-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [911InsideJobbers] Bleier: 9:11, Plane huggers vs. no planers + link to Morgan Reynolds on no planes on 9/11 Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 07:53:12 -0800 From: malaprop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Some comments: I think these articles are excellent. When I see a growing number of independent skeptics reaching the same conclusions, it assures me we are on the right track. "and maybe we should just ignore jetliners as a big distraction that diverts attention from the fact of demolition" For some reason, they want us to do just that. Therefore we should not, if for no other reason than that. They have the microphone and keep repeating the "fire did it", and *it has worked for them* for nearly 5 years, why would it not keep working if we dropped all the other damning evidence. I think just the opposite....that we connect the dots openly, lay everything preposterous in their story out on the table....we may never again have another chance, should we be completely silenced. Ad homien remarks are, IMHO, is evidence of a surrender--they don't have anything solid, and ad homien insults are a great shill separator for me. While this is the scientific response to this *evil act of killing ones own*, one's own common sense is of value, too--just like those "Logic Problems" in crossword puzzle books. For instance: *There is no typical physicial evidence of crashed airliners found at any of the four sites*. Yet the government insists that there were planes, and submit tampered videos as their only evidence! . Seeing that these did not go down in water, that one omission is unacceptable! Very early in the TV coverage of the attacks, the time stamps were removed from the screen, and all the important clips were unsually short, choppy, making it difficult to determine the timing, and it was clear there was something that needed to be hidden. In a little known list, was overlooked that there was no Flts 11 & 77 scheduled for that day, yet Flt 93 and 175 appeared on that list. (Flt 11& 77 were hastily added months later when They discovered we knew.)...... Without the flights being added in the computer, no tickets, boarding passes can be printed out. From this one can reasonably assume that no tickets were printed, and likely no passengers got ticketed. No credit card receipts, bills provided for the passengers for payment, nor for the "airphone calls" either. Pentagon, not airlines provided lists???? SUMMARY NOTES Flt 11 --wtc1 No physical evidence one of the non-existant flights, , no paper trails, no tickets printed due Flt not put in the computer) Conclusion points to no plane, no passengers, and what names listed by the Pentagon *could be* list of assassinations of people with inside information.. --------------------- Flt 93: *No physical evidence of plane crash. * *No family members showed up at either airport,* according to chaplains sent to console them. This was a scheduled flt., but had only a few passengers, yet a frequent flyer was denied a ticket to fly stand-by, and *told that the flight was "full".* (This was seen in an air travel forum). The claims made in Lisa Beamer's ghost-written book of their marriage, graduation, etc...didn't check out. No Todd Beamer, other that death of a child some years earlier. Most of the phone calls that were impossible came from this flt. No victim Compensation Fund applications received, until much later. (See Wing TV article) Conclusion: No flt 93 aircraft, and due to no familyies showing up, no passengers. Again, lists could have been used to account for assassinations done on the ground somewhere.. ------------------------ Flt 77 --(Pent) (Thanks to a couple of civilian firemen who saw the smoke coming from the Pentagon, and beat the other firetrucks to the scene, *who put the 2 small fires out in 7 mins*, in time for one of them to go and take a couple of pictures *showing zero physical airplane* debris, we might never have known no plane crashed there) Huge number of set up and faked photos, according to No Flt 77 was scheduled that day. Thus no tickets could have been printed. *No passengers can get on plane w/o tickets, boarding passes*. No airliner could have flown the path at the speed claimed. ---------------------------------- Flt 175 wtc2 -- The earliest video displayed live plus 45 seconds delay was a crude forgery--the most dramatic video, released at 4:30pm, of alleged flt 175 is undoubtedly a forgery on several counts. This puts all the EW accounts provided by CNN in question. Only the people watching a TV monitor could have seen any plane. http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc2hit7/911.wtc.2.plane.north.01.mpg #*175 alegedly carried Mrs. Mariani's husband, and she claims she has never been able to locate a single surviving family of that flight's 'victims in almost 5 years.* (No family mourners located for #175. Conclusion: no plane, no passengers/crew/ no paper trail. ------------------------------------ ----- Original Message ----- *From:* R Bleier <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *To:* Ron Bleier <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *Sent:* Saturday, March 11, 2006 7:29 PM *Subject:* [911InsideJobbers] Bleier: 9:11, Plane huggers vs. no planers + link to Morgan Reynolds on no planes on 9/11 9/11: Plane huggers vs. no planers: An introductory note to an article by Morgan Reynolds by Ronald Bleier For those still grappling with which of the three main versions of what really happened on 9/11, the U.S. government's official version, or the LIHOP or MIHOP versions,[i] you may be better advised to file this post in the appropriate place unless and until you become convinced that the U.S. government planned and executed the terror attacks of that day (MIHOP). Advocates of MIHOP may feel that Morgan