no one is claiming there were suicide pilots on the planes, of >> any >> > race, you just show how little you've looked into it to say something >> like >> > that. >> > >> > >> > >> > On 2/22/07, Zell, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > > Perhaps the answer lies in the Monty Python sketch in which a building >> > > is maintained by hypnosis. >> > > >> > > The problem with conspiracies is the obvious contradiction with real >> > > world government competence. Take a good look >> > > at Iraq or the intellectual depth of Bush and reason accordingly. I >> > > don't see any reason why conspirators should haul >> > > Sacks of thermite and ignite them in synchrony with ( extremely >> > > reliable) suicide bombers - when explosives would do a >> > > better job. More than that, I doubt the WTC buildings were as well >> > > built as the Empire State building - when it survived >> > > A collision with a WWII vintage bomber. >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> That which yields isn't always weak. >> >> >
