-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Re: [planehuggers] Re: [catapult] "Planes" were real.
Date:   Wed, 22 Mar 2006 18:10:03 -0800 (PST)
From:   Nico Haupt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



It was the other way round.
A controlled demolition makes sure, that no (non-existing-) passengers 
and boeing parts would be recovered.

Therefore also pulverization PLUS, means additional unconventional 
weaponry, i.e. nanoenergetics etc...

The few parts which had been planted had strangely been outside towers 
at opposite geographical coordinates of exit holes...

Same in Shanksville and Pentagon: ZERO evidence on passengers or 
commercial aircraft!!

Also too small parts, not pointing on any boeing 767, well should i go 
further....?





*/Dick Eastman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote:

    The only guarantees needed for the operation was the setup for
    controlled demolition.  THe planes could crash any way they could
    manage it -- the demolition would cover all mistakes.  (The
    demolition also had the purpose of ending attention to the buildings
    and to survivors being found etc.  -- when what was wanted was to
    elicit the rage and then focus it exclusively on Islam, Afganistan
    and IRaq.   As it happened, an engine missed the structural core and
    exited the building  -- end of story.
     
    Your thought processes baffle me, Ron.
     
    Do you have any idea how you set back progress of the truth by your
    little attempts to shore up "no planes"  -- you are one deluded
    dupe, at the very least.

        ----- Original Message -----
        *From:* ron_winn <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
        <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        *Sent:* Wednesday, March 22, 2006 11:33 AM
        *Subject:* Re: [planehuggers] Re: [catapult] " Planes" were real.

        If the end result was that "jet fuel" had to get inside the
        towers, meaning that the planes had to get inside the towers,
        where is the guarantees that a couple of conventional 767
        passenger planes were going to achieve that after the smashed up
        front portion forced its way right inside and left space behind
        it for the aft portion to follow in after and to move into that
        empty space. Now, where were the guarantees that that would have
        happened with a conventional 767?
         
        You do follow me on this, don't you? There had to be empty space
        within the tower for the aft part of the plane to fill and that
        meant the front had to go someway in sufficient to leave enough
        empty space for the aft portion. Or alternatively the front
        portion had to be smashed up so much with in the space available
        inside for the aft to go all the way in. So who is going to
        judge that conundrum. Could it have been simulated in some
        software package how much the front portion would collapse in
        the available space inside and how far the front would have
        entered inside?
         
        That is why real 767 could not have been used without these
        guarantees.
         
        You get the point?
         
        A nice point WF. You are an inspiration.
         
        ----- Original Message -----

            *From:* Rosalee Grable <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
            *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
            <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
            *Cc:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
            <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
            *Sent:* Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:47 PM
            *Subject:* [planehuggers] Re: [catapult] "Planes" were real.

            Living inside its imagination, with the reset button handy
            to prevent
            actually absorbing any unscripted, unprogrammed information,
            "John
            Austin" repeats a question to which it us unable to absorb
            the answer:

            J. Austin wrote:
             > There are at least two strong arguments against the
            "no-plane"
             > theory.  And a theory is what it is.
             >
             > First, the question remains - why go through the hoops of
            making
             > a fake-plane scenario, enlisting the efforts of ALL major
            and local
             > news outlets - when the simpler solution is to use actual
            airplanes ?
             >  


            They didn't have to "enlist the efforts" of anybody except
            their own
            pedophile-blackmailed insiders.
            The media has been an arm of CIA information warfare since
            both were
            invented.
            Project Mockingbird:
            
http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_louise_01_03_03_mockingbird.html

            http://www.parapolitics.info/phorum/read.php?f=32&i=228&t=228
            <http://www.parapolitics.info/phorum/read.php?f=32&i=228&t=228>
            Spy v. Spy: Bob Novak, the CIA's MOCKINGBIRD program & the
            Plame/Wilson
            Scandal
            by Todd Brendan Fahey
            "Using a combination of flattery, the promise of comfortable
            and/or
            exciting positions, and with dollars to burn, the State
            Department and
            CIA recruited promising students with talents in both
            journalism and the
            gregariousness necessary for any good human Intelligence
            (HUMINT) agent
            to infiltrate under Government protection and supervision
            the various
            media apparatus that keeps the collective eyes of We The
            People glued to
            whatever our controllers want us to look at, at any given
            moment. Such
            was the province of the Office of Policy Coordination,
            MOCKINGBIRD's
            oversight office within the CIA.
            http://www.parapolitics.info/phorum/read.php?f=32&i=228&t=228
            <http://www.parapolitics.info/phorum/read.php?f=32&i=228&t=228>

            Philip Graham, longtime publisher of the Washington Post and
            graduate of
            the Army Intelligence School, Harrisburg, PA, was tapped by
            State Dept.
            officer/CIA-functionary Frank Wisner to direct the program
            therefter-dubbed Operation MOCKINGBIRD. "

            http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=9508
            Information Warfare or Yesterday's News?
            Pentagon media contractor loses battle for Iraqi audiences
            Iraqis aren't as stupid as American audiences, apparently.

            http://www.serendipity.li/cia.html
            The CIA
            America's Premier International Terrorist Organization

            who provided the funding and foreknowledge for the 911 Media
            Hoax and
            Cartoon Terrorist Revue.
            http://911foreknowledge.com/
            New, much expanded edition of "Jules Naudet's 9/11 Film Was
            Staged,"
            dated 18 March 2006, at
            http://lesraphael.blog.co.uk

            Using real planes would have been ineffective.
            Plane parts sticking out of a building and sprinklers going
            off wouldn't
            have made most New Yorkers miss lunch.
            The first WTC Bombing didn't even pre-empt the soap operas,
            http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0666092/
            let alone become a long running hit "reality show" which
            nightly refers
            to various lies the Trauma Conditioned Schnookies swallowed
            while they
            were scared and hyper-suggestible.

            Planes are too valuable to ram into buildings. They are
            useful for drug
            running, renditions, and arms shipments: off-the-books
            planes which were
            only finally retired recently.
            http://team8plus.org









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/
 


Reply via email to