Reynolds's [ii] article on the subject serves as an excellent introduction to evidence suggesting that no civilian jetliners were involved in the 9/11 terror attacks. I suspect that many will be put off by the counterintuitive nature of the no planes theory, since "we all saw" a plane going into the South Tower on TV in real time. [iii] Yes, I know, the no planes thesis may at first be hard to accept. However, once one begins looking at some of the evidence as presented by Morgan Reynolds, and before him, Gerard Holmgren [iv] and Rosalee Grable [v] and others, I think many will agree that the evidence doesn't support the use of planes. Because the no planes theory is so counterintuitive, few established 9/11 researchers are eager to take up the inquiry despite its plausibility. As an independent researcher with little at stake, it is relatively easy for me to follow the no planes evidence where it leads, especially as it begins to seem the most persuasive and the one most in conformity with Occam's Razor. It's disturbing but not surprising that MIHOP plane huggers, like Jim Hoffman, use their often well-deserved reputations to attack advocates of the no planes thesis with harsh and sometimes ad hominem attacks. Some make no bones about suggesting that their motives are to disassociate themselves from theories that they consider likely to put off potential converts to 9/11 inquiry. The irony is that many 9/11 researchers have in the past decried the unwillingness of proponents of the official theory to look calmly and carefully at the evidence that has already been uncovered. And yet, when it comes to the no planes theory some "establishment" researchers are similarly loath to directly address the evidence. If you're like me, and you look forward to finding out the truth about 9/11 for its own sake and for what it tells us about the Bush administration, about the U.S. government and the media, about the world's intelligence services and security agencies, about the history of the 20^th and 21^st century, you'll be delighted with this brilliant article by Morgan Reynolds. *** It's not my purpose here to summarize Morgan Reynolds's key arguments, but I can't resist highlighting one of his smoking guns that should be easy for many to visualize. Reynolds asks the simple question: What happened to the wreckage of the two jetliners that supposedly crashed into the North and South WTC towers? There's no independent evidence on video or in still photographs, much less in evidence presented by the government, of wreckage consistent with Boeing 767s. If the jetliners flew into the Towers they should have struck some of their 47 core columns. In that case the tails and parts of their fuselages should have remained stuck outside of the buildings or fallen to the ground for all to see and photograph. Needless to say, no such evidence has ever been presented. Under the circumstances, the government's production of Mohammed Atta's undamaged passport is ludicrous, and is as damaging to their case as is anything else. *** Here is a link to Morgan Reynolds's article. (An alternate title might be:/*The case against the use of jetliners in the 9/11 attacks*/) Morgan Reynolds: /*We Have Some Holes *//*in the Plane Stories*/ http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=we_have_holes <http://nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=we_have_holes> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [i] LIHOP = Let it Happen On Purpose; MIHOP = Made it Happen on Purpose [ii] Morgan Reynolds is a member of the National Center for Policy Analysis. See his bio on: http://www.ncpa.org/~ncpa/about/Morgan.html <http://www.ncpa.org/%7Encpa/about/Morgan.html> [iii] Even as one writes such a phrase – "we all saw the plane crashing into the South Tower in real time," we recognize that it raises questions. For example: how did it happen that camera crews were ready to film the second plane coming into the Tower when all eyes were on the North Tower which had been struck less than 20 minutes earlier. [iv] (http://members.iinet.net.au/~holmgren/noplanework.html <http://members.iinet.net.au/%7Eholmgren/noplanework.html>) [v] ( http://thewebfairy.com/911 http://missilegate.com) -- Ronald Bleier http://desip.igc.org <http://desip.igc.org> -- Ronald Bleier http://desip.igc.org SPONSORED LINKS Government procurement <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+procurement&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=S_3-2zVK9QQjTwxHvO91yw> Government leasing <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+leasing&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=ZAuP_XFQBkNiVw-hPWWJ-Q> Government grants for women <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+grants+for+women&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=R7KVvqXEVqN0Ct9WGPhKwg> Government lease <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+lease&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=FM8lkJddvatAkQNo00D_Cw> Government contract <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+contract&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=fTrsbvxC-m39UjtOdMcT-Q> Government money <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Government+money&w1=Government+procurement&w2=Government+leasing&w3=Government+grants+for+women&w4=Government+lease&w5=Government+contract&w6=Government+money&c=6&s=154&.sig=HB73LsQrRnXy-2WkBh3LyA> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS * Visit your group "911InsideJobbers <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911InsideJobbers>" on the web. * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Search the archives for political-research at http://www.terazen.com/ Subscribe to the RSS feed for political-research at http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/rss Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
